Genetic Freedom - Revised Philosophical Concept [View All]

[kengineer]

It's still not worded perfectly... but it's way better than before. All responses will now occur here. If anybody notices any specific errors in genetic logic feel free to specifically point them out.

For the record, I am very, very much a progressive type person politically. All progressives need not be precise clones of each other... I do like to discuss complicated issues logically.

 The philosophical concept of Genetic Freedom in its most fundamental form is discussing a basic concept of existence for human Genetic life. The essence of that discussion is freedom for both individuals and groups of individuals. Since all of life upon planet earth is genetics, group freedom based on genetics is fundamental. So the fundamental philosophical question discussed here is: "Can we achieve world peace, while at the same time allowing ethnic groups to have local group freedom based on genetics?" Given the sensitivity and complexity of these arguments, it is best to reserve judgment until the entire brief essay is read.

The word race has a dictionary definition of "A group of persons related by common descent, blood, or heredity." It seems that the word race is perfectly suited for discussing unique human populations but, it has been decided that, even though some human groups are reproductively removed from one another 30,000 years or more, that is still not far enough in evolutionary terms to consider those unique populations a race. Scientists prefer to use the term "ethnic group" and "ethnicity" for the genetically unique human populations rather than race. Therefore, as it turns out, race as it is used today, as in the "white race," is a social construct.

The different ethnic groups, compared with one another, have genotypic variation caused by mutation, and cultural & environmental selection processes. This variation is only on the order of .1% plus or minus of the total genome (but that data is still being collected so the exact percentage is not known and will vary depending on which ethnic group is being compared to which). Additionally, how we define difference is not yet totally clear. For example: If we look at two genetic life forms and they have precisely the same genes, we could say that they have identical genotypes. However, what if those genes are sequenced slightly differently in one life form as compared to the other? Are their genotypes identical then? Bottom line: for a variety of reasons, Phenotypes in the various ethnic groups are unique to those ethnic groups.

The ethnic groups we are talking about are populations of humans who have, for the most part, bred within their group over many centuries, millennia, or longer. New ethnic groups can crop up if people so gather and reproduce. An ethnic group is still an ethnic group regardless if they have accepted some admixture from other ethnicities along the way. An ethnic groups population specific allele pairs (genetics) have a high probability of producing particular phenotypic characteristics within the new babies of that population. Put a simpler way, the combined genetic morphology of a mother and a father have a high probability of producing a baby that generally looks like a combination of the two parents (this general statement would apply for any mating human couple). Here is a good example to define the term ethnic group: If a group of people, with 100% Japanese heritage, divided into two groups and experienced isolated reproduction and unique cultural development from one another for a period of 3000 years, the resulting two communities would be two different ethnicities by how this document is using that term. While it is unknown to what extent these two groups would look different from one another it is certainly possible that 3000 years might produce some population specific mutations and phenotypes along with separate cultural population trends which would select for unique looks. ETHNIC DIVERSITY is defined as a great many of these various ethnic groups existing upon the planet. The phrase "one human ethnicity" or "one uniform human ethnicity" is used in this document to indicate a human population condition of significantly less ethnic diversity.

Next, let's talk a little about population trends. Over the past approximately 100,000 years, the human species has branched off into a variety of different genetic morphologies which are termed ethnic groups. This population diversity was created primarily do to relatively isolated reproduction within different populations upon different lands of planet Earth, coupled with cultural population influences and recombination and admixtures with adjacent populations and migratory peoples over the millennia etc... The probability of a Japanese male mating with a Japanese female is much higher if that Japanese male is in a community that is 98% Japanese, than if that community is only 5% Japanese. This suggests that if these Japanese cannot have their own "district based community" (to be further defined later), statistics will eventually lead to their particular phenotypic morphology ceasing to exist, in favor of a somewhat "uniform ethnic blend" which will result over the course of centuries as the different ethnic groups within the community combine their genetics. Expanding this argument out suggests that the current laws of non-discrimination in housing which were founded for noble reasons and, on the face of it, seem to be promoting diversity, peace and happiness upon the planet, may actually, in the end, encourage ethnic diversity to diminish. Of course, during the transition period, ethnic diversity mildly increases as unique new human morphologies are created by all the ethnicities mixing with one another. Then after reaching the top of the ethnic diversity graph, a sharp decline occurs as phenotypic diversity diminishes in favor of a single uniform looking ethnic group. There are many cities and populations where this trend can be seen (Brazil has good examples). Eventually the ethnic diversity meter may approach the flat line at one for any given country or "land area" that has laws and media which encourage such a trend. While it is unlikely and nearly impossible for this ethnic diversity graph to actually reach one given the size of the Earth and it's human population, to what extent it approaches one, only time will tell. We can certainly study trends today as they are occurring and look back through history to examine the trends.

Today we can certainly see that people of a single ethnic group often gather together in neighborhoods. This happens naturally by individual selection processes. The concept of Genetic Freedom for groups suggests that people within a neighborhood could say to someone who wishes to enter their neighborhood, "Feel free to copy us, but the choice of whether you live here, is always up to us." This way, the definition of culture and ethnicity within that district remains intact regardless of economic forces which may encourage an aggregate collection of ethnicities. Again, all choice lies with the sum total of the individual decisions within this defined ethnic district. This is the essence of group freedom mentioned in the first paragraph of this essay. The United States, itself, decides who gets to live within the United States. So that large group makes decisions of that kind. Should the United States discriminate on the basis of genetics or ethnicity. No, absolutely not because the land area is too large. Should a local district based community be able to discriminate in such a way? That is the question posed by this essay.

There is, of course, an additional factor which can either increase or decrease the probability of members of the same ethnic group selecting one another as mates. Media and educational influences have a huge impact. If the media and educational environment frowns on the concept of "maintaining and enhancing the genetic lines of your ethnic group" and most people are so educated, then the probability is increased for them to select partners outside their existing ethnic groups.

Within any ethnic group, deleterious mutations as well as exceptionally positive mutations can result. Both types of mutation occur over time. Additionally, ethnicity specific aggregate or single phenotypes may produce either deleterious or positive results, although in this case it is likely that mainly the positive results will be selected over time. So both ethnicity specific mutations and ethnicity specific phenotypic probability are part of what make two ethnic groups different from one another genetically. From an educational standpoint, all individuals should be aware if they have a recessive allele (gene) that could lead to a deleterious condition in a child. With this knowledge we can all make more appropriate reproductive decisions. For example: A person gets a genetic test and discovers they have the gene for diabetes (or any other genetic disorder). This person has not developed diabetes themselves, but if they mate with a person who also has this gene, there is a good probability of having a child who will have diabetes. With this knowledge this person can then make an intelligent reproductive decision.

Alleles can become extinguished at the level of grandchild. For example: A girl with a double pair of "light blue eye" alleles mates with a guy who has no "light blue eye" genes. Their kids will have one allele of "light blue eyes" and one allele with "other eye color." If that child then mates with a person who has no "light blue eye" genes, their is a 50% chance that their children will not have any "light blue eye" genes, at all. This is how quickly alleles can become extinguished. The good news is that deleterious genes can be extinguished the same way. Another way to eliminate deleterious genes is to not have children if you have the bad gene. Unfortunately, we do not yet have the technology to repair these genes... but we're working on it.

Here is a most important point: As an example, let's say there are three phenotypic alleles unique to an ethnic group which, when combined, give them a specific trait that no other ethnic group has. Most members of this ethnic group have all three double alleles at the same time and have the trait. If all members of this ethnic group mate with another ethnic group that has none of those alleles, what then is the probability of seeing all three of those phenotypes together at the same time within a child of the future? Close to zero... but not zero. The more ethno-specific phenotypes we add to this scenario, the more this probability approaches zero. In the real world with hundreds of ethno-specific aggregate phenotypes and mutations the probability of producing a human with the original phenotypes, under this scenario is virtually zero. Thusly, the aggregate phenotypes of that original ethnic group have gone extinct.

The "district based communities" (let's say 10 square miles) discussed in this essay are not isolated from the rest of the world and nor are they set up by the government. We shall define it as a completely voluntary thing that the ethnic groups, themselves, decide upon by discussing it with the government and then, eventually, agreeing to the area of land (zone). All decisions regarding the land after that are determined by the ethnic group and not the government - with the exception of usual governmental functions like road building, conservation etc... The ethnic group can, at any time, terminate their group and return the land to a state of "open range" so to speak. It is expected that these communities would be part of a much larger collective of communities, of a similar ethnic group, over the entire world. Individual freedoms would be completely unaffected and remain precisely as they are today in the United States. An individual who was marrying outside their ethnic group would freely bring whoever they want over to their house in their ethnic community. When she marries she may, or may not be able to live in her original community depending on what the community, itself, allows. This is the balance between group freedom and individual freedom. As individuals learn about their own genetics, genes, and alleles, they can make intelligent reproductive decisions of whatever kind they choose, be it within their general ethnic group or outside of it. There would still be intermingling between the ethnic groups with Genetic Freedom for groups implemented. In addition, Human genetic population diversity (ethnic diversity) and cultural diversity would all be maintained.

With that background behind us, the following argument proceeds:

Should we allow the human race to continue to exist as multiple ethnic groups and allow it to freely continue to branch in that way, with all the groups coexisting productively and peacefully upon this planet with their beautiful lands and cultures that we can all take wonderful and enriching vacations to, OR should we continue enforcing the current policy of one uniform ethnic group only? The one uniform ethnic group only policy is enforced by both media/educational influences AND not allowing ethnic groups to legally form district based communities, which then decreases the probability that members of the ethnic group will mate with each other. For clarification, if they cannot discriminate in housing for these district based communities, then they cannot legally have district based communities. Over time this will blend the genetics of the various ethnic groups into a more uniform looking single ethnic group and many of the ethnicity specific aggregate phenotypes will go extinct.

What is the benefit of the entire human race being just one uniform ethnic group? Peace may be a primary goal. The prevention of racial (ethnic) hatred is often mentioned. Can people be educated with a peaceful philosophy that allows more than one ethnic group to coexist upon our planet, productively and peacefully with one another, while at the same time allowing those ethnic groups to happily and legally have district based communities? So that becomes the argument: “Do you believe that human peace can be achieved along with ethnic diversity using a more advanced educational philosophy, or do you believe that human peace can only be maintained by enforcing a one-ethnic-group-only policy, at gunpoint?” The phrase “at gunpoint” is accurate because laws are enforced at gunpoint and we currently prevent any given ethnic group from legally establishing their own local communities or districts because we call that racism (ethnocentrism) and discrimination.

Groups are a collection of individuals who are freely gathering into the group. Genetics have been voided as criteria for group freedom in local communities. So that particular freedom, not one individual has. While people can buy large lots of private property and, very roughly, accomplish this type of community today, they cannot do so openly and happily, which is contrary to the pursuit of happiness fundamental to the United States. Which brings us back to this: “Do you believe that human peace can be achieved along with ethnic diversity using a more advanced educational philosophy, or do you believe that human peace can only be maintained by enforcing a one ethnic group only policy, at gunpoint?” After hearing this argument, many people simply concede that they support one ethnic group only, and that's that. This means, specifically, that these individuals support ending ethnic diversity upon our planet.

Due to today's social/political environment many people don't like talking about these topics. The many meme associations we have regarding racism (etc..) within our minds likely prevents many from discussing it calmly. Eventually, as enlightenment prevails, people will talk about it more. When we think of an ethnic group having the right to prevent other ethnic groups from moving into their "neighborhood," perhaps we need not feel animosity towards them. Perhaps, in a more enlightened world, this is just something that everybody mutually understands and respects and it is simply part of human life and genetic population diversity (ethnic diversity). Without this freedom, no matter where we travel on this planet in the future, the people will all look generally the same. Some people may want that world. What about the ones who don't?