It seems to me that humans tend to jockey for dominance, then they end up forming gangs called families, companies, religions, states, etc., all of which are fundamentally representative of gangsterism—the best description of that I've come across being from Barrigton Moore, Jr.: "a form of self-help which victimizes others."
If it's for survival, even if it's for justice and equity, gangsterism or jingoism can be argued in favor of. Yet, as soon as the scales tip past leveling and equity to committing injustice, hoarding, and greed, it becomes something which should be alien to humankind. Or at least, I'd like that to be alien to humankind.
And, even when it is for protecting victimized and oppressed groups, they're usually being victimized by another group, another "gang". The victimizing part isn't a requirement for a group of humans yet as soon as the advantage comes to a group they almost immediately attack others in the name of shoring up their defenses, their "risks". People like to say there are no victimless crimes, but there are also no perpeptrator-less crimes. If one is under a boot, another is wearing the boot.
I'm not saying this criticism as castigation. It's an attempt to work out why I feel so hopeless when I think of human history, human civilization, and why I despair when I wonder if there is ever going to be a better future or if it will just always be more of the same.
Are humans ever going to be united or is the best we can hope for some houses of cards built on a foundation of vendettas over atrocities, real and imagined, misplaced or not, ongoing and ancient.
I've researched a lot into the process of dehumanization. It's a harrowing topic to read, let alone see in the world. Every in-group, every gang, feels that pressure of us versus them, and that feeling is even encouraged. It's not just friendly competition even when it's between children. The takers and the taken-from.
It is so much easier to dehumanize when it is a group outside your own. Almost as though every group of humans considers their group as the real humans while the rest are merely background, even before they need to justify a reason to attack.
I don't have an answer. I don't even know what to hope for. I've been taken from. I benefit from others being taken from. I've probably taken. I've given freely and there are times I've been in need where I was given what I needed and other times where I wasn't.
Is it just the human condition? Human nature? Is there no hope?
I don't understand most of the hierarchical loyalties that humans possess, but I do understand being identified as lesser and the fear, uncertainty, and insecurity that can bring. I understand wanting to be on the "winning side", at least to avoid being on the "losing side". I don't understand most identities individuals choose to care about (such as geographical birthplace/residence, sport teams, religions, ethnicities/family history, to name a few) but I understand a lot of people care about those things. Yet I cannot bring myself to understand how one can care so much about their identity in a subgroup as to not only victimize others but to do it outside of direct threats.
Giving your group the advantage? Unfair but OK, I can understand wanting security. Attacking and putting down the other group when you're doing fine? Is the idea that if you don't constantly expend energy to put down others that the first chance they get you'll be the victim?
Do they just feel threatened all the time?
...
Though I dont have hope for a better future on the species-level, I do acknowledge that progress can be made in other ways. And setbacks are arguably even easier than the status quo and need to be protected against as well. So I will never advocate not trying to make the world better and I will never advocate giving up.
I only worry that humankind cannot be better as a species. That "self-help through victimization" is both human nature and inevitable in any group larger than the individual. Even when it's not eat or be eaten, but eat everything while others starve.
