> No group is truly homogeneous. We're talking about racial homogeneity.
So you do agree that saying that a country is "homogeneous" just because it is racially homogeneous does not make sense?
So you do agree that saying that a country is "homogeneous" just because it is racially homogeneous does not make sense?
But politicians do often try to engineer these splits down racial lines, so it often ends up that way in practice.
For example, racial minorities being scapegoated for inequalities in society, to try to capture the votes of the racial majority.
Dividing people who would otherwise have shared class interests, on issues of race and similar, is a political strategy with a long and sordid history, sadly.
It's basically marketing, you target different audiences. You might call it racist or whatever you want, but the reality is that it works. Just ask capitalists who mastered the craft. If you're by any chance suggesting that demographics simply don't matter in marketing or politics then that'd actually be the most outrageous statement made in this entire thread.
That's it, that's the point. Talking just about "racial homogeneity" when discussing implementing certain policies does not make sense at all because then you're ignoring all other possible divisions.