And this is where that “loss aversion” comes into play.
Humans have a herding instinct, and we form groups that we feel will optimize our access to resources and territory. We are territorial, and defend our territories as a herd.
The resistance to “multiculturalism” is basic to human nature. It has nothing to do with religion (or race, or culture), specifically, and everything to do with trying to control certain resources that “belong” to the group.
When a new group with different characteristics (religion, color, language, culture, etc.) encroaches on an existing group’s territory/resources, they are demanding access to the resources that the existing group perceives as their own.
It is about hoarding behavior and access to resources; and it is as basic to human (and animal) nature as eating and procreation. It’s a survival instinct, and it’s ridiculous to think that we can change something that is so intrinsic and essential to our survival.[/quote]
Well, this is big topic. But, survival can manifest in different ways. Competing for territory and resources against other ‘tribes’, in fact, may actually become antithetical to survival at some point and surely antithetical to group sanity, stability and common decency. There is a fine line between human behavior produced by an environment and human “nature”. In fact, you can’t really talk about nature outside of the context of environment.
Religion, ethnicity, race, nationalism, are not only points of affinity but developed as walls of division and are grounds of exploitation. Those within a household to the political offices of a nation learn well and communicate these “differences” to their own advantage especially during times of economic stress and perceived scarcity.
