Prosocial behaviors are attitudes and actions, whether felt, thought, or expressed, that promote cooperation between individuals. The term prosocial is descriptive, as the cooperative behaviors do not arise from a common etiology, but rather are driven by overlapping biological, sociological, and economic forces. Prosocial behaviors are cooperative behaviors; being cooperative, they are relationship based. This differentiates them from helpful behaviors. Unlike helpful behaviors, which are unilateral and individual based, prosocial behaviors are multilateral and based on formed relationships between interacting individual. That is, Prosocial behaviors are group-cooperative behaviors.
The group-cooperative nature of prosociality leads to a within-group/ between-group distinction — except in a leftist’s pipe dream.* Prosocial, itself, just means cooperative, and implies with respect to a group. So, while prosociality is often contrasted with selfishness (or individualism if you like), the situation becomes more complex in multi-group systems. When there are multiple groups interacting in a system, what counts as prosocial is relative. This is illustrated by the maxim: “myself before my brother, myself and my brother before my family, my family before my city, my city before my nation.” Obviously, one level of prosociality need not imply another. Often, when prosocial behavior is present in multilevel systems, it’s known as solidaity.
The relativity of prosocial behaviors makes them hard to objectively assess, at least when they are subjectively identified as being “positive,” which implies a for whom. Given the politics of morality, some will inevitable classify the forms of prosocial behavior which they don’t prefer as being antisocial, leading to a class of socially approved pro-social behaviors and socially disapproved ones. For example, one common form of prosocial behavior is ethnic pride and ethnic advocacy — also, at times called racial pride and racial advocacy.** In current western left-leaning liberal multicultural democracies, proracial behaviors are often portrayed in the worse light and held to be antisocial, at least when they are not seen in the best light and held to be as prosocial.
There are, or course, reasons for naturally linking proracial behavior with racist behavior, just as there is reason for linking patriotic behavior to imperialistic behavior. But equating the two is equivalent first equating ego-centered behavior with egocentric behavior, and then equating egocentric behavior with malignant narcissism. As I have argued before, it would take quite a perverse sense to do that — and an equally perverted sense to accept that.
*Theoretically, group-behavior could be all inclusive, in the model of universalist collectivism (eg. international communism). While such “eusociality” is theoretically possible, there is good reason to believe it’s practically unachievable. Some behaviors are simply products of organizational dynamics. There is good reason to believe that group differentiation, like group formation is one of them. Refer to: ‘The Progressive Fallacy.’
**It’s important to not one to get caught up by the little switcheroo, where race and ethnos is selectively defined by the Diversity Lobby –where racial pride is called ethnic pride and ethnic pride is called racial pride, as captured in concoctions like “Eurocentric racism” (ie. European Ethnocentrism, or eurocentrism). Or where, Hispanics are an ethnos except when they are a race, as best fits the desired census figures, crimes calculations, and affirmative action handouts.
Proracial Behavior contra Racialism and Racial Nationalism
Let us first meditate on what ‘proracial behavior’ means. To do this, we can contrast it with other ideas. Proracial behavior is prosocial behavior between peoples of similar ancestral backgrounds. In general, prosocial behavior can be contrasted with antisocial behavior. Prosocial behavior is behavior that promotes cooperation between such and such people, while antisocial behavior is behavior that is antagonistic to such cooperation.
Antagonistic Towards Cooperation:
While prosocial often involves socially identifying with a certain group, it does not necessarily involve socially identifying as that group or advocating for that group. For example, I could be prosocial relative to the US, without being a US patriot or a US nationalist. I could, for example, be a local philanthropist or just a nice citizen. In a parallel manner, I could be proracial relative to white people, without being a racialist or racial nationalist. I could, for example, just be a nice guy that writes nice things about white people and mean things about antiwhite people.
“Proracial Behavior contra Racism”
As mentioned, the opposite of proracial behaviors are antiracial behaviors, or behaviors that are antagonistic towards intra-racial cooperation. The relationship between racism and antiracial behaviors is about equivalent to that between socialism and prosocial behaviors. There surely is some, but it’s tangential at best. For example, ‘antiracism’ is a form of antiwhite activism. In that sense, it’s antiracial. And antiracial specific to whites. To further it’s agenda, it engages in racism. As such, it’s not uncommon to hear about the moral inferiority of a certain population and the need for repentance.
Beyond, if you would like, we can distinguish between ‘morally acceptable’ antiracial behaviors and unacceptable ones. For now, let’s call the former ‘deracialism’ (which leads one to being aracial) and the later ‘antiracism’ (which leads to other to being raceless).
To help us out let us return to our prosocial/antisocial dichotomy. As mentioned, to understand antisociality, you have to view it in context to the within-group/ between-group distinction. Antisocial behaviors are merely behaviors that are antagonistic towards a group’s cooperation. From the individual antagonist’s perspective, this could be for a variety of reason. Our antagonist, or protagonist — depending on how you wish to see it — could be an individualist, seeking autonomy, in the sense of Any Rand , Gide’s Immoralist , or one of Camus’ many oddballs, or he could be an individual seeking the destruction of the group, like Turgenev’s Bazarov. In this regards, while the two overlap, they are clearly distinct in essence; while antisocial behavior qua individualism has autonomy from the group as its end, antisocial behavior qua nihilism has the destruction of a group as it’s end. There’s a fundamental moral and practical distinction here.
Alternatively, our antagonist, or protagonist — depending on how you wish to see it — could be a member of another group that’s antagonistic toward’s a groups cooperation, whether in the sense of competition or oppression. Antagonism just means ‘to compete against’; there are many ways to do this, and there are fundamental moral and practical distinctions between them. For example, while some would like to hold that it is immoral for some groups to out-compete other groups, there’s a clear distinction between out-competing by overachieving and out-competing by oppressing or undermining.
Following our parallel, ‘antiracism’ is antiracial behavior which seeks to undermine the cooperation between a specific group. It’s not when a member of an ancestral group seeks their own good independent of the group and acts irregardless to that group (deracial), but when a member acts with spite. It’s the difference between leaving a block party and going home to bed because one’s tired and short circuiting the city fuse box, because one want’s to sleep. Likewise, it’s not when members of on ancestral group seeks their own good (competition), but when they act against an others group, specifically by trying to undermine it. It’s the difference between the racial nation of Japan, training hard for the Olympics, and between them sabotaging the Nigerian training facilities.
So to clarify:
Pro and Anti: behavioral, identity, and political
Ant-relative to Y
Antiracial Y behaviors
Deracialism–breaking away from (Y) Ancestral identity
Racism — (non-Y) oppressing (Y) Ancestral identity
Antiracism — (Y or non-Y) undermining (Y) Ancestral identity
Pro-relative to Y
Proracial Y behaviors
Y Racialism –identifying with (Y) Ancestral identity
Y Racism –oppressing (non-Y) Ancestral identity
Y Antiracism — underming (non-Y)
Pro and Anti: moral
Non-Y Racism — (non-Y) oppressing (Y) Ancestral identity
Y Racism –(Y) oppressing (non-Y) Ancestral identity
Non-Y Antiracism — (Y or non-Y) undermining (Y) Ancestral identity
Y Antiracism — (Y or non-Y) undermining (non-Y) Ancestral identity