Introduction to Concentrism

Concentric Politics: A Political Theory Informed by Metaphysics

How can the integrity and self determination of people’s along racial, national and cultural lines be reconciled with an increasingly globalizing and internationalized world without compromising either?

The coherence of any ideology is derived from the degree to which that ideology is based on reality principles. This is to say that ideology must be informed by metaphysics, or the principles inherent to reality generally. That which is happening, is happening, and that which exists, exists, neither can be beyond the breadth of reality. The theme of globalization as the networks of smaller groups of humanity cross and intermingle is a theme rooted in the nature of reality, likewise, the varied particularizations of man — his conditions and self definition that set the borders between him, his environment and his counterparts, are also certainly rooted in the nature of reality. This of course extends to race, ethnicity, nationality and culture. An important consideration to make herein, is that something is defined as much by what it is, by that which it is not — if there is a white circle on a black piece of paper, is the white circle defined or is the black rectangle with a white hole in it defined? What we can understand from this is that self definition of subjects necessitates both diversity and relativity, that which is defined relates to that which is external to it, and if self definition is inherent to reality, it follows that many grades of relativity, defined beings relative to one another, will be present within reality. As such, by relativity it is meant that some defined beings are more like to one another, and some are more different, relativity necessitates diversity — both of which existing much like a gradient or scale of greater and lesser similarity to any given point on the gradient. It is therefore maintained that earths biodiversity is necessitated by realities self definition, that the nature of this biodiversity is intrinsic to the principles underlying reality. A scale of relativity can be apprehended succinctly as follows: individual; familial; tribal; racial; special; animal. Tribal at one time would relay the extended family, and can still to some degree, but today it would especially relay those we find we actually relate to, those of kindred definition, friends, which can of course supercede racial and special definitions. Special, referring to the broader species within which a number of races are situated. Animal, to those beings that are animated with life and vitality. Importantly, the grades on this scale can be envisioned as concentric circles, the center being the individual and each grade being a circle further departing therefrom until you reach animal, though of course you could invert this graph — the aforementioned grading helps visualize relativity in definition from the perspective of any individual, which is of course their natural perspective. If we are to entertain the somewhat liberal view that all defined beings should be granted self determination, particularly ethnic groups, the question of the degree of autonomy and sovereignty these groups should be granted, applied especially to how many groups this could be granted realistically, what criteria for definition or a defined collective should be met, and how to apply this all in a rapidly politically and economically globalizing world — the previously mentioned graph of concentric circles grading definition would be of immense help.

Concentric politics works to respect layered particularizations of identity and authorize relative autonomy and self determination to those identities relative to the identities proximal to the given identity, as well as relative to its bordering concentric circles. For instance, ethno-linguistic and cultural identities within a given race being respected as a circle of identity within its shared racial circle. All racial circles would be relative to a shared special circle, humanity, each granted respect to their particularity but not supercession over their directly greater concentric circle, in this case special over racial. Mr. Jonathon McCann is himself a defined being, clearly a defined entity that exists discretely relative to his external environment and his living counterparts, the McCann family shares not only a genetic similarity, but many shared cognitive traits, dispositions and tendencies as well as familial traditions, the McCanns are Irish, and share in many of Irelands broader traditions and genetics, to illustrate relativity further, other British cultures are likely more similar to the Irish McCanns than say, Scandinavian cultures. Further, the Irish McCanns are Caucasians, and share in the broader but more varied Caucasian or European genetic, linguistic and cultural constitution. The Caucasian McCanns are human, and share in the above traits with humanity at large though with greater variance, with respect to earths diversity and essentially varied definitions of being expressed in the various beings relative to one another, the McCanns will share in this broad concentric circle to a greater degree than the circle directly anterior to it, animal — though they will share with all that is animate moreso than the inanimate.

The primary consideration herein is how we might treat identities nestled within identities, the answer being dependent of the identity in questions proximity to bordering opposed identities and its relativity to the greater and lesser concentric circles. On the surface, we are dealing with races within a species, cultures within races and families within cultures, though the latter is of less demanding concern. Subraces, or more specified but still broad categorizations of very broad racial categorizations would also be a useful category, given for instance, “Asian”, is hardly succinct, usually used to refer to eastern Asians, there is a great number of very distinct racial groups relatively proximal thereto such that its not of much use on its own. In any case, subracial or ethnic and cultural identities will be treated according to their relativity to the immediately anterior concentric circle. Self determination in particular, though this may sound contradictory, should be respected by counterparts according to its adherence to the self determining identities relativity to its immediately posterior and anterior concentric circles. In an aim to both conserve and develop earths biological diversity as well as to respect identity on several scales in an increasingly intermingled world, the self determination of identities according to the scale upon which they sit should be respected and not imposed on by foreign elements in a way contrary to said determination. In like manner, to avoid any kind of foul play or misconstruing of a groups determination by either a foreign element or directly anterior, broader concentric circle, supposed determination that directly contradicts safety, well being, and instinctual self preservation of a given identity, should be almost always disregarded. It should be noted that in many ways this theory more closely resembles liberalism than identitarianism of any kind, though it is wholly admitted that understanding the nature of identity, and more specifically, or particularity and definition of being in an ultimately universal and absolute system of reality is of the utmost importance. In the context of metaphysics, reality operates in a similar way, though our goal herein is admittedly merely a plausible reconciliation between the particular and the universal. Reality, being necessarily universal, particularizes and instantiates, each particularization being relative to one another, creating a gradient of similarity and difference relative to a given point of definition.

Sociopolitical polarization, though nothing new, is perhaps most exacerbated and manipulated on today’s political stage. Although said stage is certainly more manifold than polar, most any given dialectic is one between thesis and antithesis — often one is purely reactionary. Polarization may be unavoidable in totality, due to the inherence of the polarizing impulse within the beating heart of reality — but by understanding the nature of definition, the relative and the absolute as relevant to metaphysics from which we can draw wisdom and apply to innumerable planes, we can generate a true synthesis of thesis and antithesis.