Well, yes, but it’s terribly impolitic to say so and terribly impolitic to ask. But, my job is answering the ‘impolitic and hard’ questions
The correct question is, “Do some subraces tribes or clans demonstrate lower clannishness and higher extension of kingroup trust to non-kin?”
- The answer is yes. (See research on infants in cribs, and research on babies and very young on those they don’t know).
- The answer is yes and appears to be like most things, dependent upon ancestral environments. Homogeneity breeds tolerance and heterogeneity breeds clannishness. And we see this all over the world in every racial, subracial, tribal, clan, and class grouping.
- The answer is yes and it appears to be neoteny/pedomorphism, meaning the preservation of adolescent traits into adults.
- The answer is yes, and it appears that just like in other animals, the primary means of neoteny is reduction of the rate and depth of maturity.
- The answer is yes and it appears that the clannishness (Tolerance) of racial groups is measurable in the races by testosterone levels. (it also appears that most variation in homo-sapiens-sapiens is endocrine and therefore developmental. In this measurement east asians have the lowest testosterone, greatest neoteny, and as a consequence longest lives. Second to east asians are western europeans. Both of these groups could evolve without excessive competition from competing subracies and tribes. (Homogeneity is better in the long run in every sense.)
- Whites demonstrate the lowest clannishness (really). East asians and west asians (semites, and turkish) are the most clannish And everyone else is downhill from there. The difference is that east asians are not under threat from immigration and whites are.