The Cross Race Effect By Brian Simpson
The cross race effect in a well-known effect in psychology and often plays havoc in judicial proceedings and identification evidence:
“The Cross-Race Effect (CRE) in face recognition is the well-replicated finding that people are better at recognizing faces from their own race, relative to other races. The CRE reveals systematic limitations on eyewitness identification accuracy and suggests that some caution is warranted in evaluating cross-race identification. The CRE is a problem because jurors value eyewitness identification highly in verdict decisions. In the present paper, we explore how accurate people are in predicting their ability to recognize own-race and other-race faces. Caucasian and Asian participants viewed photographs of Caucasian and Asian faces, and made immediate judgments of learning during study. An old/new recognition test replicated the CRE: both groups displayed superior discriminability of own-race faces, relative to other-race faces.
Importantly, relative metamnemonic accuracy was also greater for own-race faces, indicating that the accuracy of predictions about face recognition is influenced by race. This result indicates another source of concern when eliciting or evaluating eyewitness identification: people are less accurate in judging whether they will or will not recognize a face when that face is of a different race than they are. This new result suggests that a witness’s claim of being likely to recognize a suspect from a lineup should be interpreted with caution when the suspect is of a different race than the witness.”
However, the issues go much further than judicial proceedings as argued here:
“This shows us the future of the diverse society: people wandering through a crowd, unable to distinguish others from one another, and essentially isolating themselves in an in-group of their own tribe and a few others as a means of avoiding this anonymity. By that token, much of the “racism” we see out there may have nothing to do with racial dislike, but simple practicality. If other groups appear as an anonymous horde, it may be best to avoid them. That way, the people you do interact with are accountable for their acts, which means that you can expect reasonable treatment from them.
In addition, this indiscriminability of faces will contribute to paranoia: you cannot identify those who wrong you, so they could be anyone in the herd of people around you, laughing at you as they go through their daily lives. The fear of this may be as bad as the reality. While the cross-race effect (CRE) is not new, an understanding of its importance in politics seems to have eluded our leaders, so perhaps it is something that should enter into more discussions. We are all strangers to one another in diversity.”
The ethno-racially and culturally diverse society intrinsically produces alienation and anomie, since individuals come to see themselves as being surrounded by the alien other, not members of their own kind that they can relate to. This is the source behind the sociological work showing that social capital readily breaks down in such diverse societies:
“In the short run, however, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down’. Trust (even of one’s own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer. In the long run, however, successful immigrant societies have overcome such fragmentation by creating new, cross‐cutting forms of social solidarity and more encompassing identities. Illustrations of becoming comfortable with diversity are drawn from the US military, religious institutions, and earlier waves of American immigration.’’
No matter what the argument, the elites continue to keep the immigration furnace burning despite substantial community objection to increased immigration, even in a brainwashed populace:
“Nearly two out of three American voters say they support President Trump’s plan to reduce overall legal immigration levels in the United States, whereby currently more than 1.5 million legal immigrants arrive annually. In a new poll by Harvard-Harris polling, about 66 percent of voters — or nearly two out of three — said they support a plan by the Trump administration to almost cut legal immigration in half by ending the process known as “chain migration,” as well as the Diversity Visa Lottery, and building a border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. The deal would couple the wage-boosting relief for American citizens with allowing only illegal aliens enrolled in the President Obama-created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to stay in the U.S. There are nearly 800,000 DACA illegal aliens.”
Almost certainly nothing will be done by Trump to stop this flood, as his weakness in resisting the south American “caravan” of invaders clearly shows.