Purple race

As I've been reading about white nationalism and white supremacy, it seems to me the movement is based on the fear that the white race will become extinct, or close to it.

As unpopular (or maybe even apathetic) as it may sound, I've thought, "So what?"

What if the white race ceases to exist? Which I doubt will happen, but it could.

What if the black race would disappear? What of the yellow and red and cinnamon?

What if we all became green.

But maybe purple would be more interesting?

Seems I recall learning somewhere along the way, that brown-eyed genes carry more dominance than blue-eyed genes; ie: brown eyes win most often. Why is that? Are genes that carry darker skin more dominant? I don't know and I don't feel like looking it up right now. Or say another skin color is dominant. Regardless of the dominant color-gene, could the reason be for future survival and evolutionary purposes? Is that a racist thought?

Perhaps we will evolve into a different homo-species. If our planet and some humans survive 100,000 more years, how will our descendants look back on us? With mindful study and compassion, I hope.

~*~

More thoughts...

But, if darker pigment is/was dominant, wouldn't darker skin be dominant among humas? And maybe that is true on a global basis. Globally there probably are more dark than light skins.

Weren't our human ancestors all dark-skinned? Where and how did lighter skin evolve?

Here's a link to one article that shares information from genetic study/studies. I found this same information in other articles.
White Skin Developed in Europe Only As Recently as 8,000 Years Ago Say Anthropologists

It seems that all this fighting, probably since our human origins, is really about culture and beliefs. Not skin color.

How much does skin color influence culture? How much does culture influence skin color? Those seem like stupid questions - especially the second one. Skin color is totally determined by genetics.

Last week I was thinking about war. Are most wars fought over property? Conquering land to take for one's own its resources? Some of those resources are people, which then become the conquerors' property. Unless they are benevolent conquerors. That's oxymoronic - benevolent conquerors. Is that even possible?

~*~

Thinking more about "benevolent conqueror"...

I guess one who conquers evil could be a benevolent conqueror, depending on their actions after their conquest. I wish I had retained world history better. I'm sure there are examples.

Benevolent conqueror brought to mind Jesus Christ and the final judgments. May or may not happen. We'll all find out in the future.

And it brought to mind a scripture. Romans 12:21 (Amplified): Do not be overcome and conquered by evil, but overcome evil with good.

That seems like a good policy.