You claim that some humans are superior. You put yourself in the traditions of the Nazis, who thought the same.
Some arguments to that:
1.) The Nazis thought that their "race" (which existence is not supported by any genetic facts) would be superior. They started the Second World War - and lost. 7.7 million Germans died, Germany was completely devastated, many Germans were forcefully displaced and Germany divided. Stalin - a nationalist, racist, and anti-Semite - built than national states in Eastern Europe by forcefully displacing millions. National states were usually built on such crimes, because the reality is different and therefore nationalists have to change the reality by terror and murder.
2.) Many 19th century European states thought their "race" would superior and built up colonial empires and killed millions, including several genocides. But 100 years later, all these empires had collapsed. Now, in the 21st century, their share of the world trade is back to the pre-capitalist times.
3.) There was the tradition of nobles thinking themselves to be superior and they wanted to preserve their pure gene pool (they called that differently, because they had no clues about genes at that time). The resulting inbreeding caused a huge number of severe genetic defects - e.g. in most royal families in Europe in the late 19th century.
Races is a concept, which is scientifically only valid in pets, farm animals, crop plants etc., and these races are only a result of human breeding. At least in pets inbreeding we see the same strong trend to enrichment of genetic defects. "Pure races" is recipe for disaster. Also farm animals and crop plant races only survive with massive human help, because they could not compete with wild species and pathogens.
In humans, such politics were always based on terror and mass-murder - and caused disasters.
Responses