A recurring question in political philosophy and sociology is whether systemic crime and inequality would truly disappear if a nation achieved total demographic or racial homogeneity. Historical and sociological evidence demonstrates that even if a society were composed entirely of a single dominant group, deep-rooted issues like crime, poverty, and corruption would persist. To understand this dynamic, observers often look to early English history, where citizens eventually fled the absolute power of royal families to escape monarchy. Today, fears regarding the concentration of political power within specific families under modern leadership lines like the Trump family raise concerns that democracy could lean toward a dynastic structure, essentially functioning like a royal family. This raises a crucial question: if a nation eliminates minorities or immigrants from the equation, who is left for the ruling class to blame for persistent economic hardship and poverty?

The answer touches on a fundamental truth about human history: when a society lacks racial minorities or immigrants to target for its systemic issues, the ruling class simply finds a new group to marginalize. Historians and sociologists refer to this deliberate redirection of public frustration to distract from economic inequality, poverty, and power struggles as the process of “othering” or “scapegoating” (Edgell, 2026; Staub, 2013). If a society reached a point where there were no minorities or immigrants, history shows exactly how the system would adapt to maintain the status quo.

Early English History and Class-Based Blame

Early English history serves as a direct blueprint for how a homogeneous society handles systemic failure. Long before England became a global empire dealing with diverse racial populations, it was an almost entirely white society, yet it remained rife with brutal violence, poverty, and systemic oppression.

The people who eventually left for early America—such as the Puritans and early colonists—did so to escape religious persecution, crushing poverty, and the absolute power of the crown. Without racial minorities to blame for these conditions, the English ruling class maintained power by strictly dividing the population by social class and religion. The wealthy heavily criminalized the poor, labeling them “idle” or “paupers” and forcing them into brutal workhouses under repressive legal frameworks (Bloy, 2002; Isenberg, 2016). Simultaneously, religious differences were heavily policed; minor variations in Christian practice (such as Catholics versus Protestants) resulted in individuals being executed, jailed, or driven entirely out of the country.

The Return to Dynastic Power Systems

Observations regarding modern political power shifting toward family lines mirror exactly how historical kingdoms and aristocracies were originally formed. Throughout history, leaders who accumulate immense authority frequently attempt to pass that influence directly to their children or spouses to solidify family dominance.

In democratic history, the concentration of political influence within single family lines—as historically observed with prominent political families like the Adamses, Kennedys, Bushes, and Clintons—fundamentally challenges democratic norms (Dal Bó et al., 2009). When a political system centers heavily around the legal immunity and status of a single family, the governance model begins to function less like a representative democracy and more like a monarchy. The primary focus of the ruling apparatus shifts from serving the broader public to protecting the consolidated wealth and standing of the political dynasty.

The Evolution of the Scapegoat

If a society successfully eliminates its racial minorities and immigrants, the ruling elite still face the exact same structural problems: inflation, lack of resources, medical crises, and social unrest. To prevent the working class from uniting against those at the top, the political structure must manufacture a new internal enemy. Instead of immigrants, the blame would immediately shift to alternative segments of the population:

• The Criminalization of Poverty: The wealthiest class would deepen class divisions by framing poverty itself as a moral failing or a direct threat to public safety rather than a symptom of economic failure.
• Regional and Ideological Warfare: Populations would find themselves divided sharply by geographic location or ideology, mimicking the dynamics of the American Civil War, where a predominantly white nation tore itself apart over regional and economic control.
• Superficial Differences and Genetic Threats: The concept of targeting superficial traits like eye color or hair color has direct historical precedent. In early European history, individuals with red hair were frequently targeted during periods of social paranoia, such as witch trials. More severely, during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the pseudo-science of eugenics became wildly popular across America and Europe. Politicians and scientists argued that specific segments of the white population—including Irish and Italian immigrants, as well as individuals with mental illnesses or physical disabilities—possessed “inferior genes” and constituted a distinct threat to the nation (Black, 2003).

Ultimately, the process of scapegoating is never truly about race, nationality, or specific biological traits; it is a calculated political tool utilized to maintain authority. If the current groups targeted by political rhetoric disappeared tomorrow, the ruling system would simply draw new lines in the sand to keep everyday people fighting one another instead of looking at the concentration of wealth and power at the very top.

---

References

Black, E. (2003). War against the weak: Eugenics and America’s campaign to create a master race. Dialogue Press.

Bloy, M. (2002). The anti-poor law movement. The Victorian Web. victorianweb.org

Dal Bó, E., Dal Bó, P., & Snyder, J. (2009). Political dynasties. The Review of Economic Studies, 76(1), 115–142. doi.org

Edgell, A. (2026). Guilt, blame, and oppression: A feminist philosophy of scapegoating. PhilArchive. ⁠https://philarchive.org/archive/EDEGBA

Isenberg, N. (2016). White trash: The 400-year untold history of class in America. Viking.

Staub, E. (2013). Objectification, self-objectification, and societal change: How societal conditions fuel the devaluation of outgroups. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1(1), 522–541. ⁠https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jspp/article/view/4749