The way I see it, there are concentric circles of similarity expanding out around us and we are engaged in the process of exploring the nuances, the similarities, and differences. Our highest forms of art and drama are all about exploring these nuances, the metaphors, and the great and small connections across time and space that form the meanings of the stories we tell. As with Sheldrake's Morphogenetic field, I think connections based on similarity exist beyond what we currently consider to be the physical.
We can choose to identify with something big or something small. There are trade-offs for going with either one. You can identify with your family, your ancestors, your tribe, your race, your state, your sports team, your species, or the planet... or maybe even the galaxy and universe.
A small circle of identity provides more freedom with fewer but stronger connections. A larger circle of identity can provide more connections that are weaker.
Identifying with your most immediate ancestors and land can build a long lasting meaningful stories and can bind a group of people together, but this story and the traditions are structures and structures can feel amazing or they can feel like prisons - and the way one perceives it likely has to do with both personality traits and where one finds oneself within the social hierarchy.
The oligarchs use identity to either divide or unify groups of people. If a group of people poses a threat to an agenda, the way to dis-empower that group is to eliminate the group identity, create shame around the group identity, and/or create newer smaller competing group identities. So depending on the circumstance, it might be advantageous to make people ashamed of their heritage or ashamed to focus on their immediate ancestors/land/race and consider themselves world citizens. In other circumstances it might be advantageous for the oligarchs to make people conscious of their race, their heritage, and their differences.
If people want to identify with their closest circles of similarity and be proud of their history and even their extended history going back thousands of years, there's nothing morally wrong with that and and there is nothing "racist" about that, and it can possibly add meaning to one's life. It is not wrong or "speciesist" to prefer human companions. Likewise it isn't wrong to prefer people more similar to yourself than different and you can choose what similarities are important to you.
Groups of people sufficiently empowered can be awesome or dangerous. Races are different, but not THAT different. We can all be friends and family if we want to be. And as long as we have a free and open internet that allows the networking form of organization to grow organically, and that allows people of diverse backgrounds and perspectives to keep talking, I think the danger of some new race-based superiority complex wreaking havoc like it did in the 20th century is almost nil.