Humans are social creatures. We’re good at working together to solve problems and complete tasks. We’re built to establish varying levels of emotional connections and bonds with others, and this contributes to a group’s cohesion and resilience. We establish cultural norms and various forms of social control mechanisms that also contribute to a group’s cohesion, as well as its uniformity. All of this increases a group’s ability to survive and thrive … and to compete against other groups.

Image: KarlaAnnCoté

And that’s the flip side of the human behavioral coin. As cooperative, helpful and even tender we can be with those of our own group – our family, our community, our ethnicity – our “tribe” – we can be equally antagonistic and hateful to those we consider of another group – the “other.” Particularly if there is some actual or perceived competition for such things as resources, power, access to opportunities, and legitimacy. And the fear that often results from these actual or perceived competitions can drive hateful actions to deadly ends. Even within groups, if there is differential access to these things among group members – if the norms and social control mechanisms are unable to maintain some level of equity – it can tear a group a part.

The racism inherent among the white nationalists who demonstrated and murdered a counter protester in Charlottesville, VA, over the weekend obviously isn’t new to the U.S. It’s been with us in various forms since before our birth as a nation. The slavery of African Americans, the genocidal displacement of Native Americans from their lands, the internment of American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II, these and other actions stain our history, and their dark legacies continue to shape our interactions and power differentials to this day.

Image: KarlaAnnCoté

But while white nationalists’ racist beliefs aren’t new, one could argue that Trump’s campaign and presidency have rewritten some of our norms and weakened our social control mechanisms, emboldening more open, flagrant and even violent forms of racism, misogyny, homophobia, etc. The Charlottesville rally is a prime example of that, potentially the largest white nationalist rally in decades as such individuals now feel more empowered to go public with their beliefs. The term alt-right itself is a form of normalizing white supremacy, as it seeks to give neo-nazis, the KKK, and other hate groups a place along our accepted political spectrum.

White Americans have the power here. We must stand up and work to reverse this destabilization of norms that strive for equity, that say installing a white supremacist in the White House as a president’s key advisor isn’t normal, that say affirmative action must continue, that say police officers shouldn’t rough up citizens when being taken into custody. And we must advocate for, and support a healthy, free and independent press, for it provides transparency of behavior of those in power, a key social control mechanism.

David Sloan Wilson has argued that we must learn to more deliberately upscale the social control mechanisms of the village (that include transparency) to the level of the nation state, and even that of the global village. The bulk of our evolutionary history was spent living in small groups, and as a result, we’re genetically and culturally adapted to this scale of interaction. It logically follows that our ability to successfully live on this planet as a species will depend on how well we upscale these social control mechanisms.

Policy makers, politicians, CEOs, activists, and others should all look at how we upscale these mechanisms, including the equitable distribution of resources and transparency of behavior. These were both important norms and mechanisms of our hunter gatherer and early village dwelling ancestors. Providing an acceptable minimum level quality of life to all citizens would limit a politician’s ability to capitalize on fear while running for office. Nor does transparency refer to only exposing selfish behaviors; promoting pro-social behaviors and making them visible are also involved.

One of these needed visible pro-social behaviors is for White Americans to speak up. We must recognize the existence of White Supremacy in all its forms – from the overt violence of the White Nationalists in Charlottesville, to the unconscious biases against job candidates based on skin color or even just names on a resume, to the environmental injustices that disproportionately impact communities of color, to the disproportionate disciplinary actions that students of color face in our schools. White supremacy is real. Institutionalized racism and discrimination are real. Black Lives Matter doesn’t equate with neo-nazis or the KKK. If you’re white and don’t comprehend this, talk to another white person who does.

And we must publicly shame officials, say the President of the United States, for not publicly condemning white nationalists, neo-nazis, the KKK, etc. Their world view isn’t in alignment with the ideals of the United States, nor with what’s needed for the long-term success and survival of our Global Village. Any individual worthy of the Presidency would immediately and automatically make that emphatically and undeniably clear. But Trump has fallen far short of what previous norms considered a minimum bar for the Presidency.

Creating a truly functional, equitable, stable and sustainable nation or Global Village certainly won’t be easy; nor is it a given that we’ll find the will to do so. But I think a “blueprint,” as David Sloan Wilson put it, can be found in our evolutionary past. It will take those with the most power recognizing the realities of white supremacy, finding what’s needed to upscale this blueprint, and having the courage and vision to do so.

Published On: August 16, 2017

Marcel J. Harmon

Marcel J. Harmon

Marcel J. Harmon, a licensed professional engineer and anthropologist, received his Ph.D. in Anthropology from the University of New Mexico. He currently co-leads the Research & Development team at BranchPattern, a building consultancy dedicated to improving life through better built environments. The primary mission of the team is to provide a research/evidence-based approach for aligning design intent with occupant and organizational needs. Over the years Marcel’s academic and professional focus have included applications of evolutionary theory to understanding past and contemporary societies and the reciprocal relationships between people and their built environments. In his current role, Marcel leads research projects designed to provide insights relative to specific client questions. He engages building occupants, gathering their stories and personal narratives, to ensure that projects better account for occupant’s wants and needs. He also quantifies the built environment’s impact on occupant productivity/performance and health, as well as the occupant’s impact on building performance. Marcel uses this understanding to inform on the process from early programming through post occupancy evaluations, and encourage longer term, prosocial decision making during the design/construction process.



  • Bernd Ehlert says:

    A real solution will arise only when man realizes that even his highest thinking and his highest culture are influenced by animal instincts. Man is a hybrid creature; he has a split nature. This is the consequence of his evolutionary origin, which is not a divine origin at all. Edward O. Wilson puts it to the point when he says in his book “The Social Conquest of Earth”:
    “We are an evolutionary chimera, living on intelligence steered by the demands of animal instinct. This is the reason we are mindlessly dismantling the biosphere and, with it, our own prospects for permanent existence.”

    “Make our tribe (America) great again” (on a limited earth) is a very strong animal instinct. Wilson treats it in his chapter “Tribalism Is a Fundamental Human Trait”.

  • David Doyal says:

    How can you be a reliable source of science based information, and an ideological trumpet at the same time?

    • colin hutton says:

      Well said.

      Sad to see this site providing a pulpit for a SJW to virtue signal. I guess he is hoping to find employment at Google.

  • Rory Short says:

    There is a product of our evolution that we should not lose sight of and that is our consciousness. Our consciousness gives us the ability to communicate with the greater consciousness which informs the Universe. Our spiritual leaders tap into this greater consciousness. To the degree that we manage to do so we get helpful guidance on how to respond positively to our life situations. i speak from my Quaker experience.

  • David Gerstle says:

    Doyle and Hutton: What aspects of this site have ever been anything less than ideological positions taken up through the popular authority of science? It is socio-political advocacy, in the vast majority of its publications. There is nothing particularly new (or inherently wrong) in the argument that ‘we must follow the lead of science to craft a better world’. That has also been the position of the vast majority of evolutionary theorists and popularizers: Spencer, Kropotkin, Pearson, Galton, Huxley (Thomas and Julian), Haeckel, Haldane, Lorenz, Morris, Wilson (EO and DS), and so on — and on and on. Charles Darwin was happiest when he was studying his earthworms, but that has not been his legacy.

    On the essay: The ‘global village’ proposition is also not new, nor is it a straightforward resolution for all human folly that we become some kind of worldwide ‘tribe’. How is the superorganism going to benefit the exploited and disenfranchised, when the theory demands that the rights, labor, and well-being of all its members become secondary to the health and functionality of an abstract, super-social ‘being’? This is a law of mass conformity, not self-determination. This history of such thinking and policy-making is heavy with bloodshed, famine, servitude, terror, and misery.

  • Marcel Harmon says:

    Relative to Gerstle’s first paragraph, I would disagree that the articles on this site promote a specific set of ideological positions, if one is referring to ideologies as a set of normative beliefs or pattern of ideas that govern dominant forms of thought in politics, economics, etc. I see them as interpreting original or secondary research within an evolutionary theoretical framework (particularly a mult-level selection (MLS) framework) to suggest actions or policies that may or may not align with specific political or economic ideologies. The driving interpretive framework is a scientific theoretical perspective, not an ideological framework.

    IMO Gerstle’s second paragraph oversimplifies the “global village proposition” as he terms it. While I would agree that implementing a governing framework and international agreements within a system of nested hierarchies that transcends the local to global level is fraught with potential pitfalls relative to disenfranchising those with the least power, the ideas proposed by many authors on this site, including applications of Ostrom’s eight design features to deal with the tragedy of the commons phenomena, are precisely attempts to examine how it can affectively be done. It is not about generating mass conformity, but looking for ways to maximize the quality of life and long-term benefits at ever increasing scales. See Wilson et al. 2013 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268112002697) for more details on how this can be upscaled.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.