Indeed, entirely divergent life strategies can be caused by differences in a single gene, as we see in fire ants, where ants with one version of a pheromone receptor live in independent colonies, each having a single queen, while those with the other version live in a sprawling metacolony with many queens.
–”The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution”
Human biological diversity (HBD) is a field of genetic science that argues, as the book quoted above does, that evolution didn’t stop in humans 40-50,000 years ago, and has been an ongoing, and probably quite an accelerated process, since about 10,000 years ago. The implications of this are that, in essence, the various kinds of people we see today in the world are essentially *different* kinds of people.
And for anyone acculturated in our modern society, this assertion is essentially one of the highest forms of heresy, because, well, it means we aren’t equal. Unfortunately, those who realize this tend to take the information and present it in a certain way, which leads to cries of “RACISM” instantaneously. Which is unfortunate, because as the quote above shows us, in Nature we already know that a *single* gene can determine the social structure for an entire species of creatures.
So what are the implications of HBD on social structures? Well, there are quite a few. Perhaps one of the most interesting ideas is one formulated by Steve Sailer and worked upon by HBD Chick and Jayman and others, hypothesizes that a change regarding social mores with inbreeding/outbreeding quite awhile back has drastic implications for today. In short, the idea is that quite some time ago, humans in western and northern Europe, following the impositions of the Catholic church against inbreeding, began outbreeding, which began a selective evolutionary process. This process made those peoples who followed the Catholic doctrine different. Instead of a clannish, kin-first attitude (what HBD chick calls “familial altruism”) the evolutionary process began selecting for people who would look beyond the family/tribe/clan and more often help/cooperate with “outgroups”. The advent of modern agriculture accelerated this selection process, and, according to Sailer et al, is probably why the ideas of liberal democracy and other related social structures arose from those parts of Europe where this process was taking place.
Conversely, in groups where the interdiction against close familial inbreeding wasn’t in place, the selection process began selecting for HBD Chick’s “familial altruism” gene. These groups had, and continue to have, social structures that align heavily along family/tribe/clan. Think of places like the United Arab Emirates and Dubai, where two families have been in charge for quite some time now. (Which is interesting to think, given their explosive growth in the last decade. Maybe there’s something about monarchy that allows for something different. Perhaps a discussion for another post some other time.)
Anyways, how this all works out with the lead-in quote is this: HBD tells us we’re different and different in some pretty drastic ways. Scientific studies of other species show us that a difference in a single gene can determine the social structure for an entire population. So, if Sailer et al are even somewhat correct about the inbreeding/outbreeding hypothesis, much of our problems in this world come down to the fact that trying to impose Western liberal democracy on groups where that outbreeding dynamic didn’t take place essentially amounts to trying to put a round peg in a square hole.
Does this mean that those groups where the outbreeding process took place are superior? It’s difficult to say. Rather, it’s more having to accept that different groups existing in the world today are essentially on different evolutionary tracks. As the authors of “10,000 Years” pointed out, Tibetans and Amerindians in the Andes developed two different adaptations to their high altitude environments. Does it make one better than the other? Probably not.
It just makes them different.