The Evolutionary
Psychology Behind Politics:
How Conservatism
and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans (Third Edition)
Anonymous
Conservative,
Federalist
Publications, Macclenny, Florida, 246 pages, May 2017
Introduction
Anonymous Conservative takes the two wings
of American politics on a soaring flight of fancy. By taking off from a (what I
believe is a very wobbly presuppositional) platform (derived from something he
names as “r/K Selection Theory”), Anonymous Conservative supplies and applies a
bird’s eye “goo to you” view of Natural Selection to the landscape of current American
politics. Republicans are wolves, i.e., “K Selection” and the “r Selection” are
akin to rabbits a.k.a. as the Democrats. Apparently the psychology of these two
named animals manifests itself in the predictable behaviour of the Conservative
GOP and the Liberal Dems.
Thesis
The thesis of the book is: “No individual
can truly understand the intellectual battles that occur between ideologies
without understanding the study of r/K Selection Theory within Evolutionary
Biology.” (p. 19). Therefore, according to Anonymous Conservative one must
presuppose Evolutionary Biology. However, the trouble with “goo to you”[1] or “molecules to man”
Darwinianism is that it is so hard to prove and must therefore be accepted by faith.
Thus Anonymous Conservative presupposes that the book’s audience will share
with him the same set of Evolutionary presuppositions. Otherwise they will not
“truly understand the intellectual battles” between the Left and the Right.
“Put most simply, our two main political ideologies are merely intellectual outgrowths
of the two main reproductive strategies that have been described in the field
of Evolutionary Biology for decades.” (p.2)
So there you have it, all the bickering
between the Blues and the Reds is over reproduction. Understand the “birds and
the bees” or in this case the “wolves and rabbits” and you will have figured
out how an individual can vote Republican or Democrat!
As a stopped clock tells the correct time
twice a day there is no doubt that certain human traits may be analogous to
those observed in the animal kingdom. However, we can thank God that the
American Founders were not Evolutionists, but were for the most part
Trinitarian. Otherwise we would have had a completely differently worded
Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. Indeed, there
probably would have been no American Revolution!
Being Trinitarian the Founders therefore
believed that humanity was created by and in the image of the Triune God on the
sixth day of Creation when He formed Adam from the dust of the earth and then his
wife, Eve, from one of his ribs. Therefore, though now fallen, each individual
human being is the image and likeness of the God who made us. We are not
animals. The Founders believed that we, though fallen, still are the image of
God and therefore are morally responsible human beings (free moral agents)
which, unlike animals, will be judged as individuals by God on Judgment Day.
Any likeness we share with any animals is due to the fact that the Lord God
made us all.
It may appeal to Evolutionists, but this (ex-Marxist[2] but now) Conservative
reviewer doesn’t recommend this book. It’s too much like Jonah swallowing a
whale! However, having said that, I did find some of the material contained
therein fascinating. Who knew there was such a thing as a cross-dressing
cuttlefish!
A Better Way
Anyway, for the record I believe that
Anonymous Conservative is simply dealing with the reflection of the Trinity as
it applies to American Politics. Here’s a very brief take on the Christian
position:
God is Three in One. He is the original
One and Many, Unity in Diversity. Whereas the Republican focusses on the one,
i.e., the rights of the individual, the Democrat seeks the wellbeing of the
many, the collective. (The secret is to hold both in balanced tension.)
The Founders, influenced by the teachings
of the Bible in general, but in particular by Israel as a republic (whose Ruler
was God, i.e., before Israel rebelled and wanted a king to rule over them),
sought to keep the one and the many aspect of America in equal tension by
viewing the one and the many “problem” as that of the somewhat paradoxical idea
of equal ultimacy, wherein the one does not lord it over the many or the many
over the one.
The E
Pluribus Unum (out of many, one) and the “One nation under God” motifs summarize the Founders’ intent. The rights of the individual are always viewed
in the context of the rights of the many and vice versa. Whenever this balance
is lost political polarization will occur.
John Adams, the second President of the
United States, wanted to maintain political balance. Referring to that which constitutes the United
States as a nation (and not the 1787 Constitution itself), says Adams, “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division
of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and
concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble
apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our
Constitution.” – John Adams, Letter to Jonathan Jackson (2
October 1780), "The Works of John Adams", vol 9, p.511.
Thomas Jefferson, however, believed that a
two-party system would be healthy. Jefferson wrote, “In every free and
deliberating society, there must, from the nature of man, be opposite parties,
and violent dissensions and discords; and one of these, for the most part, must
prevail over the other for a longer or shorter time.” – Thomas Jefferson to
John Taylor, 1798. ME 10:45.
Jefferson, at a later time, did go on to
say, “Both of our political parties, at least the honest portion of them,
agree conscientiously in the same object: the public good; but they differ
essentially in what they deem the means of promoting that good. One side
believes it best done by one composition of the governing powers, the other by
a different one. One fears most the ignorance of the people; the other the
selfishness of rulers independent of them. Which is right, time and experience
will prove. We think that one side of this experiment has been long enough
tried and proved not to promote the good of the many, and that the other has
not been fairly and sufficiently tried. Our opponents think the reverse. With
whichever opinion the body of the nation concurs, that must prevail.” – Thomas
Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804. ME 11:52.
Conclusion
We must deal with what we have today –
political polarization. The solution is not in understanding Darwin’s Theory of
Evolution or Neo-Darwinianism. The answer is in getting back to the original
intent of America’s Founders, which is a Democratic Republic based on the clear
teachings of the Bible. This would be to honour God and His Gospel.
Let’s allow Anonymous Conservative the
final word to illustrate political tension: “Up until now, it has been assumed
that most humans are exactly the same. As a result, the political argument was
based on logic and reason. Conservatives believed that all men wished to be
free to plot their own destiny, while liberals believed that all men wished to
be protected from the dangers of other free men. One believed everyone wanted to
be protected from government, the other that all people sought to be protected
by government. If this theory is correct (and it almost certainly is, given the
scale of the evidence), then some element of our society is always going to be
unhappy with how their government is structured. Bipartisanship is a myth.” (p.
242)
The equal ultimacy of the Trinity, i.e.,
the God of the Bible, revealed as the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
one God but three Persons, needs to be deeply studied. For therein lies the
answer to politics. Find rest, peace in Him.
[1] See eg, p. 195, “All God would see … would be more
rapidly expanding blobs of goo, each unit of goo competing fiercely with
others, to see which can spend less energy on greatness and complexity, to
focus on reproducing more of an ever less-evolved goo.”
[2] “Karl Marx was obsessed with
Darwin’s study of natural selection.” P. 226.
No comments:
Post a Comment