If Your Aren’t With Me/Us, You’re Against Me/Us

Chimpanzee males defend a joint territory against other groups--and along with the territory they defend the females who have chosen to live there. Chimp males go "on patrol" together to their borders.
- Alison Jolly (64)

It isn’t difficult to imagine that once a species is capable of forming alliances for the greater good of two, greater benefit might be found for even larger alliences. Call them coalitions. From the procurement and protection of personal resources to that of sub-group interests and finally to that of group interests, smart primates find ways to get the job done. Thanks to strength in numbers, "me" becomes "we" becomes "us." Furthermore, the circle of “us,” and what defines it, can be expended when advantageous to the individual as a group member.

I believe that an increased understanding of our primate nature can help us understand a whole host of classes of phenomena, including that of religion. Consider the following quotations:

“The Gombe chimpanzee 'war,' during which the main community exterminated the males of the southern group, was the most thoroughly observed, thanks to a corps of Tanzanian watchers, but it is clear that similar group annihilation has happened in the Mahale Mountain Reserve and probably in the Tai Forest of the Ivory Coast.” (65)

“Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you.” (Deuteronomy 20:17, New International Version)

“And he sent you on a mission, saying, 'Go and completely destroy those wicked people, the Amalekites; make war on them until you have wiped them out.'” (1 Samuel 15:18)

“’Attack the land of Merathaim and those who live in Pekod. Pursue, kill and completely destroy them,’ declares the LORD. ‘Do everything I have commanded you.’” (Jeremiah 50:21)

Is the LORD, at least the more original version of him, an invisible alpha? Should humans who attack foreigners (strangers) -- people who bow down differently or to a different alpha -- be viewed has having hair raised and teeth bared?

Sure, much of religion-speak today has been refined to reflect the present state of secure borders and an abundance of valued resources. But change the social conditions and that old-time religion with its war-like, wrathful god becomes much more attractive. Or fitting, one might say.

How advanced/refined are human beings today? Consider this: we are now capable of feeling threatened-by and hating individuals not for their alien looks or alien behavior, but for their alien ideas. It may be a natural progression, but if we truly want to understand, we shouldn’t neglect the origins of what we do.

---

(64) Jolly, A. Lucy’s Legacy, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999, p. 173
(65) Jolly, A., 1999, p.173

God’s Violent Children

Does warfare come naturally to human beings? In the least, one would be justified in concluding that group violence is an option “encoded” in our DNA. I put encoded in quotes because the word too often carries the connotation of inevitability. And that is far from the truth. The human animal embodies an entire Swiss-Army knife of potentialities. Would you and I ever engage in group violence? I suspect the answer is “it depends.” In our nation (the U.S.), thanks to the current condition of internal peace and prosperity, it is much less likely. Drastically change those conditions and the probability changes. Human nature hasn’t so much evolved as has human society. But again, the potentiality is undeniably there.

Sure, sometimes it can be difficult to perceive our own animal nature. Unless you visit a trailer park. Although that was an attempt at a joke, there may be a tidbit of truth to it. No, the men from Highland Estates rarely band together to battle those trouble-makers down the road at Oak Hill Mobile Park. However, even among other primates, orchestrated group violence is a rare event. Most loud skirmishes involve battles over “food and mates within groups.”(61) In our land of plentiful food and food-stamps and soup kitchens, who fights over food? Have humans evolved beyond such a base level of concern? No. Again, drastically change the conditions and you will see a drastic change in “the” nature of our kind.(62)

So the propensity for violence is there, especially if conditions are favorable for its expression (such as a World Cup soccer game and the clash of inebriated fans: groups of males bonded by little more than loyalty to a logo and perceived, impersonal relationships with high-er ranking males.) But what about the propensity to seek allies?

As Frans de Waal has chronicled, male alphas will partnership with others to protect their status, as will males lower on the hierarchy form strategic alliances (sometimes lasting, frequently not) in order to challenge the status quo. (63)

Is this also “encoded" in our nature? I suspect it is. Unfortunately unless you read history, or perhaps some of the tragic plays of Shakespeare, you may not readily see evidence of males forming temporary or long-term alliances to further their causes. At least not in the more blatant versions we read about where brother bands with brother to defeat father and/or another brother. What we lack is an objective distance from our own customs and habits. With suitable perspective I believe we could see just how naturally forming alliances comes to human beings, and not just those living in Washington, D.C.


Next up: Civil Unrest, Xenophobia and Primate Warfare

---

(61) Ehrlich, P. R., Human Natures: Genes, Cultures, and the Human Prospect, Island Press, Washington, D.C., 2000, p. 210
(62) The famous Stanley Milgram experiment, and many others like it, have highlighted that individuals are far from immune to social/environmental influences.
(63) de Waal, F. B. M., (ed.), Tree of Origin: What Primate Behavior Can Tell Us About Human Social Evolution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 2001, p.23

Throwing Stones at What Threatens Us

That chimpanzees and humans kill members of neighboring groups of their own species is, we have seen, a startling exception to the normal rule for animals.
- Wrangham & Peterson (56)

Nevertheless, it cannot be coincidental that the only animals in which gangs of males expand their territory by deliberately exterminating neighboring males happen to be humans and chimpanzees.
- de Waal (57)

What do you call a two group of individuals fighting violently over a resource? One of the first times the word “warfare” was used to describe non-human behavior was in Africa at a chimpanzee observation station. To lure the chimps to the station for observation a bonanza of bananas was provided. To the primatologists’ surprise, an organized fight over rights to this magic “fruit tree” erupted (the primates likely had never encountered a 4-season source of bountiful fruit before). In the end, one troop of chimpanzees completely destroyed the other. Such a thing had never been observed before. Some speculated that the unnatural introduction of bananas was the cause.(58) In subsequent years came the observation of organized chimpanzee violence in the wild. Chimpanzees, like human beings, will band together to procure and defend resources.

And why wouldn’t an intelligent, hyper-social species do that? In personal skirmishes one individual can gain a great advantage over another by finding an ally to stand beside him/her. With an alliance, the numbers and hence balance of power shifts. This strength-in-numbers mathematical verity has undoubtedly played a role in evolutionary development countless times. Human beings, as a hyper-social, intelligent primate, are aware of the value of alliances, even if benignly labeled as “friendship.”

Conflict can lead to violence which can lead to physical injury and even death. If an individual could decrease its risk of harm by drawing a friendly other onto its side and into its business, but didn’t—the genes of that individual would be much more likely to become a footnote in history. Of course, the most violent primate fights are inter-group versus intra-group; they involve encounters with neighboring individuals and groups—with foreigners.(59) This, too, makes evolutionary sense, for foreigners are less likely to share your genes.

Most of the conflicts that primates experience are intra-group: fights over food and mates, etc.(60) The same is likely true for humans, with this crucial difference: access to tangible resources has likely been replaced by abstract motivations such as “status.” Watch daytime television soap operas (which many chimps also find intriguing) with the eye of a primatologist and you will observe many instances of conflict over—surprise!—mates and status. In the human world, because food is so plentiful and readily obtained we overlook its importance and focus on other things. Same goes for housing and protection from invading foreigners . . . usually (and what a luxury!). Instead we focus on abstract/all-purpose values such as status and alliances.

How could Brad have double-crossed Felix?!! That evil man!

Human beings and chimps share these common values: dependable alliances, intra-group harmony, and protection from aliens. Not aliens of the extra-terrestrial sort, but of the beyond-the-river sort. Consider the following two quotes. Do you sense the echo of one in the other?

“Throughout the continent, wild chimpanzees will tear off and throw great branches when they are angry or threatened, or they will pick up and throw rocks.”(61)

Then Moses spoke to the Israelites, and they took the blasphemer outside the camp and stoned him. (Leviticus 24:23, New International Version)

What was the blasphemer guilty of? Questioning the authority of the group’s invisible alpha. Which is certainly a threat to intra-group harmony.


---

(56) Wrangham, R. & Peterson, D., Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence, Houghton Mifflin, NY, 1996, p. 62
(57) de Waal, F., Our Inner Ape: A Leading Primatologist Explains Why We Are Who We Are, New York, Riverhead Books, 2005, p. 137
(58) de Waal, F., 2005, p. 24
(59) Goodall, J. The Chimpanzees of the Gombe: Patterns of Behavior, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1986, p. 313
(60) Ehrlich, P. R., Human Natures: Genes, Cultures, and the Human Prospect, Island Press, Washington, D.C., 2000, p.210
(61) Wrangham, R. & Peterson, D., 1996, p. 180