From at least our school age, we learn who the enemies of our countries are, or which ethnic or racial groups threaten our own identity, or which other religions challenge our faith. The history lessons we are taught are usually a series of dates that mark battles, wars, massacres. We become so steeped in these large-scale types of violence to the point we become inured to their appalling nature and accept them as facts of life.
But if we sit back and think about this intra-species violence, we can ask questions, like “Is it natural? Have we always been that violent? Are we getting any better?
First, the role of nature. The paradox we humans face is that we are the most cooperative and prosocial species when it comes to day-to-day interactions with others in our communities. At the same time, we can be extremely violent to perceived enemy groups. Not that our in-group cooperation has been free of violence against our own. In that we share the violence of other primates, like chimpanzees and gorillas who are known to engage in infanticide in order to favor the survival of their offspring and thus the propagation of their genes.
But another primate species very close to us, the bonobos, are a lot more peaceful and masters of reconciliation. How have they reached this evolutionary happy stage? In bonobo troops the female members have the upper hand. By settling conflicts and favoring less aggressive males, they have steered their species to a more peaceful coexistence. In other words, bonobos have undergone a sort of domestication that has rooted out unusual violence.
Richard Wrangham, an evolutionary anthropologist, has come up with a similar human domestication theory to explain how humans developed less violent nature than chimps and gorillas. According to Wrangham, the predecessors of homo sapiens engaged in deliberate extermination of the very violent members of their tribes and by doing so they reduced the genetic material that could propagate violence in future generations. An alternative theory supports the idea that females avoided violent males and thus they achieved domestication through selective mating.
What about violence against out-group individuals? Here the culprit seems to be an evolutionary trait that intended to favor our survival. That is, to protect us against dangerous encounters, our brain (as well as that of other species) was wired to quickly recognize familiar faces and raise alarm against unfamiliar ones. Over time, the Us vs Them dichotomy expanded to include race, ethnicity, religion, political ideas and ways of life. While we are inclined to trust and excuse members of our group, we are less inclined to excuse or rationalize the transgressions of out-group members. Take for example religious symbols. A joke made in good-nature by a co-religionist may draw only a mild rebuke but a violent reaction if committed by someone of a different religion. The Charlie Hebdo terrorist act in 2015 is a case in point.
Have we always been violent, especially to other groups? There is considerable controversy whether our Hunter/Gatherer ancestors were as violent as we modern humans are. Some researchers claim that adjusting for population size, H/Gs were more violent. Archeologists beg to differ. H/G and nomadic tribes had the advantage they were not tied to any specific location. If challenged or attacked by another tribe they could always move to another place. All that changed with the emergence of agriculture. Real estate became important. Tribes had to compete for the most fertile land. City-states also prized defensible terrain. Thus, the causes of friction and war multiplied.
Another important institution that emerged with agriculture and larger communities of people was the creation of powerful, moralizing Gods. In more populous communities comprised of different clans, person-to person contacts and ties started to become looser and informal. The usual disciplinary tools of shaming, shunning and ostracizing that worked in the small bands of H/Gs were now less effective. The ruling class had to enlist powerful deities with moral commands to provide social cohesion and moral discipline. These Gods also became sources of inspiration and courage in wars against other ethnic groups. The result was another wedge between Us and Them. The Crusades, the persecution of Jews, the wars of Catholics and Protestants, and Sunnis and Shiites, the modern tragedies of the Rohingya and Uighurs bear witness to the religious divide of Us vs Them. That’s why religious leaders bear a heavy responsibility in building a more peaceful world.
And yet, despite the cruelty we witness in wars, we have evidence suggesting that humans are not blood-thirsty killers even when they are engaged in mortal combat. We know, for example, that only a minority of soldiers shot their rifles in battles of the American Civil War and the WW II. Facing the enemy, killing another human being is not an automatic response.
The military conflicts and aggression, the oppression of ethnic and religious groups, the brutality against women still going on should make us sick and doubtful of how civilized contemporary humans are. Nonetheless, and without turning a blind eye to all that, we have signs that we are getting better. In the 1500’s there were 41 homicides per 100,000 in Europe. Now they are down to 1.4. They are 6.9 across the globe.
Unlike other species, we have the capacity to institutionalize reconciliation and we have the moral courage to extend apology, forgiveness and amnesty. Sometimes it takes one individual to bridge the gap between Us and Them. Nelson Mandela was such a person. We also have established multilateral institutions to arbitrate differences and resolve national conflicts. And despite a backwardation here and there, basic human rights are universally accepted and are being defended. Despite its discontents, globalization through trade, the internet, and scientific collaboration has increased contacts across different people. The more we understand each other the more difficult it gets to fight each other.
Finally, there is one thing that works the best in erasing the lines between Us and Them. That is an overarching common goal. It works in bringing factions together within nations. It can work in bringing the world together. We have one such goal right now. To save the planet and along with it the human race.
Let's Reason 