The domestication theory of political psychology

Why the left and right are different

Written by Ichimoku Sanjin.

The problem of making peace with our anarchic impulses is one which has been too little studied, but one which becomes more and more imperative as scientific technique advances.
—Bertrand Russell

In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx famously proclaimed, “Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains.” Yet in escaping the bondage of industrial capitalism, have we welcomed the fetters of domestication?

This article presents a theory of political psychology that argues the left–right divide can be captured along a single axis: more versus less domestication. The left is more domesticated and the right is less. First, let’s clarify our terms:

Domestication encompasses a whole suite of genetic changes that arise as a species is bred to be friendlier and less aggressive. In dogs and domesticated foxes, for example, many changes are physical: smaller teeth and skulls, floppy ears, and shorter, curlier tails.

When it comes to behaviour, domestication is associated with reduced stress/fear responses and decreased aggression. This manifests in a longer socialization window, during which young animals become familiar with humans without developing a fearful response.

How does domestication happen? Humans may well be the only species that domesticated itself (though some contend that dogs, cats, bonobos and marmoset monkeys have all self-domesticated). Many theories exist for how it do so, though it’s generally agreed that selective pressures on tameness and docility were prerequisites. In other words, highly aggressive males became significantly less favored for mating.

Of course, the extent of domestication may vary among individuals, social classes and races. It is possible that living in better conditions triggers epigenetic switches. This was demonstrated by the famous study of fox domestication conducted by the Novosibirsk group (although the study has been critiqued).

Could it be that developed societies — which are well-protected from disease, violence, famine and social unrest — triggered epigenetic changes resulting in a dramatic increase in domestication over a few generations? After all, the decrease in most types of violence over the last century happened too quickly to be attributable to DNA changes. The same is true of the various left-leaning cultural movements such as feminism, gay rights, racial equality, animal rights and veganism.

If the increase in domestication was initially caused by epigenetic switches, it later took on a life of its own, creating a runaway process of cultural evolution that cannot be explained in terms of genetics or epigenetics alone.

Additionally, technological development fostered living conditions where social tolerance is more adaptive: overcrowding; increased contact with other ethnic groups; faster communication and transportation. Values of social tolerance, in turn, favored technological progress through the promotion of formal education. Technological and social evolution thus mutually reinforced each other and have been increasing at roughly the same pace in a positive feedback loop.

The situation was significantly different prior to the Neolithic Revolution or even the Industrial Revolution — when technological and social evolution were both slow enough for genetic evolution to keep up.

Furthermore, natural selection has weakened. Today, there is little correlation between socioeconomic and reproductive success (indeed, the correlation is often negative). As a result, there is a gap between the optimal domestication level and the actual domestication level of modern humans. This gap produces various social and psychological problems, such as depression and social exclusion.

Let’s test the theory that left–right ideology is a manifestation of different degrees of domestication. It should be noted that what follows are merely generalisations and there are probably many exceptions.

System thinking versus empathy. The left puts more emphasis on empathy as a social value. And indeed, self-domesticated primates such as bonobos are known to be more skilled at solving theory of mind tasks and those involving an understanding of social causality, whereas chimpanzees are more skilled at tasks requiring the use of tools and an understanding of physical causality.

Individualism versus collectivism. The left is associated with collectivism, which involves working together to achieve common goals, while the right is associated with individualism, which prioritises freedom and independence. Once again, bonobos are known for their ability to cooperate to solve new problems, whereas chimpanzees are more individualistic in their behavior.

Redistribution. The left believes that the government should redistribute income from rich to poor in order to create a more equal society. This is reminiscent of the relationship between humans and dogs, where the human master provides for his pet regardless of the latter’s work output. In modern human society, the role of the master is played by the government, which is responsible for providing resources for its citizens.

Intergroup tolerance. The left is strongly opposed to racism and advocates higher levels of immigration. This is in contrast to the behaviour of wild primates such as chimpanzees, who are xenophobic and territorial, engaging in aggression to protect their territory from outsiders. On the other hand, self-domesticated primates like bonobos are more tolerant and cooperative, even engaging in voluntary sharing of resources with unfamiliar individuals.

Feminism. The left supports equal rights for women and, increasingly, special privileges. This resembles the behaviour of self-domesticated primates like bonobos, where male–female aggression is much lower and females are often the highest-ranking members of the group.

LGBT. The left supports equal rights for gays, lesbians and transgender people, and indeed such people are more likely to be leftists themselves. This resembles the pattern in domesticated primates, where sexual dimorphism is greatly reduced. Bonobos even display “a substantial emancipation of sexual behaviour into nonconceptive functions” and higher rates of homosexuality. (Chimpanzees only tend to masturbate in captivity.)

Declining testosterone levels in men. Over the last fifty years, average testosterone levels in men have declined considerably. There is no scientific consensus as to why, but a reduction in testosterone is the chief biological mechanism underlying domestication. Something similar occurred during human evolution with the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic and was associated with morphological and behavioural changes.

Lockdowns and masking. During the pandemic, the left was generally more supportive of lockdowns and masking than the right — even when the scientific evidence was highly questionable. This behaviour could be explained by the tameness of domesticated individuals, which leads to following orders without questioning.

Censorship. The left generally supports the idea of censorship, as free speech enables individuals to display verbal aggression or at least to be offensive toward others. This verbal aggression is then redefined as actual violence, a definition expansion process known as concept creep.

Gun Control. The Second Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to bear arms, allowing them to protect themselves and their property. The right strongly supports the Second Amendment. The left’s opposition may stem from low levels of reactive aggression and tameness that are associated with domestication.

Urban-rural divide. Left-wing voters are concentrated in metropolitan areas, whereas right-wing voters are more likely to live in rural areas. People who are more domesticated seem to prefer living in environments that are very different from our ancestral living conditions, such as the centres of large cities. Indeed, dense populations are evolutionarily quite recent, and may have given rise to the morphological and behavioral changes associated with domestication.

The domestication theory does a good job of predicting beliefs and behaviours associated with left–right ideology. It is arguably more successful in this regard than competing theories, such as the empathic versus systemic thinking paradigm espoused by Jonatan Pallesen. For brevity, I have left many questions unanswered. But I have sketched the broad outlines.

A different version of this article was previously published on Aporia.

Ichimoku Sanjin is an evolutionary anthropologist who works on intelligence, creativity and behavioural genetics. He once published poetry but now prefers the language of R.

---

Become a free or paid subscriber:

Like and comment below.