The Alpha Male: just an idiot?

You know I fancy myself a philos'pher. I think about things.

So, I've been thinking about how monkeys have a lot of sex.

Now, stick with me, because this is something I spend A LOT of time thinking about, and let me tell you it's amazing how much sex monkeys have. Amazing.

So maybe you don't know this, or maybe you just spend less time thinking about monkey sex than I do, but Bonobos, the type of apes most closely related to us humans, are dirty, dirty funky-love-rocket rollickin' primates. In fact, it seems they are "obsessed with fornication!" as the likes of Pat Robertson might put it.

And we're not just talking your manual-approved "'peg A' in 'slot B'" stuff, we're talkin' all types of sex--no lists here folks, because you people have imaginations, but bonobos seem fond of just about every kind of "jungle boogie" that the most imaginative and unrestrained of us humans can think of and then some.

Got it? Monkey sex. lots of it. I think I got that point across pretty well, so I'm going to leave it for a little bit, but don't go anywhere, we'll soon get back around to Bonobo-bangin' and that's a promise.

So something that really annoys me is when I meet some earnestly cool, smart, philosophical dude, and, because it's clear that I spend some time thinking about things too (mostly monkey sex) they decide to inform me about their own great "philosophy of strength." This is usually a mesh of Nietzsche and Darwin... some Herman Hesse novel from college and whatever they read last all thrown together. The history of western thought, they inform me, is all a grand tribute to the Ubermensch that the dude obviously represents. Through my college days, I often heard this type declaring himself an "Alpha Male," for his "ability and willingness to conquer and dominate, while others will only follow."

To me, this Alpha Male philosophy is a just a complex justification for a selfish, nationalistic, ethnocentric world view. Historically, this "philosophy" of "social Darwinism" was based on an illiterate misreading of the writings of Herbert Spencer popularized by a Calvinist preacher with a political axe to grind. If you want to get into the history of it check out the wiki page on Social Darwinism. However, it's unnecessary for further exploration of our topic at hand:

Monkey Sex.

A misreading or no, the basic expression of this "philosophy" is Darwin's "survival of the fittest" applied to humans and human systems--both as a governing philosophy and as a personal philosophy. On the social end this "philosophy" was and is a justification for the violent European expansionism and world domination: "by wiping out the weak, we were doing nature's work and making the human race stronger!" I've heard plenty of Alphas say. Of course, many Social Darwinists have believed (and many still do) that this European conquest was proof of the superiority of the "white race."

Today, this "philosophy" has had a tremendous rebirth with the "conservative movement," a movement far from being conservative. Strangely, it's newfound popularity is due to its necessity as a binding agent between the two waring factions of the modern American "Republican Party:" the pro-corporate mercantilists and the religious fundamentalists. Though Wacko Religious leaders refuse to admit evolution in the biology classroom, they see Darwin as some extension of "Gawds Own Justice" on the street:

"Nature's remedies against vice are terrible. She removes the victims without pity. A drunkard in the gutter is just where he ought to be, according to the fitness and tendency of things. Nature has set upon him the process of decline and dissolution by which she removes things which have survived their usefulness."

-- William Graham Sumner, propenent of Social Darwinism, Arian superiority, "free trade" and overall idiot.

Newt Gingrich: Monkey or just monkey-brained?

More recently, Newt Gingrich used to regularly invoke this idea in his "contract with America" stump speech, saying that in the old days there used "hammer and anvil which would fall on the unwed mothers (and apparently other vagrants of society, though Newt really seemed to have a thing for unwed mothers...)" the goal of the republican revolution in his view was to destroy the social safety net and "bring back the hammer and anvil."

As a personal philosophy, it works the same way: by "kicking ass and taking names" and being the Uberdude, you fulfill your natural destiny and make the race stronger or some such nonsense. And since it is "human nature" to try to dominate, it's better to be the wolf than the sheep....

Now, I don't know anything about any of that, but I DO know about monkeys. And sex. And let me tell ya, ya just can't keep the lil' buggers out of the nookie jar!

That is, at least when you're talking about the smartest and most human-like of the super-monkeys called Apes, the Bonobos. The Common Chimpanzee on the other hand, would rather spend their time in the sort of aggressive behavior engaged in by the likes of English Soccer fans, but the Bonobo follows the dictum of the 60 hipster: "make love, not war, man."

And that's what's so interesting about monkey sex, or at least bonobo Sex: they make love not war. Researchers say it's now clear that they actually use 'doin' it' as a way of building community and resolving conflict! And from what modern mathematics and evolution theory tell us, it was jism that acted as their social cohesion and supplied their darwinian "fitness." And it was likely the same behavior that paved the way for modern man: the intellectual marvel of an animal that created the pet rock and "Goonies."

Truly remarkable.

For more about that you can start here: http://williamcalvin.com/teaching/bonobo.htm.

See, here's the truth about humans; dude, we're like really, really wimpy animals. Tony Soprano, naked in the woods V a Grizzly Bear: ain't even going to be close. But, put the Grizzly against Tony and a bunch of his burley mob buddies and you got a hit "reality" series.

Anyway, it clearly isn't aggressive dominance that led us to the top of the food chain.

Modern "game theory" has explained that the "fittest" often refers to the party "fittest for cooperation." Models repeatedly show that the old axiom "the nice guy finishes last" just ain't so! In fact, it seems that aggressors usually end up losing first! For a primer on modern game theory, check out the great book: The Universe and the Tea Cup. Or just go play a multiplayer online strategy game like "Wesnoth:" as a mater of basic survival, everyone teams up on the most aggressive players first.

So here's the problem, its not that there isn't social evolution, the problem is in thinking that the World Wrestling Federation represents the apex of human achievement: it's conflating "fitness" with aggression. Evolution is simply nature's problem solving method--it certainly effects humans and human societies and even human ideas. And there are certainly lessons we can take from evolution and apply its problem solving method to our own lives and to our societies.

Darwin's lesson for our lives is not to look out for #1, it's to look out for everyone, and even the whole planet. Evolution's mission for the individual is not to step on others in our scramble to the top, it's to become your own fullest most unique solution to the problem of living-- to fully take advantage of your unique perspective and place in the world. The pragmatic individual will make sure their lifestyle is consistent with an informed view of natural selection, and will be true to their own diversity and kind and compassionate to their fellow beings. The pragmatic individual will understand that nature will prune the aggressors and be kind to those leading a sustainable equitable lifestyle, and they will use that math to their advantage. They will make a little more like the bonobo and a little less like the common chimpanzee.

The Alpha Male mentality and the corresponding modern "conservative" movement is historically, mathematically and scientifically uninformed to start with. But more importantly, it's bad as a pragmatic matter.

It's no way to build a society, and an even worse way to build a life.