Greater policing required to enforce cooperation in "diverse" societies

A Test of Evolutionary Policing Theory with Data from Human Societies (PLoS ONE):
In social groups where relatedness among interacting individuals is low, cooperation can often only be maintained through mechanisms that repress competition among group members. Repression-of-competition mechanisms, such as policing and punishment, seem to be of particular importance in human societies, where cooperative interactions often occur among unrelated individuals. In line with this view, economic games have shown that the ability to punish defectors enforces cooperation among humans. Here, I examine a real-world example of a repression-of-competition system, the police institutions common to modern human societies. Specifically, I test evolutionary policing theory by comparing data on policing effort, per capita crime rate, and similarity (used as a proxy for genetic relatedness) among citizens across the 26 cantons of Switzerland. This comparison revealed full support for all three predictions of evolutionary policing theory. First, when controlling for policing efforts, crime rate correlated negatively with the similarity among citizens. This is in line with the prediction that high similarity results in higher levels of cooperative self-restraint (i.e. lower crime rates) because it aligns the interests of individuals. Second, policing effort correlated negatively with the similarity among citizens, supporting the prediction that more policing is required to enforce cooperation in low-similarity societies, where individuals' interests diverge most. Third, increased policing efforts were associated with reductions in crime rates, indicating that policing indeed enforces cooperation. These analyses strongly indicate that humans respond to cues of their social environment and adjust cheating and policing behaviour as predicted by evolutionary policing theory.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Beautiful Dreamer- Stephen Foster

Even though this song is from the unfortunate era of the 'Brother war' of the American (un)Civil War - this is a song from the great Stephen Foster that captures the majestic essence of early America - a time when the Founding Stock Anglo-Europeans were confidant and secure in their nobility and greatness.

*Oh Anglo-Americans - 'our country turns it's lonely eyes to you...'

Anonymous said...

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/info-center/us-peace-index/

Anonymous said...

http://www.mapwatch.com/news-blog/2005/03/diversity-maps.html

Svigor said...

Another prime example of "white privilege"; while non-whites and Ashkenazis get to call defectors "Uncle Toms," "self-hating Jews," or what have you, whites are allowed no such terms, because the concept itself is denied them. Or perhaps more accurately, white identity currently does not allow for the acknowledgement of white identity, much less mechanisms to punish defectors.

Anonymous said...

Svigor said...
Another prime example of "white privilege"; while non-whites and Ashkenazis get to call defectors "Uncle Toms," "self-hating Jews," or what have you, whites are allowed no such terms, because the concept itself is denied them. Or perhaps more accurately, white identity currently does not allow for the acknowledgement of white identity, much less mechanisms to punish defectors.


As usual - spot-on Svig.

Our ancestors certainly knew what an absolutely rotten being a traitor was...

Tell the traitors all around you

That their cruel words we know,

In every battle kill our soldiers

By the help they give the foe.

Anonymous said...

^ ^ ^
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Before_the_Battle,_Mother

Anonymous said...

They've done such a psych job on Whites that you're actually expected to be a traitor to your race, to not be is the stigma - racist.

Anonymous said...

They've done such a psych job on Whites that you're actually expected to be a traitor to your race, to not be is the stigma - racist.

I know bro, I know...

This has to change though, if Our People are ever to survive.

Anonymous said...

They've done such a psych job on Whites that you're actually expected to be a traitor to your race, to not be is the stigma - racist.
___

I know some of the fellas here are not particularly fond of Steve Sailer - but he really nailed the true, base and ignoble motivations of this problem on the part of White "anti-racist" poseurs squarely on its head:

White anti-white racism is a broadly fashionable attitude that extends far beyond loonies like Ignatiev. I don't believe I've ever seen it formally explained, although Tom Wolfe's novels show it in action.

The usual explanations of what drives whites like Ignatiev are "white guilt" or "self-loathing." But does Ignatiev appear as if he personally feels guilt or self-loathing?

No—he sounds like he's having the time of his life arguing that you should feel guilt etc. He comes across as an arrogant, hostile jerk who thinks the world of himself.

He wants to feel that he's better than other whites and to rub their faces in it. The bad guys in his book are Irish Catholics and Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Ignatiev himself is neither.

And this is typical, in my experience: whites who proclaim their anti-white feelings don't really care much about blacks or other minorities, pro or con. What they care about is achieving ***social superiority over other whites*** by demonstrating their exquisite racial sensitivity and their aristocratic insouciance about any competitive threats posed by racial preferences.

To these whites, minorities are just useful pawns in the great game of clawing your way to the top of the white status heap. Which, when you come right down to it, is the only game in town.


http://www.vdare.com/sailer/whiteness.htm

Anonymous said...

Sailer is not an idiot, a degenerate maybe, so it must be a calculated move of his to completely avoid the Jewish aspect of Ignatiev and to claim he is just a "white" guy like the rest of us. Thus showing Sailer will leave out truths he doesn't like, and take you for a ride the other way. He can't be trusted.

Social climbing is definitely part of why Western Whites look down on racists but it's not the only reason. It certainly isn't the main motivating factor for Ignatiev and his ilk.

He comes across as an arrogant, hostile jerk who thinks the world of himself.

He's a narcissistic sociopath, you often find these in the both the extreme right and extreme left. The extreme left are more often Asiatics and hybrids so they're ugly as hell too.

Anonymous said...

Sailer is not an idiot, a degenerate maybe, so it must be a calculated move of his to completely avoid the Jewish aspect of Ignatiev and to claim he is just a "white" guy like the rest of us. ...

Actually, Sailer over the last couple of years at least has hardly been avoiding the 'Jewish Question' over at his blog - and on VDARE as well.

Even though he classifies Jews (Ashkenazis at least) as 'White', he certainly most often differentiates between them and European Americans - especially their hypocritical double-standards on racial identity - i.e. one for themselves, and one for 'other' Whites (so-called 'goyeeeem').

Social climbing is definitely part of why Western Whites look down on racists but it's not the only reason. It certainly isn't the main motivating factor for Ignatiev and his ilk.

Yes, and I think Sailer points out this all-too-typical schizoid dichotomy when he points out that Genocide-Advocate Noel "abolish the white race" Ignatiev is really not a true White person -

"He wants to feel that he's better than other whites and to rub their faces in it. The bad guys in his book are Irish Catholics and Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Ignatiev himself is neither."

Anonymous said...

You've established yourself as a fanboy of Sailer's, but not much else.

Yes, and I think Sailer points out this all-too-typical schizoid dichotomy

Wrong, they're not White Europeans, and it's not schizoid, that would be more of a dissociative identity disorder.

They know that they're not European, they're not us. Sailer and those that want to consider Jews white are the ones confused.

Why bother arguing in his defense, he's already stated he has Jewish ancestry so there's your answer.

Anonymous said...

You've established yourself as a fanboy of Sailer's, but not much else.

Wow, I didn't know you were such a pessimist.

Anonymous said...

Why bother arguing in his defense, he's already stated he has Jewish ancestry so there's your answer.

Heh. Sailer is quoted pointing out the hypocrisy of various Jews - even parroting Kevin MacDonald's rhetoric in the process - and that's still not good enough for you.

Thus showing Sailer will leave out truths he doesn't like, and take you for a ride the other way. He can't be trusted.

I don't think Sailer is in any sort of position where trust or faith is required. He is an HBD blogger, not your Fuhrer.

Anonymous said...

Heh. Sailer is quoted pointing out the hypocrisy of various Jews - even parroting Kevin MacDonald's rhetoric in the process - and that's still not good enough for you.

Yes.

Why bother arguing in his defense, he's already stated he has Jewish ancestry so there's your answer.

His "admission" of supposed "Jewish ancestry" was (since he was adopted by his parents) little more than assuming he had some Ashkenazi genes due to his very intellectual and inquisitive nature.

Anyway, this was more the pre-2005 Sailer - he radically changed his approach since then in truthfully delving into any topic that may or may not "offend" racist Jewish "sensibilities" (as the previous commentator rightfully pointed out).

Anonymous said...

You're either dense or mendacious, or both. Somewhere between a nigger and a Jew, like the typical nitwit on YouTube.

Anonymous said...

You're either dense or mendacious, or both. Somewhere between a nigger and a Jew, like the typical nitwit on YouTube.

Nah, it's actually you who cannot see the facts regarding Sailer, because, in your all-or-nothing worldview, if he or anyone else doesn't agree with your cherished positions *110%*, then he must be the "enemy" (which is the typical mindset of political fanatics and zealots the world over).

Lighten up a bit, and examine what the guy says issue by issue rather than painting him with a broad brush.

Anonymous said...

"You're either dense or mendacious, or both. Somewhere between a nigger and a Jew, like the typical nitwit on YouTube."

Marcus Cicero said...

Our ancestors certainly knew what an absolutely rotten being a traitor was...

Yes they did.

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague." -Marcus Cicero, 43 BC

Anonymous said...

Older, rather liberal but very interesting article from the Washington Post on the rhetoric vs. the *reality* of anti-White, anti-Northern European multi-kulti AmeriKwa -

Myth of the Melting Pot: America's Racial and Ethnic Divides

(Continued...)

[...]

The newly arrived today can be roughly divided into two camps: those with college degrees and highly specialized skills, and those with almost no education or job training. Some 12 percent of immigrants have graduate degrees, compared to 8 percent of native Americans. But more than one-third of the immigrants have no high school diploma, double the rate for those born in the United States.

Before 1970, immigrants were actually doing better than natives overall, as measured by education, rate of homeownership and average incomes. But those arriving after 1970, are younger, more likely to be underemployed and live below the poverty level. As a group, they are doing worse than natives.

About 6 percent of new arrivals receive some form of welfare, double the rate for U.S.-born citizens. Among some newcomers – Cambodians and Salvadorans, for example – the numbers are even higher.

...

But as the immigrants arrive, many American-born citizens pour out of these cities in search of new homes in more homogeneous locales. New York and Los Angeles each lost more than 1 million native-born residents between 1990 and 1995, even as their populations increased by roughly the same numbers with immigrants. To oversimplify, said University of Michigan demographer William Frey, "For every Mexican who comes to Los Angeles, a white native-born leaves."

Anonymous said...

^ ^ ^

Here's the real kicker - the *ethnic cleansing* of the Founding Stock American People -

[...]

Most of the people leaving the big cities are white and they tend to working class. This is an entirely new kind of "white flight," whereby whites are not just fleeing the city centers for the suburbs but also are leaving the region, and often the state.

"The Ozzies and Harriets of the 1990s are skipping the suburbs of the big cities and moving to more homogeneous, mostly white smaller towns and smaller cities and rural areas," Frey said.

They're headed to Atlanta, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Portland, Denver, Austin and Orlando, as well as smaller cities in Nevada, Idaho, Colorado and Washington. Frey and other demographers believe the domestic migrants – black and white – are being "pushed" out, at least in part, by competition with immigrants for jobs and neighborhoods, political clout and lifestyle.


[...]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/meltingpot/melt0222.htm

Anonymous said...

Does the obviousness of it ever smack these sociologists in the face? do they ponder what they've "discovered" while sitting in traffic with their veggie wrap, or is NPR prolefeed enough to protect their doublethink?

Anonymous said...

Does the obviousness of it ever smack these sociologists in the face?

Court "historians" ... court "economists" ... court "sociologists" ... (if that clears things up for you)

do they ponder what they've "discovered" while sitting in traffic with their veggie wrap,

LMFAO :-}

or is NPR prolefeed enough to protect their doublethink?

It's prolefeed enough for sure.

Anonymous said...

They've done such a psych job on Whites that you're actually expected to be a traitor to your race, to not be is the stigma - racist. @Anon - September 8, 2011 4:16 AM
___

Aw shit - it's even far worse than this - mere racial and ethnic identity (as important as this absolutely is) - it's also vastly more destructive **economically** that has greatly (overall, of course with some exceptions) 'proletarianized' White/Nordish America, i.e. 'The American Majority':

Globalism's sad love story

Why yes, the middle class steadily grows in fledgling shitholes while our own, having been denied the fruits of its own labors by the burgeoning global corporatocracy, continues to shrivel.

Globalism garners the world population into a singular mammoth work force which the multinationals can feed from like vultures.

These former cesspools of geographical humanity, possessed of the worst standards of living and expectations ever, had everything to gain by joining the march to the rise of a new global middle class.

They have nowhere to go but up.

Meanwhile, the middle classes from areas that once enjoyed prosperity and comfort for most of the 20th Century, were called upon (ha, no, it’s more like “drafted”) by the corporate global forces to begin chipping in and sacrificing its well-being so poverty-stricken workers in other parts of the world might lift themselves up by their Incorporated bootstraps in the ostensible hopes of raising the human race and of course, providing an ever ballooning customer base for the global racketeers.

Global business interests have inflicted upon Americans the greatest disguised social welfare program of all time. The middle class essence of our country has been gutted and distilled into a paper thin layer of prosperity coated across the globe and which, from the perspective of struggling economies, is the beacon of hope and wealth.

India and other Asian countries find a swelling middle class growing in their bosom, and ***its genetic roots are born from American involuntary sacrifice***. (*Emphasis mine.)

In the article you will find that in spite of its misleading damning headline, it does not damn corporate globalism one bit. In fact, repeated references and case citations kindly make a case for globalism by pointing out the unmistakable reasons for business to take advantage of a global work force and customer base. The article even seems to insinuate we are fools for questioning the propriety of established corporate global motives.

Not only do they illustrate reasons the girl has outgrown us, they demonstrate that there is no honor…in honor.

[...]


http://www.phoenixism.net/?p=6538

Marcus Cicero said...
Our ancestors certainly knew what an absolutely rotten being a traitor was...


THEY MOST CERTAINLY DID!!!

Jacob said...

And nothing really substantive on this article in the comments. I can fix that: http://www.denimandtweed.com/2011/09/what-does-evolution-have-to-do-with.html