Democracy against <i><b>Homo sapiens</b></i> alpha: Reverse dominance and political equality in human history

For tens of thousands years Paleolithic hunter-gatherer communities lived in democratic systems. These based their relations on power and freedom what Christopher Boehm has called "reverse dominance hierarchy" systems, which, for much human history guaranteed political equality among members communities. The reverse hierarchy is a principle that could be used today to rethink the foundations current democracies design systems ensure true our societies. To understand democracy Homo sapiens evaluate it necessary broaden usual limited perspective democracy. Robinson (2010) points out modern humanism considers prehistory rather negative terms as largely irrelevant, yet covers most sapiens’ existence left deep evolutionary traces humans. Carroll (2015) proposes structures can divided into four major periods: (a) by an alpha male individual or group; (b) egalitarianism hunter–gatherer societies; (c) return groups postagricultural (d) resurgence today's democracies. Such far-reaching historical perspective, while admittedly schematic simplified, important because links past encompasses sapiens. Sterelny (2021a, 2021b) offers chronological affirming that, since species was established around 300,000 ago, 97% its developed egalitarian This should radically change vision themselves, present, possibilities future. image we have liberal influenced currently dominant are exception authoritarian humanity, there tendency condescending relation generously excuse shortcomings. However, recognizes long periods radical more critical. Palaeolithic demonstrate cover history, humans imagined built with very high degree equality, practices closely linked development species. all these reasons, reevaluating original significant impact critical evaluation today. I explain forms prehistoric societies, may offer pointers reflection lead new insights. first describe contributions from anthropology regarding democracies—which designate democracies—considering Boehm's theory those democracies, then basis evolution Finally, briefly review view reconsidering fundamental objective this article present theoretical framework rethinking which were organized during existence. proposal, ranging scope, views light anthropology. Seeking principles researching not novel: republicanism, instance, sought alternatives ancient Athens, Roman Republic, Italian Renaissance republics. go further back time revisit contribute concepts enable future.1 Focusing peoples anachronistic exercise naive transposition idealized cultures, immense distance between societies acknowledged. Rather, serve comparative models inspiration reflect past, future In article, deliberately refer just references date processes possibly led emergence origins There been prior ones, origins. It possible existed some contemporary sapiens, but use term “original democracies” refers earliest any other divergence Pan five seven million ago marked beginning journey mainly male-dominated (Boehm, 2012a). Evolution toward began two culminating Late 1999, 2012b; et al., 1993; Hayden, 2001; Richerson & Boyd, 1998, Wiessner, 2002). Neolithic extension consolidation sedentarism agriculture, approximately 10,000 massive transition hierarchical direct dominance. Evidence nature twofold. First, few survive almost every continent highly democratic, even though they live different conditions ancestors, being confined especially states, inhospitable areas resources. fact patterns ecosystems similar would suggest underlying substrate shared ancestors. Second, archaeological remains only exceptionally provide evidence social inequality, reasonably inferred broadly speaking, 2000). Although fundamentally uniformity absolute, example, structure Calusa Amerindian fisher warrior people western Florida headed deified chief. Also indicating hierarchization luxurious burial sites Mesolithic, transitional following great Ice Age (Graeber Wengrow, 2021). customary differentiate simple complex hunter–gatherer. Simple living small mobile equally resources, power, freedom. Complex diverse sociopolitical characterized longer seasonal settlement, less mobility, larger constructions, and, cases, signs inegalitarian (Arnold, 1996; Graeber 2021; Moffett, 2013; Singh Glowacki, 2022; Woodburn, 1982; ). considered special cases occurred (e.g., rivers) rich accumulable case, cultures survived recent times both indicate nomadic, egalitarian, manner (Seabright, Venkataraman, von Rueden, 2022). analysis focused society, clearly democratic. argued partial, applied men women, several anthropologists archaeologists refute this. Gender widely reported Mead (1982) Arepesh, Mundugumor, Tchambuli New Guinea; Kaberry (2005), Bell (1983), Leacock (1981) Australian Aboriginal peoples; Gómez (2008, 2017) Bijagós (Guinea Bissau) Zapotecs (Isthmus Tehuantepec). Similarly, North America, European colonization, women possessed powers rights (Leacock, 1981; Ward, 2006). Authors such Lerner (1990), Ginn (2010), Eisler ( 1987) argue patriarchy Neolithic, over others habitual coercive violence.2 Patou-Mathis (2020) argues no demonstrates than community activities. Women who question generally affirm taken granted intergender must cultures. freedoms subject debate, so conclusion possible. If male–female lacking, say lack extrapolate men, extending them women. existed, however, fullest throughout communities, meant wealth, status hierarchies (Gintis 2019; 1982). addition, seizure group avoided 2019). Adults (men, too) equal, personal autonomy decision making matters characteristic extremely connects democracy: system citizens, free individuals, jointly make decisions community's best interest. develop argument generic definition will starting point, namely, right participation community. Starting classic differentiation monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, does mean one some, or, at least, majority But, leaving aside relative numbers individuals participate making, is, participants collective government same final section initial discussed compared Self-domestication, theories explaining pro-social evolution, how certain preferences, values, behaviors produced changes time. Domestication reduces aggressiveness, demonstrated Belyaev's silver fox experiment: 40 generations 50 years, domesticated foxes, whose behavior dogs wild obtained selecting least aggressive specimens breeding (Belyaev, 1979; Trut, 1999). A self-domestication domestication produces (anatomical, physiological, behavioral, cognitive, etc.), collectively labeled “domestication syndrome,” feminine youthful faces, globular cranial development, depigmentation sclera, reduced neonatal androgen pubertal testosterone levels, gradual brain extreme delays synaptic pruning, increased early-onset cognition, tolerance (Hare Wrangham, 2017). seem related mild neurocristopathy, rate neural crest-cell migration accompanied mechanisms (Wrangham Fitch, 2014). plausible thesis derives tendencies political. Regarding (from 50,000 ago), punishment execution males gradually reproduction corresponding traits 2000 generations, contributing altruistic moral 2001, 2008, 2012; Mameli, 2013). Wrangham's (2018, 2019, 2021) coherent explains aggression reactive, proactive (i.e., instinctive thoughtless violence, planned violence). Self-domestication probably resulted conspiracies assassinate leaders aspiring leaders, planning facilitated language cognition. Middle Pleistocene (about when antidespotism against generated culture exercised Language cognition feedback loop cause consequence leadership relationships motivation, persuasion, prosocial cooperation, consent, turn, cultural niches 2000; Gintis Cooperative assassination also enhanced lethal projectile weapons, potentially rendering dangerous (Bingham, 1999; Physical strength thus factor maintaining power. ensured assassinating males, whether coalitions. differ chimpanzee cousins directly replace challenging chimpanzee. unlike chimpanzees, became self-domesticated through genetic factors. While Fukuyama (2011) establishes equivalence chimpanzees hunter–gatherers, he overlooks differences: eliminate organize principles, self-awareness choice organizing proposition reactive violence important, why perverse way, often systematic, cruel military operations genocides. helped coalitions impose powerful antidemocratic ambitious egotistical despotic Given early said antiauthoritarianism spirit evolution. Considering above-described genetic-cultural loop, did create also, created We consider certainly Two factors cooperation members, hunting large mammals raising children 2019), immediate returns producing resources encourage accumulation wealth consequent establishment inequalities (Cashdan, 1980; 1995). An issue debated experts disappeared evolved unequal resource distribution gave rise states. Some hypotheses point (such construction infrastructures), highlight conflicts, conquest, socioeconomic differences.3 regressed humanity persists day. (1993, 2000, 2012) concluded, comprehensive study ethnographic literature Africa, Asia, Australia, politically structured attempted dominate community—what hierarchy. ruling minority, minority. longest lasting covering, lengthy period anticipatory, designed anticipate coercion. Grüner (2007) calls hunter–gatherers “anticipated revolution.” persistent, abstained inequality actively contributed building (Macdonald, 2012). intentional, tried avoid elect subjects (Boehm 1993). according antihierarchical sentiments values differeoontiated good evil viewed coercion morally aberrant. (2000) hypothesizes taboo dominance, society functioning coalition punished deviant behaviors. Thus, individual, mildly severely punishable, criticism, mockery, disobedience, desertion, overthrow, ostracism, expulsion, beyond specific positions procedures, relevant acted apparatus prevent minority informal gossip ridicule) formal public debates ostracism). part nature, descended species, made designs persistent struggle hunter–gatherer, horticulturist, farming, herding deduce basic roles, assemblies, task leaders. differences here focus, summarized generalized manner, roles feature studies. Community assemblies form deliberative aspect, whereby whole affected event conflict, attempt reach consensus (Draper, 1978), if conflict persisted, parties’ splits community, join another party choose submit party. fission sparse population abundance natural unoccupied territory (Bandy, 2004; Ellis, 2008; Lomas, 2009; Turner, 1957). peoples, oratorial communication skills crucial documented, Gahuku-gama Gubinea Read (1959). Europeans came contact impressed eloquence dialectical ability debate issues, Wengrow (2021) daily communally decide matters, underpinned traditions, bombastic speech, pretentious oratory ridiculed Task expert directed childbirth, healing, singing, dancing, connecting spirits, warfare, etc., although had authority duration task, war full war, ceased soon ended, retain prestige (Chagnon, 1983; Hooper 2010; Lowie, 1948; Price, 1981). Inuit Arctic coasts Kwakiutl Canada 2021), tasks coordinated gathering Alternating bands settlements, ruled either chief rules freedoms. system, chiefdom rotated year another: nobody seize hold onto ultimately resided monumental constructions discovered decades might thought task. delegated temporary construction. What surprised most, elected held novel understanding powerless clearest example applied. Leadership expertise periods. coerce Amazonian documented Clastres (1974) (Ojibwa, Dakota, Nambikuara, Barana, etc.) Lowie (1948). Unlike chiefs executive, legislative, judicial powers, functioned peacemakers, benefactors, spokespersons by, Chapuis Riviere (2003), Mainville (2014), Perrone-Moisés (2011), generosity humility essential (Bird Power, 2015; Macdonald, Patton, 2005; Rueden Chiefs, without capacity, maintained unity resolving attending lacking facilitating consensus, reminding rules. suggests American indigenous sometimes poorest due pressures generous others, Levi-Strauss (1967) indicates role unbeneficial many rejected it. Only vocation serving wanted offered become Overall, relied direct, assembly-based, deliberative. Their unique agreeing noncoercive leadership. themselves time-limited shows, failed advance higher level civilization, ongoing hegemonic organization. (1974, 1977) identified life logic state. state, interpreted norms politics mitigated external Clastres’ reflections notable influence theorists philosophers, French, Lefort, Abensour, Gauchet (Abensour Kupiec, 2011; Holman, Moyn, 2004), well received disenchanted leftist authors, suspicious state insights Soviet totalitarianism.4 appropriate seems restrictive operative. enormous merit pointing dimension stateless interpreting was, fact, reintroducing centrality always so, necessity state-centered theory. concept contrast, open, type dominance—not counterstate therefore allows us continues occur apparatus, nonstate mafias, religions, corporations, private armies, armed gangs, caste lineage etc. Therefore, impedes self-government, need wants will, interests, position Clastres, anarchist anthropologist, raises speak anarchism given easy answer depends understood perceived interrelated. begin with, assumption incompatible questionable, anarchists (2013) Price (2016, 2020) Furthermore, classical critics Proudhon, Bakunin, Malatesta, wrote late 19th 20th centuries referring representative suffrage restricted sectors. Bakunin (1995) affirmed people, democrats. Western historiography, Athens usually Greek polis, century, city-states considering perspective. Since doubts raised polis really states differentiated (Anderson, 1997; Cartledge, López Barja, Manville, 1994; Paiaro, 2018; Routledge, 2014; Wood, 1996). conclude strictest sense necessarily Athens. Certain concep