THE TRIBES OF MAN

Brent Anderson

Scientific observations of human tribal behaviors have revealed that mankind’s tribal boundaries are usually based upon differences between groups that are often superficial. It is easy to measure and quantify observable differences simply because they are easily differentiated as in skin or hair color etc. Superficial differences as have been observed in the Indian tribes of the Amazon basin can be and usually are based on triviality. In their cases it is interesting that the differences are almost always artificial. They may be based on hairstyle, skin painting, body piercing or even edible foods that one tribe enjoys while an adjoining tribe considers them taboo. Each of these tribes refers to the tribal group as "the people", and by inference then all others are not people. From this point of view then killing of members of other tribes is not murder since all others lack the quality that makes them "the people".

The function of tribes in both historic and prehistoric human groups was and is survival. Man and woman, when compared to the major predator species, are rather lightly armed and easy prey to said predators. Mankind’s strengths in the quest for survival are intelligence and unified action but even without high intelligence unified action is a very powerful tool as we witness in the social insects. The old adage of there being safety in numbers is true. Further there is even greater safety when the group around the individual is intelligent and has an emotional and or genetic bond to the individual. There is little doubt that living within a cohesive group provides increased probability of survival for all in the group. This also applies on the macro scale as observed in the case of alliances established between nations.

In considering survival and all it entails, it must be remembered that it is a genetic level imperative, and that it encompasses a number of genetically driven behaviors that all lead to procreation and ultimately continuation of the individuals genes. Survival is at the very heart of evolutionary processes and without that imperative there would be no life, as we know it. This applies to all life, even the most primitive life forms, and ultimately the genes themselves. Tribal behavior is but one of many survival mechanisms we observe in nature, but it is perhaps one of the most successful strategies for a large percentage of animal species from ants through chimpanzees and man.

While most in modern society would deny that any vestige of "primitive" tribal behavior is observable in their methods of association, it is nonetheless evident to any careful observer that almost every aspect of our lives incorporates tribal behaviors. In our society the lines of demarcation are different in that our geographic neighbors are not necessarily included in what we view as our intimate group, while others who belong to the same church or club etc. and live miles away may well be. The lines of demarcation for most in today’s world are very flexible, and under some circumstances they can inflate to include total strangers. This is best illustrated by considering travelers who develop instant rapport with an individual from hometown or state they meet in some far away spot. In these instances, individuals who would not necessarily have been among a circle of intimates, if they had been previously known, become part of the individuals acceptable group. What is happening in these circumstances is simple, and that is since the individual is literally surrounded by foreigners, he or she reaches out for any alliance that brings some group inclusive comfort. (We do not like feeling alone). Another aspect of this sort of behavior is observed in the "do you know so and so" game that follows most first time meetings, which is just a method of searching for unifying common acquaintances that provide comfort to the individuals.

Tribal behaviors are just as prevalent today as they were 10,000 years ago. Most of the rituals that abound in our lives, whether religious or temporal, are reflections of the tribal rituals of the past. They are and were designed to promote cohesion of the group and to act as lines of demarcation between differing cultures, religions, nations, etc. We observe that the American Indians took upon themselves tribal symbols represented by the bear or cougar, and perhaps even see this as strictly primitive symbolism with no place in modern society. While we on the other hand, fail to see that the schools or clubs our children attend take the same symbols to identify themselves from others. This sort of thing is so ubiquitous that we commonly don’t recognize it for that which it is.

The typical tribal or village situation for most of the tenure of mankind upon the Earth was groupings of 10 to 300 individuals. This number correlates well with what is observed of the average number of acquaintances for modern individuals. This average illustrates well that there is an inherited comfort level for numbers of close associates that varies between zero and several hundred, depending on the individual. Obviously this limitation is not due to lack of mental capacity but rather a function of individual comfort levels. It would seem in considering the crowded schools of today and the fact that our children are educated and socialized in large groups, that we might overcome this limitation. That we haven’t testifies of it’s genetic origin. This is further confirmed by observing the tribal cliques that children form within the school population. They generally have no more than 10 members and can be quit ruthless in persecuting outsiders.

Mankind has used organizational abilities to overcome the fact that we are genetically ill prepared to deal with groups exceeding these relatively small numbers. This ancient solution is exemplified by military organization. The smallest unit in the military is a company, which generally contains 20 men. All the individuals in a company know their comrades well and build a great deal of loyalty to each other and the company leader. On the next level is the platoon, which consists of two companies and so on. At each level in the chain of command there are contemporaries who associate with each other and form bonds, which are tribal in nature. At no level does the number of contemporaries exceed the built in human comfort level. This form of organization is rather ancient, in that it originated with the first conquerors. As with all human endeavors, the bulk of the work is always carried by the lowly first level soldiers while the intermediate leaders and ultimate leader receive the glory and /or riches derived from their positions of power. Ultimately, this sort of organization is just the welding of tribal units at the bottom with successive tribal units at each level until you reach the level of the ultimate leader who has no tribe of equals only the subservient. These leaders are always ambitious and usually quite ruthless in seeking and acquiring power. Additionally they are usually true loners who value loyalty in their subjects while never allowing any into their confidence.

Since organization of tribal groups is a requirement for any successful group effort, then adapting it to what is rapidly becoming a global society is mandatory. Historically, whenever considering the organizations (Empires) formed by man we witness amplification of the leaders ethical standards for good or evil. The future requires leaders that not only have high ethical standards but they must also be sensitive to the many different ethical systems we observe in the rest of the world. Governments and organizations will survive and prosper only if the needs of the myriad small tribal groupings are considered and integrated in leadership decisions. This is akin to walking a tight rope, for the needs of any one group will conflict with some other group’s needs. The solution ultimately lies with education of all peoples to the end that they become more tolerant of cultural diversity. Along with this comes the necessity of also decreasing the extremes of diversity (where superstition and ignorance breed friction or even war with other groups) again through education. But with all these changes, local governments will always be the best government in terms of meeting the needs of the various tribal groups since it will have a greater understanding of local culture. If we are wise, then national or world government will tread very lightly so as to offend as few of our tribal sensibilities as possible. In the end our cultures (tribes) are the source of all human knowledge and certainly the source of all sustenance for the vast worldwide economy.