The Capitulation Gene

Do you have an unscientific theory that you still stubbornly believe in? Like, say, that the Loch Ness Monster is actually the ghost of a long-dead plesiosaur and since the theory hurts no one, why not believe it? Sure. We all have one or two unsupported theories we cling to, right?

I have a wholly unscientific pet theory that I nevertheless believe in wholeheartedly. To wit: Homo Sapiens have been around for roughly 300,000 in our current form. Same height, same brain mass, same male pattern baldness and/or permanently engorged mammary glands (Look it up. Other mammals don't usually have boobs except for when nursing). During most of those 300 millennia, we lived as hunters and gatherers in tribes no bigger than 100 people. Then, around 12,000 years ago, humans quickly switched to agriculture, which led to stationary lives, defending plots of land, which led to the division of labor, which led to the rise of armed forces for protection, which led to the rise of a ruling class. Yada yada yada, before you know it, we invented kings. And for the next 11 millennia or so, nearly all humans who have ever lived did so under the rule of monarchs, kings, czars, emperors, or sovereigns. And what is the one thing that no king can stand? Dissent.

Historically speaking, kings have always had to maintain a population that is radically outsized to their level of power. We invented gods and mythologies to buttress monarchies because people are less likely to rise up if they believe their chosen gods personally backed the guy wearing the crown. We invented information networks to root out dissent, insurrection, sedition, and heresy. We invented caste and class systems to ensure that people FEEL that they SHOULD be oppressed because something something natural order. But in the end, the one thing a king cannot abide is dissent and defiance.

So, here's my pet theory: All living humans are the descendants of people who are either genetically predisposed to passivity and acquiescence OR are the descendants of people who were very good at hiding their dissent. In the long history of monarchies, from prehistoric times to roughly, oh, 1776, all humans lived under constant threat of death for dissent. I believe this means we are all the descendants of either capitulating cowards, genetically incapable of standing up against tyranny, or descended from those skilled in the art of deception, dishonestly, and deceit. The reason we like stories about rebels who win is because those stories are so exceedingly rare in human history.

Do you know the biggest fear among all people, regardless of age, geography, or race? It isn't terrorism. It isn't heart disease (which, honestly, it should be). You know what the biggest fear of humans is in a world of nuclear weapons and black widow spiders and serial killers and tuberculosis? Public speaking. It's not even close. People fear public speaking most. I can see no natural evolutionary reason for why a whole species would fear standing up and standing out...unless you factor in thousands upon thousands of years of unnatural selection at the hands of kings who killed anyone who dared raise their heads, stood tall, and spoke loudly to the masses.

Is this theory scientifically sound? Nope. Is there a genome-wide association study supporting the polygenic nature of the behavioral patterns for passivity and acquiescence to authority? Nope. Do I believe this theory explains why, in any given population, at any point in recorded history, on any continent, there's always roughly 20–30% that actively and openly yearn for a strong man dictator king to take command and rule? Yes. Yes, I do.

But even if you don't buy my pet theory, one thing remains true: For almost the entirety of recorded history, all humans lived under kings and czars and emperors and despots and men in little crowns of some sort. And those men in little crowns stayed in power by killing anyone who would deign to speak out against them. And we are all descended from the humans that remained alive long enough to reproduce under those kings. You can draw your own conclusions, but if you were searching about in the wreckage for a theory that explains why a significant segment of any population actually WANTS a king to rule over them, well, there you go. You now have a new pet theory on par with the ghost of a plesiosaur in the Scottish Highlands.