Hierarchy vs Egalitarianism

Posted by Beetle B. on Fri 04 November 2016

Republicans appeal to all 5 moral tastes than Democrats, who appeal to only 1 or 2. This is why the former tend to have an edge in elections.

Liberals vs Conservatives on how much they care for each foundation

Extremely liberal people care only about Care and Fairness foundations. The extremely conservative people care equally about all 5 (but perhaps not passionately about any).

Hunter gatherers were egalitarian for hundreds of thousands of years before hierarchies came.

Hierarchy and inequality precedes agriculture by a few thousand years. But it took off with agriculture. Then we had larger property sizes and much larger group sizes. Equality ended.

Boehm’s research: Humans are innately hierarchical. At some time, they evolved to egalitarianism to rein in the bullies.

  • Gossip was used to shame bullies.
  • Better weapons were created to gang up on bullies.

So hierarchy and egalitarianism are constantly butting heads. An equilibrium exists.

Groups that switched to egalitarianism made a leap in “moral development”. Such groups became “self-domesticated” via selective breeding.

Original trigger: Signs of attempted domination (aggressive, controlling behavior). Response to it is called reactance.

The Liberty foundation is in conflict with the Authority foundation. We are vigilant of signs that they’ve crossed the line into tyranny. The liberty foundation consists of freedom fighters, revolutionaries, etc.

Current triggers: Anything perceived to impose illegitimate restraints on one’s liberty (including government).

Both left/right hate oppression. One hates it due to the Care/Harm foundation and the other due to Liberty/oppression.

Liberals: Transition from equality of rights to equality of outcomes. However, the latter is incompatible with capitalism.

tags : trm, morality, Haidt