Edward Bell

Consanguinity as a Major Predictor of Levels of Democracy A Study of 70 Nations

This article examines the hypothesis that although the level of democracy in a society is a complex phenomenon involving many antecedents, consanguinity (marriage and subsequent mating between second cousins or closer relatives) is an important though often overlooked predictor of it. Measures of the two variables correlate substantially in a sample of 70 nations (r = −0.632, p < 0.001), and consanguinity remains a significant predictor of democracy in multiple regression and path analyses involving several additional independent variables. The data suggest that where consanguineous kinship networks are numerically predominant and have been made to share a common statehood, democracy is unlikely to develop. Possible explanations for these findings include the idea that restricted gene flow arising from consanguineous marriage facilitates a rigid collectivism that is inimical to individualism and the recognition of individual rights, which are key elements of the democratic ethos. Furthermore, high levels of within-group genetic similarity may discourage cooperation between different large-scale kin groupings sharing the same nation, inhibiting democracy. Finally, genetic similarity stemming from consanguinity may encourage resource predation by members of socially elite kinship networks as an inclusive fitness enhancing behavior.

The Rise of the Lougheed Conservatives and the Demise of Social Credit in Alberta: A Reconsideration

In 1971, Peter Lougheeds Conservatives put an end to the long rule of the Social Credit party in Alberta. Many accounts maintain that large-scale social change that occurred in the province as a result of the postwar oil boom was responsible for this important change of government. Urbanization, in particular the expansion of the urban middle classes, secularization and increasing wealth are often cited as the primary causes of Social Credits downfall. This article challenges this popular interpretation, arguing instead that short-term factors such as leadership, contemporaneous issues and campaign organization better explain the Conservative triumph. Also challenged is the larger claim that election outcomes may be determined by matters beyond anyones control.

The Structure and Sources of Right‐wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation

Right–wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are widely used constructs in research on social and political attitudes. This study examined their hierarchical and correlative structure (across sexes, generations and rater perspectives), as well as how genetic and environmental factors may contribute to individual differences in them (using different rater perspectives and nuclear twin family data). We found a substantive common aspect (beyond shared artificial variance arising from socially desirable responding) underlying both RWA and SDO: aggression against subordinate groups. We discussed how this aspect could help to explain the commonly reported correlation between the two concepts in Western countries. Estimates of genetic and environmental components in RWA and SDO based on self–reports were quite comparable with those based on peer reports. When controlling for error variance and taking assortative mating into account, individual differences in RWA were primarily due to genetic contributions including genotype–environment correlation, whereas variance in SDO was largely attributable to environmental sources shared and not shared by twins. The findings are discussed in terms of the utility of RWA and SDO as basic constructs to describe individual differences in social attitudes and with respect to the different patterns of genetic and environmental influences that underlie them. Copyright

The Genetic and the Sociological: Exploring the Possibility of Consilience:

We argue that consilience, or the unity of all knowledge, is an important goal for all researchers to pursue. The philosophical foundations of this position are explored, and then an empirical study is presented that illustrates what could be gained by melding behaviour genetic, sociological and other perspectives on politics. Twin data are analysed to examine the extent to which sociological factors can explain the variation in three dependent variables: left/liberal versus right/conservative political orientations; party identification; and interest in politics. The results indicate that large amounts of the variance in these variables are not explained by the sociological predictors, so the residual variance is tested for genetic influences, which yields fairly high heritability estimates. We conclude that analyses that are informed by both genetic and sociological insights are essential for understanding the phenomena examined, and explore the implications of this conclusion for conventional research paradigms and for consilience.