Michael Thacker

“Understanding left — right polarization as a developmental problem, not a partisan one”

Political upheaval has become a part of everyday life in America with news stations broadcasting radicalized events such as ICE deportations and protests. Social media, too, is a digital space wherein one can witness the vile exchanges between adherents of the right and left. Both sides of the political spectrum claim to reside on the correct end while exalting a sense of moral superiority.

This phenomenon is nothing new to humanity with similar divides being witnessed throughout civilized society since its emergence approximately 5,000 years ago in both Sumer and Egypt. Whether it be the collapse of Rome during the 4th century AD or the English Civil War of the 17th century — all portray a similar fundamental issue and that is the divide.

Over the past several decades, the divide between left and right political issues have gradually enlarged. This increasing gap between the two parties has now reached a point of incommunicative salience and aggressive defensiveness. Both sides have pressured each other into reclusive reactive aggression that seeks to protect their ideological framework at all costs.

Of course, these frameworks did not develop overnight nor were they pieced together in recent decades. These systems of thought and perception are a result of millions of years of human evolution — and this evolutionary perceptual and contemplative construct has only increased in both vigor and precision since the Neolithic Revolution some 12,000 years ago.

What America is witnessing is a divide of human consciousness; it is a fragmentation of the collective human psyche. With that said, it is this evolutionary trend that could determine the future evolutionary pathway of humanity. The fundamental issue appears to be that both sides are both right and wrong in what they are articulating — and the answer is not found on either side but rather a unique synthesis of the two.

The Evolution of Coherence

Six million years have passed since humans last shared a common ancestor with chimpanzees. It was at this divergence that the same set of species evolved in two different ways that resulted in two distinct forms of existence. The chimpanzees remained forest dwellers with little to no cultural and cognitive development occurring, while humans went on to evolve into a more symbolically and culturally complex species that have built megastructures and effectively shaped the world (Tattersall, 2013).

This distinction could perhaps be due to mere chance; however, the universe appears to be anything but mere chance. Rather, what occurred must have been — at least in the more primitive sense — a deliberate attempt at coherence that led to exploration outside of the trees. Of course, this “deliberate attempt” was not the same as conscious choice towards coherence, but rather an attempt at survival nested in a bold sense of curiosity.

Around four million years ago, we were called Australopithecines, and our home and food were found in both the forest and savannah. However, something else occurred at that time that was quite remarkable, something different than our predecessors or our relatives the chimpanzees — we began to live in large communities wherein cooperation became imperative for survival (Donald, 1991).

At approximately the same time around 3.4 million years ago, Australopithecus began to use stone tools to butcher meat which gradually helped us develop enhanced eye-hand coordination skills (Kunze et al., 2024; McPherron et al., 2010). Over time, this novel skill acquisition morphed our hands in a manner that increased our manipulative abilities. This adaptive feature not only helped us better manipulate objects but may have also increased our ability to analyze the material being manipulated (Kivell, 2015).

The Increased newfound ability to analyze becomes even more apparent with the invention of more sophisticated tools found among later Homo erectus remains. These tools required precision and planning to form properly. If the material was faulty or fashioned incorrectly, the tool would be useless, which is of crucial importance when surviving in the wilderness (Tattersall, 2013).

Stone tool use in conjunction with bipedalism, fire use and cooking, and increased group size and cooperation, all helped our species evolve into the next genus Homo. With the emergence of Homo erectus around 2 million years ago, came larger brains and taller, more human-like anatomy. It is with this dramatic shift that we begin to witness a gradual development of culture that becomes increasingly evident with each new subspecies. Moreover, Homo erectus were the first to hunt for their food, construct sophisticated tools and weapons, and migrate out of Africa into far off regions such as Asia (Tattersall, 2013; Wrangham, 2009).

Each subsequent species of Homo progressively evolved into more sophisticated creatures. Both Homo heidelbergensis and Neanderthalensis were highly adaptable while being the first to dominate the European continent. They, too, furthered the advancement of tools and weaponry that increased precision and efficiency while hunting and construction. These species were also able to successfully hunt extraordinarily large prehistoric animals such as the wholly mammoth and saber tooth tiger. Their culture became quite advanced compared to their predecessors with the invention of ovens, construction of living quarters, and the first to use colorful ochre that may have had an aesthetic value (Tattersall, 2013).

However, despite all the progress that previous species of Homo were able to accomplish, none even remotely compared to the arrival of Homo sapiens 200,000 years ago. In this new subspecies, we find an explosion of innovation that both gradually and rapidly develops, becoming abundantly apparent beginning around 50,000 years ago. Homo sapiens overwhelmingly advanced tools, weaponry, art and territory. Religion, too, began to take precedence in the form of carvings within cave walls and female fertility figurines that appeared to have symbolized death and rebirth (Gimbutas, 1991).

At the beginning of the Neolithic period 12,000 years ago, Homo sapiens experienced another shift of innovation that has only accelerated even to this day. It was at this time that the emergence of agriculture — followed by the later domestication of wild animals — transpired. At the same time, cultural complexity expanded with religious ideas and aesthetics becoming more prominent than before. Megalithic structures such as Gobekli Tepe emerged partly as a consequence of this religious axiom (Cauvin, 2000; Schmidt, 2010).

The goddess of fertility still held sway over the collective, although she developed more intricate and precise features, and she was now accompanied by a bull symbolized in the form of the bucranium. This new mythic entity has been identified as the first male deity that would later around 7,000 years ago develop into an actual male human figure (Cauvin, 2000).

These religious ideas provided collective coherence as they sought to explain the variety of complexities found throughout nature. Consequently, and quite unknowningly to the collective creators of such ideas, psychological components were embedded within these religious narratives that provided insight into the both the workings of the psyche and the evolution of consciousness. Of course, this did not become apparent until later after the emergence of civilization their systems of writing. These novel systems provided the developers of religion to articulate the ideas in precise and intricate detail.

As these religious narratives developed throughout the centuries, elements within began to gradually attain coherence and unification. First evidenced in Egypt in the story of the death and resurrection of Osiris and his amalgamation with his son Horus and then witnessed a little later in the Babylonian myth of Marduk and his defeat of Tiamat that enabled him to unify the gods and create order (Eliade, 1981; Neumann, 1954). The implicit psychological fundamental axiom presented here is the unification of the psyche and the increased coherence of consciousness.

It was in the first millennium BC in both Mesopotamia and Israel that we witness the beginning of a novel idea emerge within religious thought — that is the full articulation of a unified deity. Both Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism and Yahweh in Judaism presented a single deity that was Omnipotent and Omniscience. There were no other gods to be compared to them, and a matter of fact there were no gods at all besides them. All other deities were simply created entities by the supreme gods themselves (Eliade, 1981).

Aside from their religious connotation, the psychological significance of this development is of crucial importance. For the first time, humanity had unified the various forces of both nature and the psyche into a unified and coherent system of thought. This phenomenon was further developed with the emergence of Christianity during the first century AD. In this religious narrative, humanity manifested this unified and coherent concept of divinity into human form. Additionally, they articulated the narrative in a manner that represented the fundamental essence of human existence. Through the death and rebirth of the human psyche, an individual can develop into an increasingly coherent and unified entity that appears messianic. Across these developments, a consistent pattern emerges: increasing differentiation of perception and behavior followed by the necessity of symbolic reintegration to maintain coherence.

The Fragmentation of Modernity

From prehistoric times where the divine was symbolized through the fertility goddess, to the addition of a male cohort in Neolithic times, to the written narratives of ancient Egypt and Babylon, all of which are developing articulated components of the psyche. The plethora of deities found in the latter of these narratives were later developed into unified and coherent deities. However, it was not until the time of Christ that we witness the full manifestation of a coherent and unified structure emerge into human form that was then placed within a narrative that represented both human existence and psychic transformation.

These foundational narratives of the collective helped provide meaning and stability to society, at least as much was possible with what technology and level of intelligence was available at the time. It was not until the time of the enlightenment that these fundamental axioms began to disintegrate under the influence of scientific discovery. Gradually, society transformed itself through innovation and scientific theory. Though these were beneficial in many regards, as well as necessary evolutionary components that resulted from the consequence of the development of human consciousness, the complete dismantling influence of religion does not come without its own consequences.

As modernity grew in its influential prowess with technology and its consequential convenience, along with the spread of global and rationalistic ideals, so too did the fragmentation of the collective order and thus the human psyche. The latter of these is evident in the dramatic increase in mental illnesses of all sorts affecting the global populace, but especially in western society where this modern influence has been the most impactful. Additionally, the political front has now become the fundamental axiomatic structure of many in America that orients their perception and behavior, even among those that claim to be strong adherents to religious beliefs.

With that said, this is not to say that modernity is somehow inherently evil or that religion is the answer per se. However, if humanity persists in this direction, further fragmentation along with a potential collapse is highly plausible. Thus, something must be done to impede the progress of social decay that is not found in solely one political party as many hope, whether that be conservative or liberal. What modernity reveals, then, is not the failure of progress itself, but the consequences of differentiation without sufficient mechanisms for psychological and symbolic reintegration.

Oscillatory Unification

One fundamental issue regarding the dialogue between conservatives and liberals is not simply a mismatch of language, but rather an incongruence of fundamental axiomatic presuppositions. Conservatives collectively conceptualize the ideal as a traditional mechanism that preserves order, even if that order risks stagnation or tyranny. In contrast, liberals collectively conceptualize the ideal as a mechanism of progress that helps transform the order, even if the resulting progress is disorganized. Unfortunately, both sides lead to polar opposite solutions of extreme proportions — the right towards stagnation while the left towards chaotic dissemination.

American society has clung unto a political identity that is nested in a dichotic mode of perception, thus gradually pushing either side further away through right and left rhetoric. This has fueled the polarization we see today, and the radicalized attachment to these opposite ideals has only increased the damage. Identification with the political parties and their leaders is just as dangerous as stark adherents of radical religious organizations.

For society to regain coherence and unification, the process must begin at the individual level. With that said, the alleviation of political identification is found in adaptability. Just as modern human success was the result of millions of years of adaptation, so too must the individual develop their own sense of independent identity through successful adaptation. At this level of analysis, the process of adaptation is accomplished through the acquisition, evaluation, and integration of information that is either acquired through experience or research.

As each individual alleviates the restraints of political identification, they then can begin developing an independent sense of Self that is both adaptable and coherent. Jung spoke of this very process as the process of individuation, wherein an individual cycles, or oscillates through knowledge acquisition and deep contemplation and synthetizing, followed by psychic integration. This process transforms the individual into a stable and independent structure that can think for themselves while remaining open. Consequently, dialogue can reopen in a manner that is both developmental and resolving (Jung, 1956; Neumann, 1954).

As adaptive dialogue is engaged, resolutions between the ideals of both tradition and progress can emerge. This is not to say that the resolution between these two systems is the simple synthesizing of components found within both, but rather it is to be discovered through creative, oscillatory dialogue that synthesizes those components with novel information.

In Buddhistic terms, it is not simply the middle way that produces solutions but a developmental dialogue between the two systems in addition to information found outside them such as religion and science that helps manifest the resolution. Only through these means of adaptive dialogue and information integration and synthesis can the collective transcend political and ideological identification and thus produce a resolution that unifies humanity in a coherent fashion. 

References

Cauvin, J. (2000). The birth of the gods and the origins of agriculture. Cambridge University Press.

Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition. Harvard University Press.

Eliade, M. (1981). A history of religious ideas, Volume 1: From the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries. University of Chicago Press.

Gimbutas, M. (1991). The civilization of the goddess: The world of Old Europe. HarperCollins.

Jung, C. G. (1956). Symbols of transformation (R. F. C. Hull, Trans.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1912)

Kivell, T. L. (2015). Evidence in hand: Recent discoveries and the evolution of human manual manipulation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 370(1682), 20150105. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0105

Kunze, C., et al. (2024). Early stone tool use and its implications for cognitive and motor development. Journal of Human Evolution, 185, 103523.

McPherron, S. P., Alemseged, Z., Marean, C. W., et al. (2010). Evidence for stone-tool-assisted consumption of animal tissues before 3.39 million years ago at Dikika, Ethiopia. Nature, 466(7308), 857–860. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09248

Neumann, E. (1954). The origins and history of consciousness. Princeton University Press.

Schmidt, K. (2010). Göbekli Tepe — the Stone Age sanctuaries: New results of ongoing excavations with a special focus on sculptures and high reliefs. Documenta Praehistorica, 37, 239–256. https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.37.21

Tattersall, I. (2013). Masters of the planet: The search for our human origins. Palgrave Macmillan.

Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching fire: How cooking made us human. Basic Books.