Originally published sometime in 2005 or 2006
We at Caveat have learned a few things about humans during our time on this perishing planet. Lately, we have also been giving a lot of thought to the origins and proliferation of breed banning and restriction, as we are baffled by it. Here's today's attempt at an explanation.
One thing we have learned is that humans (and other primates), being social pack animals, rely on a hierarchical system in order to survive in groups, just as wolves, dogs, lions, bees and ants do. In order to have a successful hierarchy, certain basic protocols must be observed. They are:
1. There is always a leader. Alpha class
2. There is always a vice-leader. Beta class
3. There is a group just below the leaders ready to take over if necessary, ie if the leader and vice-leader are removed. Enforcement or soldier class.
4. There are the domestics and labourers who manage the day-to-day operation of the social group and accept the leadership of those above them without question.. Middle, Lower Middle and Lower class.
5. There are the ones who pose the most danger, as they wish to be upwardly mobile within the group and are therefore a serious threat to the stability of the hierarchy, ie, to the core leadership group. Outcast class.
6. There are other outcasts, marginalized and persecuted by the other classes. These are the ones who do not acknowledge the superiority of the existing leadership group and the status quo or who refuse to conform. Most social advances in human society have been achieved by members of this group. Outcast class.
The leader in a natural pack achieves status through providing safety and resources for the rest of the pack. He/she maintains this status by being a benevolent dictator most of the time and a ruthless tyrant some of the time. All challenges are met and defeated. Monarchy is an excellent example of a pack-based social hierarchy.
Western and Communist nations claim to abhore monarchy but as hierarchical structure is a natural element of social living, they have developed a system which is extremely similar and in many ways much more onerous. They publicly deny the existence of a class system and instead claim to operate with a flat social structure, which is patently untrue. This confuses all classes, as visible identifiers of class are necessary to human hierarchical structure. For example in Victorian London, a man wearing a top hat was a member of a class different from one wearing a cap. Identifiers obviously benefit alphas and betas, but they benefit all other classes too, as status must be clear for hierachy to function. This is why uniforms are popular for certain workers, for example.
In most hierarchies, an alpha male and an alpha female are at the helm. In other species, the female is the dominant leader, as it used to be with homo sapiens. Next in line are a beta male and beta female. Only the alpha pair may breed and/or have unlimited access to resources, which is why there is strong interest in achieving leadership status. The system runs on the tenet that survival, which is really the passage of genes, should go to the most competent. Human society has muddied this concept by allowing all classes to breed and pass on their genetic material, which benefits the upper classes most as it ensures a good supply of the middle group, which supports the status quo.
The enforcement, or soldier class, supports the alpha and beta groups by upholding their edicts. In this century, this class consists of law enforcement, the military, the media, organized religions and the justice system, among others. This group will be acknowledged as the new alpha class, should something drastic befall the existing leadership, or aristocracy, to use a dated term.
The domestic classes keep the fires burning, manage and produce resources, look after the young and indoctrinate them, add strength to hunts and battles when required, and are composed of both males and females. The members of the lowest domestic class (the Lower class) support the hierarchy as a marginalized group within this category. They are tolerated by all upper levels as they add strength through numbers to the status quo, yet do not successfully compete for resources. They are almost completely dependent on other classes for their maintenance so do not pose a threat through upward mobility or dissent.
The young males are the most threatening in any social hierarchy, including humans. They are universally feared by leaders and viewed with disdain and mistrust by others. They are the greatest threat to the stability of the hiearchy so beloved by the Middle classes due to their very nature, ie, physically strong, fearless, young and healthy. These qualities make them prime candidates for upward mobility. We believe this is why young men are sent to war by old men, when logically, for the good of the species, those past reasonable breeding age should be sent into battle. If survival of the species were a motivator, aged women would be the ideal candidates for military engagement. Physical strength, particularly in this and the latter part of the previous century, is no longer necessary for military engagement or other atavistic pursuits.
Other outcasts are those who have directly challenged an alpha or beta and have failed, or are considered to be misfits within another class because they refuse to recognize or support the status quo. They are often ostracized and stigmatized by the other classes. In humans, this group includes the nonconformists, intellectuals, scientists, artists, civil rights advocates, criminals, those who wish to replace the alphas and those who openly criticize or ignore the social structure. Most social advances have been achieved by outcasts. People such as Jesus, Leonardo da Vinci, Bertrand Russell and Mahatma Gandhi are fine examples of the outcast class. There are many more.
There is one confounder which appears in all classes spontaneously: Genius. Genius is one of the greatest threats to the maintenance of a stable hierarchy, as it appears to be the ability to apply pure reason to a problem with intense focus, unencumbered by subjectivity or compliance with convention. It is a quality which most find difficult to define and recognize. The outcast class, throughout history, has contained the largest proportion of individuals with this characteristic. Members of this group have total mobility within the class structure. It is not as uncommon as many suppose and in fact, we believe this quote by Stephen Jay Gould sums it up nicely:.
"I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops."
If you accept the above as true, then you can see the origin of 'pit bull' banning and why it proliferates with the consent of the majority of citizens, though it threatens the civil rights of not only those who have a 'pit bull' but also the majority itself. We know that 'pit bull' as used in the media, government and on the street includes over 20 registered purebred dogs and an unknown number of mixed breeds and is really a substitute for 'threat to stability'. A dog is an excellent identifier - who can't recognize a dog? If you invent a 'breed' of dog and describe it using vague language, the resultant misunderstanding will garner support among the uninformed. Before long almost every dog looks like the mythical creature - a 'pit bull' - to those who are easily indoctrinated.
How often have you heard someone ask "Why would anyone want one of those dogs?" or "Why do you need a breed that is capable of killing?", etc.
Questions like this reveal the underpinnings of breed-based persecution.
Think about all the dog owners you know, and think of the breeds they love. Scan your neighbourhood and think of who owns a 'pit bull', who has a Shih Tzu, who likes the rare breeds, who the most common, whether purebred or mixed. Then think about where they fit into the social structure.
We at Caveat believe that the persecution of a minority, particularly one that rejects the status quo, is a natural inclination among those who support the existing social alignment. Leaders need support in order to maintain their positions. By targeting a class with a (rare) visible identifier and declaring it a threat to 'public safety' they can maintain the status quo, from which the alpha and beta classes, and to a somewhat lesser extent the enforcement classes, directly benefit.
The class system is effective and works very well as long as certain factors are present:
1. The middle classes fulfil their role and do not question the leadership of the classes above them ie, they don't 'rock the boat'.
2. The alpha and beta classes demonstrate integrity, consistency, competence and superior intelligence.
The problem we have in Canada, on a federal level, is that our government (alpha) has exhibited a corrupt and self-serving or incompetent personality, which trickles down and leads to dissatisfaction and confusion among the lower classes.
In Ontario, the government (beta) has also been revealed as incompetent, unintelligent, lacking in integrity and self-serving. It has also been tainted to a certain extent by allegations of corruption. It has broken election promises, has put forward much unnecessary and counterproductive legislation, has refused to consult stakeholders or listen to experts in many areas and appears to be running the government by the seat of its pants. It does not appear to have a plan. It is desperate to remain in office and will do anything to create the illusion of sincerity, altruism and capability.
When incompetence at the top is coupled with the strong and natural desire among those in the middle classes to maintain the status quo, and the desire for upward mobility among outcasts increases, social volatility ensues. This opens the door to duplicity, propaganda and scapegoating - the last refuge of those desperate to cling to convention.
Whether the propaganda targeting a particular group of outcasts is founded or unfounded is actually irrelevant in our opinion. Scapegoats are important to incompetent alphas and betas for a variety of reasons, primarily because they give focus to public anxiety and deflect attention from their failure to lead. In the case of the 'pit bull' banning scenario, a very superficial review of the facts proves that it is baseless, which is why we at Caveat have been trying to understand its popularity among the uninformed members of the middle and lower middle classes.
We believe this is why the news media, newly promoted to the enforcement class (formerly outcast), have sensationalized the 'pit bull' issue using hyperbole and exclusionary tactics and why the opposing view has not received wide publication. In fact, the law itself has not been fully publicized, which contributes to confusion and misunderstanding, important aspects of a successful scapegoating scenario.
We believe that governments do not wish to publicize the rights violations inherent in the banning of a particular shape of legally owned property. These include illegal search and seizure, reverse onus, prohibition of cross-examination of accusers, restriction on mobility rights and discrimination based on appearance. They prefer to use the 'pit bull' as a readily identifiable example of a public danger to avoid dissent or analysis. In our view, the true danger to public safety very clearly lies elswhere.
This is just one possible explanation for the contagious nature of the breed-based stigmatization and persecution of upstanding, law-abiding citizens in
The Publisher would like to remind our faithful readers that all articles of this nature are opinion based and are an attempt to analyze an issue. We welcome comments, criticism and rebuttal pieces as we strongly believe that discussion, constructive criticism, collegiality and the willingness to consider opposing views are the cornerstones of a truly free society.
