CDZ Politics Explained By Evolutionary Ecology

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

In r/K Selection Theory in Evolutionary Ecology, if you provide a population with free resources, those who will come to dominate the population will exhibit five basic traits, called an r-selected Reproductive Strategy. These traits are all designed to best exploit the free resource availability. In nature, the r-selected strategy is best seen in the rabbit, which lives in fields of grass it will never fully consume. The five traits are, competition and risk avoidance, promiscuity, low-investment single parenting, earlier age of sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group. These traits are ultimately designed to selfishly maximize the numbers of offspring produced. Each of these offspring, though of lesser fitness, will be able to survive and reproduce freely themselves, due to the free resource availability. In r-selection nobody ends up dead, and killing or being killed is not a concern.

In r/K Theory, there is also a strategy exactly opposite to the rabbit's, which emerges under conditions of resource scarcity. It is called the K-selected Reproductive Strategy. There, where resources are scarce, competition for resources is everywhere, and some individuals will die due to failure in competition, and the resultant resource denial that this produces. This produces the K-strategy, which is best seen in the wolf. This strategy also has five psychological traits - competitiveness/aggressiveness/protectiveness, mate monopolization/monogamy, high-investment two-parent child-rearing, later age of sexualization of young, and high loyalty to in-group. This psychology is designed to form highly fit and competitive groups that succeed in group competition, all while capturing and monopolizing the fittest mate possible, as a means of making their offspring genetically fitter than those of competitors. Here, the goal is not to simply consume as much as possible yourself and produce as many baby-making machines as you can, with little regard to their fitness. Here, the goal is to help your group succeed in its competition for the scarce resources, and then produce offspring of as high a fitness as possible, so they may carry your genes forward by succeeding in competition themselves. It is obvious why every r-strategy ideal would act as a repellent to a K-strategist, since each ideal would guarantee failure in the K-selected environment.

The premise of this highly substantiated scientific work is that all of politics is really a battle between the K-strategist wolves within our society, designed to battle in a world of scarce resources and fierce competition, and the r-strategist rabbits, designed to freely graze the bounty of a sudden resource glut and rapidly explode in numbers to exploit such a glut.

The implications of such a work on our perceptions of each ideology's morals and propriety are mind boggling. Get the book for free, and see for yourself!


r/K Selection Theory

A concept in biology which postulates that nature will tend to produce two different psychologies, each adapted to a specific environment. It states that animals which are competitive and protective of family, sexually selective and monogamous, imbued with regard for two parent family life, desirous that offspring wait until mature to mate, and loyal to in-group are designed to produce highly fit and competitive offspring, designed to compete in an environment of resource scarcity.

Animals that exhibit a cowardly nature, promiscuous mating strategy, single parenting style, early sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group are designed to exploit a resource glut by producing as many offspring as possible, as fast as possible, without regard to offspring quality.

The K-selected Wolf

Wolves are a quintessential K-strategist species. Wolves are competitive and protective, because they must fight for food to survive. They carefully select the fittest mate, and monopolize that fit mate, so that their offspring will be as genetically fit as possible, relative to peers. They embrace two-parent family values, as offspring are reared carefully in a loving and supportive pack/family environment, so they will have the best chance of succeeding themselves in their own competitions. They do not allow offspring to mate until mature and proven in competition, so any immaturity will not lead to their offspring securing sub-par monogamous mates. Finally, they develop a strong pack-loyalty to maximize the chances of their pack's competitive success, and by extension, their own. Males evolve to be courageous and strong as they set out to provision the family and absorb any risk, while females carefully nurture offspring back at the den.

The r-selected Rabbit

Rabbits are quintessential r-strategists. Rabbits live in fields of grass they never fully exhaust. Their goal is to produce as many offspring as quickly as possible. They flee from danger, because to fight for food that they can get elsewhere is an unnecessary risk. They mate promiscuously with any mate, because their goal is solely to reproduce, absent concerns for genetic quality - when resources are everywhere, even the most defective offspring can find food, mate, and pass genes forward. While males are off mating as often as possible, females raise offspring alone, and quickly send them on their way to whelp a new litter. Offspring begin having sex early, to maximize numbers of their own offspring. Loyalty to in-group is unknown to the rabbit, because there is no competition for resources, since resources are everywhere. Among r-strategists, males will tend to exhibit smaller, more feminine, less robust physical qualities, to better facilitate fleeing and showy displays of flash and beauty, to facilitate mate attraction, and mating. r-strategist females, by contrast will tend to grow big, assertive, and ill-tempered, to better occupy a more masculine family role, provisioning and protecting the offspring they raise alone.

Liberalism isn't intellectual. It is merely the rabbit's r-selected Reproductive Strategy, intellectualized in humans who exhibit it instinctually. Its only purpose is to exploit a resource excess in our society. This information kills Liberals, if you point it out to them, because it strips Liberalism of any intellectual justification, leaving it as merely a conglomeration of r-selected urges that K-selected humans oppose instinctually. This work is what we were waiting for, and it will alter our political debates forever."

Help Us Destroy Liberals With Science!

Debate.

Your position is a fallacy.

Species may- or may not follow these strategies.

But individuals within the species do not.

Note when you talk of 'wolves' you are not talking about 'liberal wolves' or 'conservative wolves'- you speak of wolves.
Same with rabbits.

But with humans suddenly you are talking 'Liberals'

Frankly- it is an idiotic argument.

There are no K-selected rabbits, are there? There are no r-selected Wolves.

You talk in one instance of a species- presuming that the entire species is one of your 'selected' traits.

Then you want to apply that to individuals within a species, who make political choices.

Your argument is a fallacy. Here let me make an equivalent.

Gorilla's are polygamous, social and are vegetarians.
Chimpanzees are promiscuous, social and are omnivores.
Orangutans are non-social, mate indiscriminately and are omnivores.

Therefore conservatives are like Orangutans, liberals are like chimpanzees and vegetarians are like gorillas and should have polygamous marriages.

You do not understand the theory.

It appears to me that the 'theory' is just an attempt to attack liberals.

What part am I not understanding?

Well that is the problem...you're more upset over the conclusion that leftists employ r-selected strategies than thinking it over objectively.

Not entirely your fault, I think the author could've presented it in a way that didn't cause folks like yourself to be repelled automatically. I'm assuming you're a leftist though...correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Syriusly]

In r/K Selection Theory in Evolutionary Ecology, if you provide a population with free resources, those who will come to dominate the population will exhibit five basic traits, called an r-selected Reproductive Strategy. These traits are all designed to best exploit the free resource availability. In nature, the r-selected strategy is best seen in the rabbit, which lives in fields of grass it will never fully consume. The five traits are, competition and risk avoidance, promiscuity, low-investment single parenting, earlier age of sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group. These traits are ultimately designed to selfishly maximize the numbers of offspring produced. Each of these offspring, though of lesser fitness, will be able to survive and reproduce freely themselves, due to the free resource availability. In r-selection nobody ends up dead, and killing or being killed is not a concern.

In r/K Theory, there is also a strategy exactly opposite to the rabbit's, which emerges under conditions of resource scarcity. It is called the K-selected Reproductive Strategy. There, where resources are scarce, competition for resources is everywhere, and some individuals will die due to failure in competition, and the resultant resource denial that this produces. This produces the K-strategy, which is best seen in the wolf. This strategy also has five psychological traits - competitiveness/aggressiveness/protectiveness, mate monopolization/monogamy, high-investment two-parent child-rearing, later age of sexualization of young, and high loyalty to in-group. This psychology is designed to form highly fit and competitive groups that succeed in group competition, all while capturing and monopolizing the fittest mate possible, as a means of making their offspring genetically fitter than those of competitors. Here, the goal is not to simply consume as much as possible yourself and produce as many baby-making machines as you can, with little regard to their fitness. Here, the goal is to help your group succeed in its competition for the scarce resources, and then produce offspring of as high a fitness as possible, so they may carry your genes forward by succeeding in competition themselves. It is obvious why every r-strategy ideal would act as a repellent to a K-strategist, since each ideal would guarantee failure in the K-selected environment.

The premise of this highly substantiated scientific work is that all of politics is really a battle between the K-strategist wolves within our society, designed to battle in a world of scarce resources and fierce competition, and the r-strategist rabbits, designed to freely graze the bounty of a sudden resource glut and rapidly explode in numbers to exploit such a glut.

The implications of such a work on our perceptions of each ideology's morals and propriety are mind boggling. Get the book for free, and see for yourself!


r/K Selection Theory

A concept in biology which postulates that nature will tend to produce two different psychologies, each adapted to a specific environment. It states that animals which are competitive and protective of family, sexually selective and monogamous, imbued with regard for two parent family life, desirous that offspring wait until mature to mate, and loyal to in-group are designed to produce highly fit and competitive offspring, designed to compete in an environment of resource scarcity.

Animals that exhibit a cowardly nature, promiscuous mating strategy, single parenting style, early sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group are designed to exploit a resource glut by producing as many offspring as possible, as fast as possible, without regard to offspring quality.

The K-selected Wolf

Wolves are a quintessential K-strategist species. Wolves are competitive and protective, because they must fight for food to survive. They carefully select the fittest mate, and monopolize that fit mate, so that their offspring will be as genetically fit as possible, relative to peers. They embrace two-parent family values, as offspring are reared carefully in a loving and supportive pack/family environment, so they will have the best chance of succeeding themselves in their own competitions. They do not allow offspring to mate until mature and proven in competition, so any immaturity will not lead to their offspring securing sub-par monogamous mates. Finally, they develop a strong pack-loyalty to maximize the chances of their pack's competitive success, and by extension, their own. Males evolve to be courageous and strong as they set out to provision the family and absorb any risk, while females carefully nurture offspring back at the den.

The r-selected Rabbit

Rabbits are quintessential r-strategists. Rabbits live in fields of grass they never fully exhaust. Their goal is to produce as many offspring as quickly as possible. They flee from danger, because to fight for food that they can get elsewhere is an unnecessary risk. They mate promiscuously with any mate, because their goal is solely to reproduce, absent concerns for genetic quality - when resources are everywhere, even the most defective offspring can find food, mate, and pass genes forward. While males are off mating as often as possible, females raise offspring alone, and quickly send them on their way to whelp a new litter. Offspring begin having sex early, to maximize numbers of their own offspring. Loyalty to in-group is unknown to the rabbit, because there is no competition for resources, since resources are everywhere. Among r-strategists, males will tend to exhibit smaller, more feminine, less robust physical qualities, to better facilitate fleeing and showy displays of flash and beauty, to facilitate mate attraction, and mating. r-strategist females, by contrast will tend to grow big, assertive, and ill-tempered, to better occupy a more masculine family role, provisioning and protecting the offspring they raise alone.

Liberalism isn't intellectual. It is merely the rabbit's r-selected Reproductive Strategy, intellectualized in humans who exhibit it instinctually. Its only purpose is to exploit a resource excess in our society. This information kills Liberals, if you point it out to them, because it strips Liberalism of any intellectual justification, leaving it as merely a conglomeration of r-selected urges that K-selected humans oppose instinctually. This work is what we were waiting for, and it will alter our political debates forever."

Help Us Destroy Liberals With Science!

Debate.

Your position is a fallacy.

Species may- or may not follow these strategies.

But individuals within the species do not.

Note when you talk of 'wolves' you are not talking about 'liberal wolves' or 'conservative wolves'- you speak of wolves.
Same with rabbits.

But with humans suddenly you are talking 'Liberals'

Frankly- it is an idiotic argument.

There are no K-selected rabbits, are there? There are no r-selected Wolves.

You talk in one instance of a species- presuming that the entire species is one of your 'selected' traits.

Then you want to apply that to individuals within a species, who make political choices.

Your argument is a fallacy. Here let me make an equivalent.

Gorilla's are polygamous, social and are vegetarians.
Chimpanzees are promiscuous, social and are omnivores.
Orangutans are non-social, mate indiscriminately and are omnivores.

Therefore conservatives are like Orangutans, liberals are like chimpanzees and vegetarians are like gorillas and should have polygamous marriages.

You do not understand the theory.

Well let me see...how respected is the actual r/K selection theory?

The theory was popular in the 1970s and 1980s, when it was used as a heuristic device, but lost importance in the early 1990s, when it was criticized by several empirical studies.[4][5] A life-history paradigm has replaced the r/K selection paradigm but continues to incorporate many of its important themes.[6]

As the name implies, r-selected species are those that place an emphasis on a high growth rate, and, typically exploit less-crowded ecological niches, and produce many offspring, each of which has a relatively low probability of surviving to adulthood (i.e., high r, low K).[8] A typical r species is the dandelion Taraxacum genus.

Organisms whose life history is subject to r-selection are often referred to as r-strategists or r-selected. Organisms that exhibit r-selected traits can range from bacteria and diatoms, to insects and grasses, to various semelparous cephalopods and mammals, particularly small rodents.

(so.....the theory does not apply strictly to mammals)

By contrast, K-selected species display traits associated with living at densities close to carrying capacity, and typically are strong competitors in such crowded niches that invest more heavily in fewer offspring, each of which has a relatively high probability of surviving to adulthood (i.e., low r, high K). In scientific literature, r-selected species are occasionally referred to as "opportunistic" whereas K-selected species are described as "equilibrium".[8] A typical K reproducer is the orchid, or members of the Orchis genus.[citation needed]

Organisms with K-selected traits include large organisms such as elephants, humans and whales, but also smaller, long-lived organisms such as Arctic terns.[10]

So humans- the entire human species- is K-selected- according to the actual r/K selection theory.

So to recap my original post: your premise is a fallacy.

It does not conform to the actual theory you reference.

You appear to be abusing an actual theory in an attempt to attack a particular political viewpoint.

 

[Syriusly]

Your position is a fallacy.

Species may- or may not follow these strategies.

But individuals within the species do not.

Note when you talk of 'wolves' you are not talking about 'liberal wolves' or 'conservative wolves'- you speak of wolves.
Same with rabbits.

But with humans suddenly you are talking 'Liberals'

Frankly- it is an idiotic argument.

There are no K-selected rabbits, are there? There are no r-selected Wolves.

You talk in one instance of a species- presuming that the entire species is one of your 'selected' traits.

Then you want to apply that to individuals within a species, who make political choices.

Your argument is a fallacy. Here let me make an equivalent.

Gorilla's are polygamous, social and are vegetarians.
Chimpanzees are promiscuous, social and are omnivores.
Orangutans are non-social, mate indiscriminately and are omnivores.

Therefore conservatives are like Orangutans, liberals are like chimpanzees and vegetarians are like gorillas and should have polygamous marriages.

You do not understand the theory.

It appears to me that the 'theory' is just an attempt to attack liberals.

What part am I not understanding?

Well that is the problem...you're more upset over the conclusion that leftists employ r-selected strategies than thinking it over objectively.
.

Why would I be upset about another baseless political attack on the 'left'?

As I point out in my previous email- your entire OP is a fallacy- the r/K selection theory does not support your attack on individuals political viewpoints within the human race- because according to the r/K selection theory- humans are K- our entire species.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

In r/K Selection Theory in Evolutionary Ecology, if you provide a population with free resources, those who will come to dominate the population will exhibit five basic traits, called an r-selected Reproductive Strategy. These traits are all designed to best exploit the free resource availability. In nature, the r-selected strategy is best seen in the rabbit, which lives in fields of grass it will never fully consume. The five traits are, competition and risk avoidance, promiscuity, low-investment single parenting, earlier age of sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group. These traits are ultimately designed to selfishly maximize the numbers of offspring produced. Each of these offspring, though of lesser fitness, will be able to survive and reproduce freely themselves, due to the free resource availability. In r-selection nobody ends up dead, and killing or being killed is not a concern.

In r/K Theory, there is also a strategy exactly opposite to the rabbit's, which emerges under conditions of resource scarcity. It is called the K-selected Reproductive Strategy. There, where resources are scarce, competition for resources is everywhere, and some individuals will die due to failure in competition, and the resultant resource denial that this produces. This produces the K-strategy, which is best seen in the wolf. This strategy also has five psychological traits - competitiveness/aggressiveness/protectiveness, mate monopolization/monogamy, high-investment two-parent child-rearing, later age of sexualization of young, and high loyalty to in-group. This psychology is designed to form highly fit and competitive groups that succeed in group competition, all while capturing and monopolizing the fittest mate possible, as a means of making their offspring genetically fitter than those of competitors. Here, the goal is not to simply consume as much as possible yourself and produce as many baby-making machines as you can, with little regard to their fitness. Here, the goal is to help your group succeed in its competition for the scarce resources, and then produce offspring of as high a fitness as possible, so they may carry your genes forward by succeeding in competition themselves. It is obvious why every r-strategy ideal would act as a repellent to a K-strategist, since each ideal would guarantee failure in the K-selected environment.

The premise of this highly substantiated scientific work is that all of politics is really a battle between the K-strategist wolves within our society, designed to battle in a world of scarce resources and fierce competition, and the r-strategist rabbits, designed to freely graze the bounty of a sudden resource glut and rapidly explode in numbers to exploit such a glut.

The implications of such a work on our perceptions of each ideology's morals and propriety are mind boggling. Get the book for free, and see for yourself!


r/K Selection Theory

A concept in biology which postulates that nature will tend to produce two different psychologies, each adapted to a specific environment. It states that animals which are competitive and protective of family, sexually selective and monogamous, imbued with regard for two parent family life, desirous that offspring wait until mature to mate, and loyal to in-group are designed to produce highly fit and competitive offspring, designed to compete in an environment of resource scarcity.

Animals that exhibit a cowardly nature, promiscuous mating strategy, single parenting style, early sexualization of young, and no loyalty to in-group are designed to exploit a resource glut by producing as many offspring as possible, as fast as possible, without regard to offspring quality.

The K-selected Wolf

Wolves are a quintessential K-strategist species. Wolves are competitive and protective, because they must fight for food to survive. They carefully select the fittest mate, and monopolize that fit mate, so that their offspring will be as genetically fit as possible, relative to peers. They embrace two-parent family values, as offspring are reared carefully in a loving and supportive pack/family environment, so they will have the best chance of succeeding themselves in their own competitions. They do not allow offspring to mate until mature and proven in competition, so any immaturity will not lead to their offspring securing sub-par monogamous mates. Finally, they develop a strong pack-loyalty to maximize the chances of their pack's competitive success, and by extension, their own. Males evolve to be courageous and strong as they set out to provision the family and absorb any risk, while females carefully nurture offspring back at the den.

The r-selected Rabbit

Rabbits are quintessential r-strategists. Rabbits live in fields of grass they never fully exhaust. Their goal is to produce as many offspring as quickly as possible. They flee from danger, because to fight for food that they can get elsewhere is an unnecessary risk. They mate promiscuously with any mate, because their goal is solely to reproduce, absent concerns for genetic quality - when resources are everywhere, even the most defective offspring can find food, mate, and pass genes forward. While males are off mating as often as possible, females raise offspring alone, and quickly send them on their way to whelp a new litter. Offspring begin having sex early, to maximize numbers of their own offspring. Loyalty to in-group is unknown to the rabbit, because there is no competition for resources, since resources are everywhere. Among r-strategists, males will tend to exhibit smaller, more feminine, less robust physical qualities, to better facilitate fleeing and showy displays of flash and beauty, to facilitate mate attraction, and mating. r-strategist females, by contrast will tend to grow big, assertive, and ill-tempered, to better occupy a more masculine family role, provisioning and protecting the offspring they raise alone.

Liberalism isn't intellectual. It is merely the rabbit's r-selected Reproductive Strategy, intellectualized in humans who exhibit it instinctually. Its only purpose is to exploit a resource excess in our society. This information kills Liberals, if you point it out to them, because it strips Liberalism of any intellectual justification, leaving it as merely a conglomeration of r-selected urges that K-selected humans oppose instinctually. This work is what we were waiting for, and it will alter our political debates forever."

Help Us Destroy Liberals With Science!

Debate.

Your position is a fallacy.

Species may- or may not follow these strategies.

But individuals within the species do not.

Note when you talk of 'wolves' you are not talking about 'liberal wolves' or 'conservative wolves'- you speak of wolves.
Same with rabbits.

But with humans suddenly you are talking 'Liberals'

Frankly- it is an idiotic argument.

There are no K-selected rabbits, are there? There are no r-selected Wolves.

You talk in one instance of a species- presuming that the entire species is one of your 'selected' traits.

Then you want to apply that to individuals within a species, who make political choices.

Your argument is a fallacy. Here let me make an equivalent.

Gorilla's are polygamous, social and are vegetarians.
Chimpanzees are promiscuous, social and are omnivores.
Orangutans are non-social, mate indiscriminately and are omnivores.

Therefore conservatives are like Orangutans, liberals are like chimpanzees and vegetarians are like gorillas and should have polygamous marriages.

You do not understand the theory.

Well let me see...how respected is the actual r/K selection theory?

The theory was popular in the 1970s and 1980s, when it was used as a heuristic device, but lost importance in the early 1990s, when it was criticized by several empirical studies.[4][5] A life-history paradigm has replaced the r/K selection paradigm but continues to incorporate many of its important themes.[6]

As the name implies, r-selected species are those that place an emphasis on a high growth rate, and, typically exploit less-crowded ecological niches, and produce many offspring, each of which has a relatively low probability of surviving to adulthood (i.e., high r, low K).[8] A typical r species is the dandelion Taraxacum genus.

Organisms whose life history is subject to r-selection are often referred to as r-strategists or r-selected. Organisms that exhibit r-selected traits can range from bacteria and diatoms, to insects and grasses, to various semelparous cephalopods and mammals, particularly small rodents.

(so.....the theory does not apply strictly to mammals)

By contrast, K-selected species display traits associated with living at densities close to carrying capacity, and typically are strong competitors in such crowded niches that invest more heavily in fewer offspring, each of which has a relatively high probability of surviving to adulthood (i.e., low r, high K). In scientific literature, r-selected species are occasionally referred to as "opportunistic" whereas K-selected species are described as "equilibrium".[8] A typical K reproducer is the orchid, or members of the Orchis genus.[citation needed]

Organisms with K-selected traits include large organisms such as elephants, humans and whales, but also smaller, long-lived organisms such as Arctic terns.[10]

So humans- the entire human species- is K-selected- according to the actual r/K selection theory.

So to recap my original post: your premise is a fallacy.

It does not conform to the actual theory you reference.

You appear to be abusing an actual theory in an attempt to attack a particular political viewpoint.

Hahaha....no. I'll let you figure out why you are wrong. Nothing I've said thus far has seemed to work.

Never did I say that humans are not naturally K-selected. The argument is an abundance of freebies causes some humans to employ r-selected strategies.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

There are no K-selected rabbits, are there? There are no r-selected Wolves.

You talk in one instance of a species- presuming that the entire species is one of your 'selected' traits.

Then you want to apply that to individuals within a species, who make political choices.

Your argument is a fallacy. Here let me make an equivalent.

Gorilla's are polygamous, social and are vegetarians.
Chimpanzees are promiscuous, social and are omnivores.
Orangutans are non-social, mate indiscriminately and are omnivores.

Therefore conservatives are like Orangutans, liberals are like chimpanzees and vegetarians are like gorillas and should have polygamous marriages.

You do not understand the theory.

It appears to me that the 'theory' is just an attempt to attack liberals.

What part am I not understanding?

Well that is the problem...you're more upset over the conclusion that leftists employ r-selected strategies than thinking it over objectively.
.

Why would I be upset about another baseless political attack on the 'left'?

As I point out in my previous email- your entire OP is a fallacy- the r/K selection theory does not support your attack on individuals political viewpoints within the human race- because according to the r/K selection theory- humans are K- our entire species.

You are upset. Its obvious from your very first response to this thread.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Syriusly...The PDF version of the book is free. I suggest you download it and read it before criticizing it.

 

[william the wie]

All biological theories of behavior are directly or indirectly corrupted by Avian data. The actions of women and the actions of horse breeders support mammalian inheritance of 60+% from the mother. Shorter lived domesticated mammals are not worth the expense of doing the calculations but appear to be the same. With birds the split is much closer to 50/50 and unless the author made a huge point of this 60/40 mammalian split, which I did not see at least not in all caps on the very first page there is some degree of corruption by Avian data.