Sunday, 3 May 2009

Culture is in the Genes

Image - Queen Victoria in mourning dress. Note the clothing that covers the body entirely as a result of generations of puritan christian tradition and culture. Also the clothing corresponds to the climate of Northern Europe and therefore one of the reasons why white skin is a European genetic trait.

Image - African tribal woman with lip plate and scarrification as part of indigenous African traditions. Her lack of clothing corresponds to the environment of Africa resulting in skin tone being black.

The research below demolishes entirely the myth of multi-culturalism.

First the scientific truth that racial differences exist destroyed the 'one race' myth of the liberal marxist multi-culturalists, and now the myth that all cultures are able to embraced by anyone has now been undermined.

Some may pretend to be part of that culture, such as when they marry into it or adopt it, but in reality they never can be as culture is hardwired into DNA. In the end the innate cultural wiring re-asserts itself at some point.

For instance India was once ruled by the British Empire and its culture was socially engineered during the Empire to become a copy of British culture, laws, way of life etc - but as soon as the British left it reverted slowly back to what it was.

This has also occured most spectacularly in Zimbabwe which has reverted to its ancestral culture of ethnic violence, corruption and ethnic and tribal conflict.

The idea that people from different countries who for hundreds of generations have embraced their own unique indigenous cultures can suddenly 'adapt' to different cultures and adopt those cultures when they move abroad has been shown now to be false.

Culture is hard wired into our genes - and the moment that another population is moved into the territory of another population, both the cultures are destroyed.

Assimilation is merely an illusion, for after a few generations those populations begin to assert their own cultural forms in the new host community.

Take a walk around the East End of London, Tower Hamlets and the 'enriched' areas of Birmingham and Oldham and you can see that the new populations that have moved to the UK have merely colonised those areas and imposed their own cultures on the area.

The myth of integration and assimilations is based yet again on 19th century Marxist mythology.

This probably explains why so many people from the African continent experience mental illness in Britain, as they are forced to adopt and adapt too the British culture which conflicts with their own hard wired cultural phenotype.

This is the beginning of a whole new science of 'Cultural Genetics' which will demolish entirely the myth of assimilation, integration and multi-cultural ideological myths.

Culture May Be Encoded in DNA

* By Lizzie Buchen Email Author
* May 3, 2009 |

Disco, Mother’s Day and even Lolcats may have been a biological inevitability, according to a new study that suggests culture is written in our genes.

Zebra finches, which normally learn their complex courtship songs from their fathers, spontaneously developed the same songs all on their own after only a few generations.

“We found that in this case, the culture was pretty much encoded in the genome,” said Partha Mitra of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, co-author of a study in Nature on Sunday.

Birds transmit their songs through social interactions, as humans do for languages, dances, cuisine and other cultural elements. Though birds and humans have clearly followed different evolutionary paths, birdsong culture can still inform theories of human culture.

Normally, male finches learn their complex courtship songs (MP3) from their uncles and fathers. But if there are no vocal role models around, the song will deviate from the traditional song and be harsh to female finch ears (MP3). Each bird, then, must learn from his father or uncles, as they learned from their fathers, and so on — but this can only take us so far down the lineage.

“It’s the classic ‘chicken and the egg’ puzzle,” Mitra said. “Learning may explain how the son copies its father’s song, but it doesn’t explain the origin of the father’s song.”

Mitra’s team wanted to find out what would happen if an isolated bird raised his own colony. As expected, birds raised in soundproof boxes grew up to sing cacophonous songs.

But then scientists let the isolated birds give voice lessons to a new round of hatchlings. They found that the young males imitated the songs — but they tweaked them slightly, bringing the structure closer to that of songs sung in the wild. When these birds grew up and became tutors, their pupils’ song continue to conform, with tweaks.

After three to four generations, the teachers were producing strapping young finches that belted out normal-sounding songs.

You can listen to the progression below, but keep in mind that the elements that are important to female finches — duration of beats, rise and fall of pitch — can be difficult for the untrained human ear to pick up on. (QuickTime works best for these)

* birds raised in isolation (MP3)
* first generation (MP3)
* second generation (MP3)
* third generation (MP3)
* fourth generation (MP3)
* wild birds (MP3, MP3)

“It all happened so fast, and there was so little difference between the colony and in the one-to-one tutoring environment,” said lead author Olga FehĂ©r of City College of New York. “So the process is pretty much hardwired. And the interesting thing was also that they could only get so close in a single generation, so the three to four generations were necessary for the phenotype to emerge.”

“Song culture can emerge ‘from the egg,’ as it were, if one allows for multiple generations to elapse,” Mitra said. ”In a similar way, we may ‘grow’ our languages.”

Though there are approximately 6,000 different languages in the world, they all share certain structural and syntactic elements. Even when a language arises spontaneously, as it did in the 1970s among deaf school children in Nicaragua, it adheres to these stereotypical human language features.

The study’s findings might have implications beyond language to other culturally-transmitted systems, said evolutionary biologist and cognitive scientist Tecumseh Fitch, at the University of St. Andrews.

“We can think about both birdsong and human culture — especially language but including other aspects of human culture, like music, cuisine, dance styles, rituals, technological achievements, clothing styles, pottery decoration and a host of others — in similar terms,” he said. These culturally-transmitted systems must all pass through the filter of biology.

“Look at all the different human cultures,” said Mitra. “They’re different, but they’re all within certain constraints, so those differences aren’t genetic. But now compare with the chimp culture — there are key differences. The possibilities between those cultures are constrained by biology.”

Mitra admits that the analogies between bird culture and human culture are tenuous. “But there are resemblances. Culture is just learned behaviors. The motivating scenario is, if you isolate human babies from culture, put them on an island and come back after a few generations, what would their culture be like? What sort of language would they have? What sort of politics would evolve?”

That experiment probably won’t take place in the near future. In the meantime, Fitch says we can learn valuable lessons about human culture from songbirds, both at theoretical and mechanistic levels.

“Social learning is shared between the two, and songbirds are a well-understood and experimentally tractable system,” he said. “These biologically-grounded studies will lead us beyond the tired ‘nature versus nurture’ or ‘biology versus culture’ dichotomies which dominate the social sciences today.”

Add to Technorati Favorites


Defender of Liberty said...

The nation of America is proof that culture is fixed.

Each of the various racial groups that have colonised America have in most ways retained their own racial and cultural communities.

The Native Americans retain their own culture and communities, the whites the same and also the blacks.

When they do mix this had produced a fusion of their own cultures that in no way bears any real resemblance to their original cultures - therefore such mixing in effect is destroying the original cultures.

Mexicans seek the company of mexicans and embrace mexican culture etc etc - and this is the basis of Multi-culturalism.

In effect multi-culturalism is already aware that culture is hardwired into the DNA - But as the Native Americans know - multi-culturalism = gencide and cultural extinction for the indigenous host populations.

Just as the Aborigines and the Tasmanians and the English.


Anonymous said...

UK Take note

lormarie said...

Culture is hard wired into our genes - and the moment that another population is moved into the territory of another population, both the cultures are destroyed.

Assimilation is merely an illusion, for after a few generations those populations begin to assert their own cultural forms in the new host community.--DOL

I personally don't believe that culture is a part of our DNA. Race is, but not culture. Regarding cultures being destroyed, I'd have to say that that can be a good thing at times. I don't believe that all cultures are morally equal, thus, certain things should not be respected. In a sense, coming to the west is actually good for some people. They are no longer bound to practice cultural practices that are contrary to morality I'd say. Thus, I'm coming to understand the dangers of multiculturalism but probably from a different angle than yours.

Each of the various racial groups that have colonised America have in most ways retained their own racial and cultural communities


Defender of Liberty said...

Why the sigh .... explain.

Are you implying that America is not divided by race / religion / culture and that race based communities and ghettoes do not exist.

Of course there has been assimilation around the edges - but black is still black and white is still white - and isnt that why America is called a 'racist' nation because whites still have their own culture and communities and are still in the main financial power position even with a black / white president ?


lormarie said...

The sigh was related to this:

Each of the various racial groups that have colonised AmericaFrom my POV of American History, colonization is a negative thing. All Americans were victims of it, including the original whites who came here (victims of British tyranny). What the various racial groups in the US did was settle here. They created what we have today...a free society where opportunities exist for all. I don't want to stray too far from the original topic again, but my sigh was over the word colonize. I guess it would be the same reaction that a Jew would have to being labeled a nazi.

Of course black is still black and white is still white. No matter what cultural practices we have, we cannot erase our genes.

Mr Potter said...

Superb article - thank you for promoting it to a wider audience.

Obviously, this scientific research has much relevence to poltical science and to nationalism, in fact this material is fundamental to our arguments.

My only bone of contention is how far assimiliation can work.

Let's consider the native Celts of the area now defined as England in the 5th and 6th centuries AD as centralised Roman power collapsed.

The invading Germanic tribes seemed to have destroyed the indigenous Romano-Celtic peoples and their culture within a reasonably short space of time. Intermarriage occurred frequently and some Celtic place names have survived.

Yet current evidence is that the Germanic invasions were limited in numbers yet Celtic culture was destroyed and has never resurfaced in England.

My second observation is how does this affect the science of memes. Since memes are a cultural vector then this research suggests that memes too are genetically encoded.

It would also suggets that such genetic information can be changed over time and new memes geneticaly created.

What are your views on this?

Autonomous said...

You mention ethnic differences a lot, but only describe racial ones.

Whilst there is no doubt in my mind that cultural differences are hard-wired into members of different races, can the same be said for different ethnicities?

For example, would there be a cultural difference between ethnic Englishmen and those ethnic Frenchman born in England?

Or perhaps those cultures are more or less too similar in the first place.

What about an ethnic Englishman born in Poland? Or the child of that ethnic Englishman? Are the differences in the cultures clearly visible, do you think?

What about an ethnic Nigerian born in Ghana?

Are cultural differences more to do with race or ethnicity?
Personally, if we are talking about on an innate level I'd say the former.

What do you think?

Anonymous said...

Funny how I am born from parents who have came from India and yet I rarely eat any Indian food, I have a huge dislike of Indian music and all other forms of arts, I like many things you might consider someone who is English to like in terms of arts and food and act no different from anyone I go to college with which is predominately white. Also, if culture is in within genes, then why do we not have similar cultures of the Norwegians seeing as England was invaded by them?