consanguinity and homicide

luke says/asks:

“It is interesting to compare world maps of consanguinity and murder rates…. Incidentally, someone who is proficient in computing correlation coefficients could use the country tables in the two links above to compute an actual number.”

here at hbd chick, we take reader requests! (^_^)

so i plotted the consang.net data as compiled by woodley & bell — just to be consistent — against the intentional homicide rates as compiled by the united nations office on drugs and crime and got … *drumroll please!* …

…nuthin’. zip. zilch. nada. a correlation of -0.0758. in other words, there is noooo correlation between modern consangunity rates and known intentional homicide rates. i love non-result results! they’re some of the best. (^_^)

here’s a chart for you — x-axis=consanguinity rates, y-axis=intentional homicide rates (as bob would say: that’s a scatter plot!):

consanguinity and intentional homicide - scatter plot

and here’s a table of the data sorted by homicide rates:

consanguinity and intentional homicide

like i said, though, i think there are problems with using the modern consanguinity rates when we are (i think probably/possibly) talking about the evolution of behaviors — and steven pinker thinks that there are probably some problems with the collection of homicide rates in certain countries. still — no correlation is no correlation.

previously: consanguinity and democracy

(note: comments do not require an email. one of the immortals.)

Advertisements

18 Comments

  1. Can you measure the number and average size of identifiable clans in a country and correlate that with the reported consanguineous marriage rates? They are not quite the same thing are they? How do they related to the average genetic distance between groups in a society. And let’s not forget Freud’s concept of the narcissism of small differences. Think of the Nazi war on the Slavs.

    Reply

  2. There have been few race wars in history. The reason I suppose is that the races have usually been widely separated by geography. In more modern times the story changes. I am thinking of the European encounter with the natives of North and South America and in Australia and parts of Africa. And in China and India and the Middle East and, oh dear, almost everywhere there were genetically distant people. Is this being unfair? What about the wars of Islam?

    Reply

  3. @luke – “A high consanguineous marriage rate in Israel. Mostly Arab?”

    yes. both muslim and christian arabs. and the druze, too. some jews (sephardic and north african) also have some fairly high rates as well (ca. 8-14%). see here, pgs. 17-18 [pdf].

    Reply

  4. I have a new generalization: people will fight with their neighbors no matter who they are! Unless they have been subdued by a political state with a monopoly of power. History is perhaps better understood as a story of warring states in a relentless competition for power. Genetics be damned.

    Reply

  5. @luke – “There is a story in the papers that the murder rate of rural white South Africans, mostly by blacks, is something like 250.”

    =(

    Reply

  6. @luke – “Can you measure the number and average size of identifiable clans in a country and correlate that with the reported consanguineous marriage rates?”

    well, that’s an interesting idea! sounds like a lot of work, though. =/ wonder who’s gonna do it. (~_^) (ok, ok — maybe i’ll give it a shot … in the new year! remind me!)

    @luke – “They are not quite the same thing are they?”

    no, they are most certainly not.

    @luke – “How do they related to the average genetic distance between groups in a society.”

    i think the closer the relatedness within families — i.e. the more/closer the inbreeding — the larger the average size of clans/tribes. that’s my guess anyway. depends, too, on your total population size — more people overall in saudi arabia than in yanomamo territory.

    Reply

  7. @luke – “I have a new generalization: people will fight with their neighbors no matter who they are!”

    that sounds about right.

    @luke – “History is perhaps better understood as a story of warring states in a relentless competition for power. Genetics be damned.”

    well, but the neighboring warring state (or tribe) is often rather different from you genetically — especially if you’ve been inbreeding and they’ve been inbreeding. remember how the “identical by descent” (ibd) segments look in the balkans, for example — quite different from one another.

    @luke – “Except Western-style liberal democracies don’t fight with each other. Now that is an anomaly.”

    hmmmm. interesting. and look at their ibd rates — the ones in europe that is. not so inbred + liberal democracies = less warring?

    Reply

  8. @luke – “I forgot Genghis Khan and the various invasion forces coming out of Central Asia generally. I guess they would count as race wars.”

    i think the whole race discussion is just … misguided. and distracting.

    the important thing is “different” in some way. unrelated. we’re all in competition with: different individuals, different families, different extended families … and for some of us more than others, different clans, different tribes. just different. and then when someone from another race comes along, they’re just very different. that’s all.

    obviously circumstances matter. sometimes different people can get along, sometimes they can’t. and i think that inbred peoples, for evolutionary reasons, have a lower threshold for when they suddenly feel they can’t get along with the different guy anymore.

    Reply

  9. I wouldn’t call either the wars of the Mongols or of the European colonialists “Race” wars, in any sense. The Mongols were equal opportunity killers, and were just as happy to slaughter asians as they were anyone else, and the European Colonialist just wanted the money, and were just as happy to oppress their own race as other races (see the British in Ireland and the Teutonic Knights, for example). I’d classify a “race War” as one where race is the driving factor, and yeah, there have been very few of those recently. Hitler, the Russians in Central Asia, and the Chinese in Tibet, maybe? Now, wars over ethnicity/culture/religion – that’s another matter…

    Reply

  10. @lukelea (@lukelea)
    I forgot Genghis Khan and the various invasion forces coming out of Central Asia generally.

    people will fight with their neighbors no matter who they are!

    Great Wall of China

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Monday links « Panther Red Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s