Home NWO Eusociality, Part 2: Is the Great Reset Biologically Inevitable?

Eusociality, Part 2: Is the Great Reset Biologically Inevitable?

14

world mapWill all members of the human species coalesce under one leader?    Map: wikimediacommons.org

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

Once upon a time there was a species on earth that came to occupy every continent. Sometimes its societies numbered in the tens of millions. To put the body of each member on the weighing scale would prove that this species had greater biomass (collectively speaking) than all the neighboring creatures. It also had, in its heyday, the largest impact on the environment.

How did it come to be such a winner? The clear answer is: by eusociality. That means that the individual lives in a society toward which it practices altruism. He or she works for the good of the group, laboring away and even going to the extreme of dying for the group, as in war.

Remember whom we are dealing with here, Folks.  EO Wilson is the eusociality man. Entomology is his trade. The species he is referring to, above, is that of the ants. (Go on, doubt that ants, collectively, weigh more than elephant and hippopotamus – Ed swears it’s true.)

Chronologically, Wilson says, the first species to “invent” eusociality was probably the termite, which is believed to have evolved from the cockroach by 200 million years ago, in the Early Cretaceous Period.

It was my plan to delve into the other eusocial species, as Part 2 of this series of articles, but “events have overtaken us.” There is such a political crisis happening today that I will jump right up to our favorite species, Homo sapiens.

I want to pose the question: Are we, in any way, bound to become like an ant colony where the individuals have almost no freedom? Is eusociality “destiny”?

How is our species going to deal with “globalism”? Wilson refers to a large ant colony as a superorganism. Are we, in any way, bound to become like an ant colony where the individuals have almost no freedom? Is eusociality “destiny”?

The Great Reset

The pertinent book by Wilson, impertinently called Genesis, was published in 2019, before there was talk of the “Great Reset”. So needless to say, what I am offering here is my opinion, not EO’s. He does not address the proposed change by which, allegedly, the entire human economy will be centrally run “from the top.”

For this intellectual exercise, I will go along with the notion that we are proceeding to a One World Government. I’ll assume that our democracy-minded protests against the Lockdown have been to no avail. (Trust me, this is just for argument’s sake.)

A veritable textbook about the global takeover has been swiftly produced by Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. His 2020 book, co-authored with Thierry Malleret, is entitled Covid-19: The Great Reset. Schwab has much experience in the IMF (International Monetary Fund) so naturally has a high-level vision of what he expects to happen.

An “evolutionary biology” question to keep in mind is: For whose good is the proposed global economy — and the proposed political dictatorship that would naturally have to accompany it?

Oops, now that I‘ve put it that way, it seems obvious that it will NOT benefit society in general.  Klaus Schwab speaks of the new system as being wonderful.  Sure, Klaus, it will be wonderful for you, in that you will have all the resources you can eat, even if the majority starve to death.

Indeed, killing the masses off, or reducing them to robot-like behavior, will spare Klaus’s class from the nuisance of having to deal with “challenges from below.”  No more of that late-night “Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown” business.

The Rare Emergence of Eusociality

On December 8, 2020, I published Part 1 of this series, entitled “Adam and Eve and EO Wilson,” which described, in different species of wasp, the evolutionary history of eusociality.

There are more than a million species in the world. Many of these associate in groups – flocks of birds, schools of fish, prides of lions — but they are not eusocial. The word eusocial is reserve for the ones (17 of them) where the group forms a superorganism.

Here’s a quick recap how this came about, per Wilson’s book Genesis.

A mutation occurred, causing a mother wasp to “leave food” for her unhatched egg in an unusual manner. Namely, she sought out a prey animal, stung it, then left her egg to feed on it after birth. Call that “Stage 1.” (The offspring and mother never meet again.)

Stage 2 occurred millions of generations later — nobody’s in a rush here! This “improvement’ consisted of a wasp bringing food to its nest to feed the offspring – something we are familiar with in birds.  When these wasps’ daughters reach reproductive age, they “disburse singly.”

So now to the “winning” species, wasps where the daughters do not “disburse” upon maturity.  And neither do they reproduce!  The mother continues to do all the production of offspring and the daughters act as helpers.

(Are you with me? We know that animals such as chimpanzees go much further than that, by having “the kids” stay in a group that consists of more than one “mom.” However, the chimps are not working their way toward eusociality, whose key criterion is a division of labor.)

Stage 3

This is eusocial-evolution Stage 3.  The infertility of all the daughters makes possible a division of labor.  They are not busy with reproducing.  They can feed the larvae and clean the nest. Eventually a caste of soldiers may form; these can ward off attacks from outside.

Wow. With division of labor, you can have a superorganism.  Aha, I’ll bet you suspect that I’m going to demonstrate how this kept developing, on up to the human species where we have an immense division of labor? No, that never happened – there isn’t any trail of species connecting wasp to human, as far as a genetic-based division of labor is concerned.

Even in our close relative the chimp, you can’t go up to him and say “Hi. What do you do?” He doesn’t do anything that others aren’t also doing. Males’ activities differ somewhat from females’, and young differ from old, but there are no castes.

Granted, one pre-human mammal species is eusocial – the African mole rat, which lives only underground and forms a colony, but we won’t go into that today. Rather, I will quote Wilson as to how Stage 3 came about.  The key is the non-disbursement of mature females. They stay home.

Hmm. Is there a genetic basis for staying at home?  Well, sort of. It consists of a lack of the gene for disbursing.  The relevant mutation, in which natural selection “selected” the Stage 3 behavior, is known as the silencing of a gene.

There are many instances in Nature where a gene falls silent.  Like any other genetic mutation, this can take hold if it is adaptive.  Apparently, the silencing of the stay-at-home gene was adaptive for that particular wasp species. The result was that the whole group works together as a unity.

Group Selection

But now we must detour for a moment to discuss group selection. When I wrote Human Evolution in 1984, I was parroting the line about kin selection that was considered essential to sociobiology.

William Hamilton had published this theory in 1964.  Kin, he said, can help kin. They can break the rule of selfishness-for-survival. If they act altruistically to family members, it helps that family’s genes as this pushes the family genes into the future (via, say, a nephew).

A few years ago, EO Wilson broke away from this and said the math is wrong — it is group selection that makes the thing work. Richard Alexander had already claimed that. (In my 1988 PhD thesis, I favored Alexander, as I was interested in international relations. Humans fight group-to-group in a very different way than they fight within their tribe.)

Wilson now says that group selection came first, and it enabled kin altruism! When a group has some altruists in it, they assist the success of their group. You don’t find that in a species where it’s every individual for himself.

Famously, the wolf works for the group.  Rudyard Kipling put it like this:

9999 “Now this is the law of the jungle, as old and as true as the sky,
And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die.

“As the creeper that girdles the tree trunk, the law runneth forward and back;
For the strength of the pack is the wolf, and the strength of the wolf is the pack.” 9999

Wolves are one of the many social species. Still, we don’t say that wolves are eusocial.  They know how to form an arrangement such as an ambush, but the individual is not stuck in a caste.  There is no real division of labor.

How Did Humans Do It?

Recall that the eusocial wasp made the break into eusociality by the silencing of a certain gene that had made it normal for mature females to go off and reproduce on their own. Humans aren’t like this – they do go off and reproduce on their own.

At this point, I should mention that Wilson has not firmly claimed that humans are eusocial. He’s is toying with it. We humans surely have an impressive division of labor – everybody has an identifiable role. It’s not genetic, though.  At birth it’s not foreordained that you will be a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker. As will be shown in Part 3, language and ideas are the human basis for eusociality.

It’s very handy that we have the sketch that Wilson has provided, by which we can see that in a few species the eusociality is such that a superorganism exists. He says there are 17 such lines in the evolution of sociality – three are found in shrimp species, one in mammal (the African mole rat), and the rest in the phylum Arthropoda (bees, beetles, crustacea, etc).

Looked at ecologically, a whole ant colony is more interesting that the individual Miss Sally Ant’s or Mr Joe Ant’s in it. And I don’t doubt that the whole human species, or even any one of its societies, is more interesting than the individual. Our creations are made by interaction with each other and by interactions of whole cultures.

Let’s Talk Reset

By coincidence, in the very decade that Wilson caught ahold of the human-eusociality notion, someone else came up with a historically radical plan that aims to diminish individual freedom in our species. So we’ll need to look at the future that is envisioned. It has to do with a big technological takeover.

I pose the question: Should we now (for whatever reason) move in the direction of becoming a superorganism? I think we should not.  I don’t think globalization or species-wide government is inevitable – or biologically mandated. I am certain that Klaus Schwab’s vision of a “great reset” is just plain zany.

How did we go from village life to a partially globalized society?  How is it that we seem to be moving from Daddy-as-boss to a “global commander”? Ask: Is there material within Homo sapiens that would make this new scheme possible. Yes, there is!

Don’t fail to notice, though, that there may be material within us that could have taken us — and may yet take us — in a quite different direction.

I must end Part 2 here, and provide in Part 3, a more detailed picture of where we are headed. And wouldn’t you know it, my old mentor, Edward O Wilson, will again provide a major thrust, courtesy of his 2017 book, The Origins of Creativity.  Also, Philip Allot makes a sweeping proposal, in his magnum opus, Eutopia.

Are you dreading the Great (not-so-great) Reset?  Relax. Nature gave us a much better deal.

 

 

 

SHARE

14 COMMENTS

    • In the link above there is a reference to the Rockefeller policy of gaining control of physical resources, rather than money itself.
      If every household was to adopt this policy and have its own little reset, no “great” reset would be possible.
      I don’t discuss this with my bees though. Perhaps we should refer to it as “sustainable development”.

  2. Charles Darwin On The Ouija Channel

    January 24th, 2010

    by Robert David Singer

    …………..RD: No, but I’m not omnipotent and why does there have to be a benefit in beneficent? On the other hand, a “perfect and complex eye” is a benefit for human vision.

    Darwin: The “ayes” were a problem even before modern ophthalmology.

    RD: Damn those eye scientists. They found three, almost imperceptibly tiny eye movements ‘tremors, drifts and saccades’ caused by minute contractions in the six muscles attached to the outside of each of your eyes. Every fraction of a second, they very slightly shift the position of your eyeball, automatically, without conscious effort on your part, making human vision possible.

    Tremors — the tiniest and probably the most inexplicable of these movements, continuously and rapidly wobble your eyeball about its center in a circular fashion. They cause the cornea and retina (front and back) of your eyes to move in circles with incredibly minute diameters of approximately 1/1000 (.001) of a millimeter, or .00004 inch. [f8]

    This size is about 70 times smaller than the thickness of a piece of paper.

    Darwin: You can’t be serious, are you saying that 70 circles of the same diameter (OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO) all touching can be placed in a row straight across the thickness of the paper?

    RD: Yep. There are other problems too; people are questioning the benefit of symmetrical mutations in aiding survival. How would you explain two symmetrical, arms, ears, nostrils and eyes?

    Heck, I’m thinking an eye in the back of my head would be handy but on the other hand two arms are necessary to pop open a can of Beer.

    Darwin: Well, an eye in the back of your head would be useful if your only concern was a predator sneaking up behind you when you were drunk, but you need to think Survival of the Symmetrists and Lady Hope. There would have been no story about taking her to bed if I looked like The Elephant Man.

    By the way, did you go to the inaugural Gordon Conference in Neuroethology in the UK?

    RD: [p5] No, but Bora Zivkovic did and made the mistake of exposing Carl Zimmer for leaving out the Ampulex compressa (Emerald Cockroach Wasp) and its prey/host the American Cockroach (Periplaneta americana) out of his research………………

    ………..[f8] The Saccades Of The Oculomotor System In Vision Processes In Biological Vision, http://www.neuronresearch.net/vision/reading/saccades.htm, Creation ex nihilo 16(4):10–13
    September 1994, by Tom Wagner

    http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2010/01/24/charles-darwin-on-the-ouija-channel

  3. Brisbane lockstep.
    Any possibility the bsl4 factory in Queenslsnd Uni is remotely related to events?
    Vaxxxes are also manufactured in these bio security weapons laboratories that are not leakproof.

  4. Vaccine are anti-Evolutionary –

    Miami Doctor Dies After Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccine from Autoimmune Disorder

    ER Editor: Of note, the doctor reacted with hemorrhaging under the skin within 3 days. Subsequent testing showed he had zero platelets in his blood making brain hemorrhaging likely. ******** EXCLUSIVE: Wife of ‘perfectly healthy’ Miami doctor, 56, who died of a blood disorder 16 days after getting Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is certain it was triggered […]

    Read more of this post

    https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/miami-doctor-dies-after-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-from-autoimmune-disorder/

    • STUDY: Bill Gates DTP Vaccine Killed 10 Times More African Girls Than The Disease Itself

      According to a peer reviewed study published in a respected journal by the world’s most authoritative vaccine scientists, Bill Gates DTP vaccine killed 10 times more African girls than the disease itself. The vaccine apparently compromised their immune systems. Although, such study was never performed before 2017, Bill Gates and the Vaccine Alliance GAVI and […]

      Read more of this post

      https://greatgameindia.com/bill-gates-dtp-vaccine-africa/

      • Medscape Friday, January 8, 2021

        COVID-19 Vaccine Has Potential Side Effects, Nurse Volunteer Says

        Nurse researcher Kristen Choi, PhD, RN, experienced first-hand a “worst-case scenario” of potential side effects after receiving an experimental COVID-19 vaccine in a phase 3 trial. She says clinicians should be prepared to reassure patients if reports of similar experiences spread when vaccine rollouts begin.

        “This was the highest fever I can ever remember having, and it scared me,” said Choi, with the School of Nursing at the University of California, Los Angeles.

        Choi volunteered to participate in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trial in August. When she came back for the second dose in September she began to experience distressing symptoms.

        The symptoms, she writes in a perspective piece published online today in JAMA Internal Medicine, started with immediate pain at the injection site. By nightfall, she felt “felt light-headed, chilled, nauseous, and had a splitting headache” and went to bed.

        She woke up at midnight and the symptoms had intensified and she could hardly move her arm from injection-site pain. Choi slept fitfully and when she woke up at 5:30 AM her thermometer read 104.9 °F (40.5 °C).

        By the next morning all symptoms had disappeared except for a sore bump at the injection site.

        Because the trial was blinded, Choi wasn’t told whether she received the vaccine or placebo, but the symptoms left her with little doubt…………………..

        https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/942133

  5. The word “eusociality” means the self-sustaining capacity for cooperation that’s built into creatures such as ants and bees – as opposed to operating on a freewill basis by virtue of being created in God’s image

    • As for the notion that termites invented themselves, I suggest that you dismantle your P.C, throw all the pieces in a K-mart bucket, give it a good shake, and pour the content out onto the floor

      You might just discover that it’s no longer functional

  6. I suppose that there are some, out there in Glueshoe Land, who feign astonishment that anyone could believe the Corona/Reset/NWO hype, or the banking/money scam, or that paedophile protection rackets don’t really exist, or that widespread corruption of public institutions is only a thing in some remote banana republics and Communist countries, etc. etc.

    But the fact is that all these horrors are the natural result of some form of Relativism that does not admit any transcendent absolutes of cause, truth and purpose. In simple terms; everything is becoming by accident, truth is becoming by proclamation or desire, and good is a nebulous thing evolving out of convenience.

    All that is slyly proposed by the EOWie (pronounced yowie (“Yo-wi” is a spirit that roams over the earth at night. according to some Queensland Abo stories)) superstitions presented here by the Maxwell lawyer/scribe. Let’s call it the Yowiemax superstition. (A superstition is defined as “any unreasonable belief”).

    So, how will I define the Yowiemax superstition? … It is a speculation that a thing that doesn’t exist can cause itself to exist by random accident or series of random accidents. As is usual for superstitions it is simply proclaimed in defiance of, or disregard for, well known, easily demonstrable natural laws that are seen to order the function of the macro physical World always and everywhere. Not only are these physical laws easily demonstrable philosophically, scientifically, practically, they’re also known intuitively by anyone who has sane use of reason and observation (i.e. commonsense). I have long claimed that the Ivory Towers of academia are fortifications designed to prevent the ingress of commonsense.

    The main physical law of nature that is most pertinent to this argument is what is known as “The Second Law of Thermodynamics” which states: “All ordered systems, left to themselves tend toward maximum randomness and lowest energy differential.” It’s the law of entropy which I can explain in more detail if required.

    Summary: Yowiemax is a nonsense superstition intended to separate minds and wills from truth and virtue.

    • What such a lot of these uninhibited freedom advocates are demanding is effectively the suppression of reason according to the rules of logic and the suppression of any notion of morality that derive from a “religious” view that Man has a knowable nature and purpose. For these “freedom fighters” logical Reason and rational Faith (which are complementary) must be suppressed because they implicitly impinge on the supposed “right” to be intellectually wrong and morally perverse. The main justification for this supposed “right” is a dogmatic Relativism based on the assumption that there are no absolutes because everything is constantly “evolving” by random accidents to some unknowable end. Such is the implication of the fantastic speculations proposed by the Yowiemax above.

      (Agnostic is literally translated as “unknowable”. My take on contemporary Agnosticism is their implicit claim that “the only thing you can know for sure is that you can’t know anything for sure”).

      Anyhow, another perspicacious assessment to come out of Brazil (it’s pretty old now and some of the translation from Portuguese is quaint) is: “Evolutionism: scientific dogma or theosofic thesis?”
      http://www.montfort.org.br/eng/cadernos/religiao/evolucionismo/

      A short quote from the introduction that is particularly pertinent to this thread:
      “[T]he belief in Evolutionism can be pointed as one of the causes of the triumphant relativism in our days. There would not be any absolute value. No truth, neither moral, neither beauty, neither religion, nor dogmas, nothing would be stable, because all would be under the law of evolution, this one, indeed, is taken as absolute.”

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.