By now there is a huge body of literature in behavioral genetics, which shows that pretty much every psychological characteristic we can measure is to some degree heritable. This raises a question that has received little discussion beyond academia – what about political views? Are they heritable? And if so, what does this mean for the political landscape of future generations?
The evidence for the heritability of psychological traits is immense. The authors of a recent meta-analysis published in Nature Genetics looked at 2,748 publications surveying 17,804 traits. They found that “estimates of heritability cluster strongly within functional domains, and across all traits the reported heritability is 49%.”
These results shouldn’t be surprising. If offspring didn't resemble parents to some degree, evolution as we understand it could not occur. Indeed, according to the Darwinian paradigm, evolution takes place through variation and selection.
Is political ideology like height and hair color? Is it heritable?
In a 2014 study, Peter Hatemi and colleagues analyzed a large sample of identical twin pairs. Their results are striking. They conclude that the data collected thus far suggests “genetic factors play a role in the formation of political ideology, regardless of how ideology is measured, the era, or the population sampled.” Their findings are based on questionnaires given to the participants to test personality traits that incline people to put more weight on individualism vs collectivism, or on individual liberty vs material equality.
Why is this important to think about?
People are selective, especially when searching for long-term mates. Sometimes we respond unconsciously to fitness cues, as when we find symmetrical features and smooth skin attractive. But we also consciously select long-term partners based on shared values and interests. If people tend to marry those who share their basic values, and if the values that shape our political allegiance are heritable, then a small difference in fertility rates between different populations – that is, the number of children people choose to have – can grow into a large difference in the characteristics of a population over a few generations.
There are fairly noticeable differences between the fertility rates in Red States vs Blue States in the U.S. (that is, in states with high proportions of liberals vs conservatives). Predominantly conservative states like Kansas, Oklahoma, and Alaska have a markedly higher number of births per capita than predominantly liberal states like Vermont and Massachusetts.
It's been said that educated people tend to have more socially liberal political views, either because liberals seek out higher education or because higher education tends to lean in a politically liberal direction. The demographic divide might be partly explained by the fact that conservatives tend to be less willing to use abortion as contraception, and that they more generally tend to value children and traditional family life. Part of the explanation could also be that people often become more conservative when they have children.
In particular, the data shows that traditionalism and in-group favoritism (both of which contrast with liberal ideals) are correlated with high levels of heritability. Conservatives are having more children.
This is not an argument in favor of conservatism. It is an observation that political orientation is heritable, that conservatives tend to have more children than liberals.
http://quillette.com/2017/06/14/are-liberals-dying-out/
