Rags to Riches: Foreign to Awesome

In belated celebration of Darwin's and Lincoln's 200th birthday, I present a poorly composed propaganda piece based on Darwin's Decent of Man:

In The Decent of Man, Charles Darwin reveals his theory of mankind’s evolution through natural selection. He delineates the processes of evolution from a strictly biological perspective. However, he digresses, “there is apparently much truth in the belief that the wonderful progress of the United States, as well as the character of the people, are the results of natural selection.” (pg. 168) This brief foray into the realm of cultural analysis deserves further interpretation. Transformations in the physical form of the United States citizen attest to Darwin’s theory of man’s evolution. These changes are the result, in part, of differences in the natural environment, the unique ethnic diversity of the people, and the rigorous process through which these people seek out their genetic supplement: dating.

Ironically, in the introduction to The Decent of Man, Darwin praises the French naturalist George Louis Leclerc, a man whose theory of American degeneration earned him a place of infamy in the hearts of the first U.S. citizens. Leclerc believed that organisms in the Americas were smaller and less fertile than those of Eurasia, and that plants and animals imported from the Old World would diminish accordingly within a few generations. In defense of the national pride, Thomas Jefferson had the remains of a moose exported to Paris, where it easily dwarfed their largest local game. Leclerc’s theory was put to death, but U.S. citizens would exact even further vindication.

Not only did America's wildlife grow to epic proportions, so did its people. Darwin tells of how German soldiers appeared ridiculous donning American made clothes that were much too long for them. “Thus, as is generally admitted European settlers in the United States undergo a slight but extraordinarily rapid change of appearance. Their bodies and limbs become elongated.” (pg. 227) Here, Darwin links the environment (specifically, as we now know, the increased abundance and diversity of food) to the physical development of its inhabitants.

Moreover, measurements of over 1,000,000 U.S. soldiers produced a linkage between a man’s size and the general area in which he was reared: “For instance, it is established, ‘that residence in the Western States, during years of growth, tends to produce increase of stature.’” (pg. 49) Thus, the United States not only demonstrates an environmentally related physical departure from Europe, but also intra-national physical diversity as a result of its various landscapes. Such changes in stature undoubtedly affect an individual’s standard of living and, thus, his ranking in the horrible hierarchy of natural selection.

Darwin’s theory is also exemplified in the racial history and diversity of the United States. The institution of slavery produced rapid physical adaptations: “There is also a considerable body of evidence shewing that in the Southern States the house-slaves of the third generation present a markedly different appearance from the field slaves.” (pg. 228) As politically incorrect as it may sound, the process through which United States slaves were physically transformed is parallel to the domestication of animals. Darwin studied the breeding of pigeons, noting that very few generations were required to change the birds’ physical appearances when bred with a purpose. Likewise, slaves in the South were divided into field-slaves or house-slaves based upon certain characteristics. These traits were undoubtedly reiterated when members of these distinct groups produced offspring together. Meanwhile, slaves endured extreme physical stress in the crowded, often diseased ships in which they were transported to the U.S., or also from the continual strain of field work. Thus, one might argue that modern African Americans are the product of a fiercely concentrated selection process because slave owners favored certain traits and also due to the harsh physical challenges which their ancestors endured.

Meanwhile, the interbreeding of races in the U.S. has produced individuals with some interesting characteristics. Darwin writes of the “inferior vitality” of mulattoes (pg. 224), but also mentions that they are “almost completely exempt from the yellow fever so destructive in tropical America.” (pg. 193) In both cases, the mixing of races in America illustrates the inheritance of traits that result in unique offspring, a central aspect of Darwin’s theory as to the emergence of man. Moreover, the United States gene pool is more diversified than that of any other country. No single ethnicity dominates the population. U.S. citizens are so diverse that racial groups considered distinct in other countries are often lumped together as Latinos, Whites, Blacks, Asians, or even just Americans. Presidential candidate Barak Obama, who is of mixed ethnicity, is an iconic personification of this genetic diversity. Thus, the United States provides evidence of human forms that have distinguished themselves from their ancestors, an inherent part of Darwin’s assertion that man descends from organisms that were quite distinct from his modern manifestation.

According to Darwin, all would-be progenitors are subject to the trials of sexual selection. The dating atmosphere in the modern U.S. demonstrates some of the ways in which many organisms pursue their drive towards procreation. As a young lad, I am acutely aware of women's discrimination, none of which seem to comply with my request that they “see through the life choices to the genetic potential.” Darwin relates, “the exertion of some choice on the part of the female seems a law almost as general as the eagerness of the male.” (pg. 257) A lack of pre-arranged marriages in the U.S. results in a highly competitive mate market. The American male is obliged to advance, and he does so in a fashion that is not unlike the attempts of his brethren among other species in natural environments: the so-called act of “peacocking” entails male adornment for the express purpose of distinguishing himself to the feminine eye. Literally, the term refers to the flamboyant feathers of the male peacock, and Darwin observes such brilliant elaboration across a wide variety of animals. Similarly, bird-song is used to attract a mate, and some birds even imitate each others’ songs towards this end. (pg. 94) Such behavior is mirrored in my own feeble musical creations, which so often give way to more surefire cover-songs. Darwin also describes the use of “a musky odour, which we may suppose serves to charm or excite the female.” (pg. 408) Likewise, Ax Body Spray commercials depict one lucky guy being engulfed by a mob of women who are apparently zombified, unable to resist the scent of the Ax product. Thus, the various endeavors of the American man against the horrific prospect of genetic oblivion as a consequence of sexual deselection are directly parallel to those of other species, supporting Darwin’s connection between man and beast in the theory of evolution.

On the same token, U.S. women employ a wide array of agents, ranging from make-up and hair removal to mind-warping social games, in their pursuit of the least repulsive mate. Darwin argues that, through this process of coupling, only the best persist. He explains, “if such [well nourished] females select the more attractive, and at the same time vigorous males, they will rear a larger number of offspring than the retarded females, which must pair with the less vigorous and less attractive males.” (pg. 255) Theoretically, a United States citizen could be too poor to support a family. However, in general, nutrition is not a significant issue in the U.S., enabling “retarded…and less attractive” progenitors to make their contribution to the gene pool (see “lower class Conservatives”).

Thus, the U.S. by no means represents the greatest culmination of man through Darwin’s principles of evolution. Perhaps it is fitting that Jefferson chose the moose to represent the grandeur of the United States, as the analogy can be extended to modern times: “during his progress he [the moose] holds his nose up, so as to lay the horns horizontally back; and in this attitude cannot see the ground distinctly.” (pg. 577) The great international influence wielded by the U.S. is roughly parallel to enormous antlers of the moose. Moreover, some argue that it has proven to be similarly cumbersome as, for example, the focus on the war in Iraq has drawn attention away from significant domestic issues. Finally, foreign criticism of the American citizen is well known, and generally entails something like, “he holds his nose up…and in this attitude cannot see the ground distinctly.” In other words, many feel that the United States’ great success has resulted in an excessively proud, spoiled and ignorant population. Moreover, Darwin writes, “It even appears from what we see, for instance, in parts of S. America, that a people which may be called civilised, such as the Spanish settlers, is liable to become indolent and to retrograde, when the conditions of life are very easy.” (pg. 169) No one can deny that, within the last century, the standard of living in the United States has become quite comfortable. Some argue that welfare programs, for example, create a situation not unlike the conditions that spoiled Darwin’s Spanish settlers. If the trials of the American frontier once chiseled out a heartier race of man, the close proximity of the fast food restaurant has now, perhaps, returned him to the obscurity of his folds.

Of nineteenth-century America, Darwin writes, “obscure as is the problem of the advance of civilization, we can at least see that a nation which produced during a lengthened period the greatest number of highly intellectual, energetic, brave, patriotic, and benevolent men, would generally prevail over less favoured nations.” (Pg. 168) In the twentieth-century, the United States, without question, affirmed Darwin’s prediction of greatness. As to whether it will continue on this course throughout the twenty-first century remains to be seen. Regardless of the United States citizens’ future, they are a testament to the principles of Darwin’s theory of evolution, as is exemplified by their various physical adaptations to the American landscape, the unique forms that have arisen as a result of their ethnically diverse gene pool, and in the animalistic methods they employ against the smothering potential of sexual selection throughout the process most commonly referred to as dating.

Work Cited
Boyle, T. C., and Charles Darwin. Descent of Man : Selection in Relation to Sex. Ed. Adrian Desmond. New York: Penguin Group (USA) Incorporated, 2004.

Huh? T.C. Boyle of Tortilla Curtain fame?