ABSTRACT
Individuals are predestined to die, but human groups may persevere for millennia. Because individual humans are inferior to other animals in many physical aspects such as size, strength, speed, and senses, the human ability to coalesce in large and efficient groups has provided humans with an evolutionary advantage. Consequently, humans have been motivated to perpetuate the existence of groups that safeguard their own existence. From this group survival motivation, I draw three hypotheses pertaining to inter- and intra-group relations: First, group survival, not intergroup relations, is the main force driving group behavior. Intergroup conflict resolution interventions that fail to consider implications for group survival may inadvertently compromise group safety by reducing vigilance to collective threats. Second, the memory of collective victimization, often depicted as an obstacle to intergroup conflict resolution, may have group survival advantages in the sense of “once burned, twice cautious.” Third, ideological polemics within a group that often seem negative and disruptive may function as a system of checks and balances between different strategies that serve group survival needs. Because the perception of threats and opportunities is contingent on political affiliation, groups that are ideologically diverse may have an advantage in perceiving threats and seizing opportunities. In this chapter, I present research supporting these hypotheses and show how the group survival perspective may help understand burning social issues, from the obstinate nature of intergroup conflict to the strengths and vulnerabilities of liberal democracies.
