The Link Between Polygamy and War (economist.com)

Is there a link between polygamy and war? The Economist explores (might be paywalled): Men in South Sudan typically marry as often as their wealth -- often measured in cattle -- will allow. Perhaps 40 percent of marriages are polygamous. "In [our] culture, the more family you have, the more people respect you," says William, a young IT specialist in search of his second wife. Few South Sudanese see the connection between these matrimonial customs and the country's horrific civil war. If you ask them the reason for the violence, locals will blame tribalism, greedy politicians, weak institutions and perhaps the oil wealth which gives warlords something to fight over. All true, but not the whole story. Wherever it is widely practised, polygamy (specifically polygyny, the taking of multiple wives) destabilises society, largely because it is a form of inequality which creates an urgent distress in the hearts, and loins, of young men. If a rich man has a Lamborghini, that does not mean that a poor man has to walk, for the supply of cars is not fixed. By contrast, every time a rich man takes an extra wife, another poor man must remain single. If the richest and most powerful 10 percent of men have, say, four wives each, the bottom 30 percent of men cannot marry. Young men will take desperate measures to avoid this state. A non-paywalled, syndicated source for the article.

Comments

Re: Editor, You mixed the links

[rickb928]

If you consider ejecting young men out of your society, into a foreign culture where they are entirely unprepared to survive much less succeed to be nonviolent, then the Mormon practice of polygyny would be nonviolent.

Simply put, polygyny leaves the unmarried men at a significant disadvantage, and in authoritarian societies can lead to such expulsions, or outright violence. Mormons are not so inclined to murder their young men, so expulsion was the most common result. Recently only the fringe fundamentalist Mormon sects practice this, and with predictable results.

The real problem is middle eastern culture

[lucasnate1]

Middle eastern culture transforms women (and men too to some extent, as servants or younglings who obey the elders) into property that can must be fought for and/or can be used for fighting.

Btw, I am saying it as an Israeli who's country is gradually adopting these perceptions due to orthodox jewish religion taking over.

China's "empty branches"

[redelm]

As I posted on The Economist, it is not salacious polygyny but anything that upsets the sex ratio that becomes profoundly destabilising: [Poor] young men see the [few] young women of their villages swept away to better [city] prospects. They can hardly stop it. But it gives them powerful motivation to improve their standing, including by military adventure. A clever "leader" (Bo Xilai?) can tap into this. Most worrying are China's "empty branches", excess young men as a result of China's "one child" policy generating selective abortion/infanticide.

Stability

[burtosis]

I've had a fair number or friends in open relationships/marriages over the years. I'm not interested in one, but it dosent bother me at all so I was fine being friends with them. Over the long haul, maybe 15 years, I've seen how these play out versus traditional relationships. In most cases, for awhile, the relationships were mutually acceptable to everyone. However, eventually a particularly outspoken and judgmental individual started making waves which didn't combine well with the few polyamorists who couldn't just be chil and laid back but instead made the drama worse. There used to be 50 or so of us in the social circle (20 or so were in non traditional relationships) but this fractured the group into roughly 3 groups even though many members were friends for 20 years. It's sad because we all used to go out and do things, and now that is ruined. People have enough trouble in a 2 person relationship, 3+ becomes far more complicated and unstable and is far easier to devolve into fighting the larger the group gets. While it's obvious you can't only blame polygamy for violence, having men take multiple wives and never the other way around, only creates a shortage of women and is just asking for younger males to become violent in competition.

Re:If polygyny is the problem, say so in the headl

[drinkypoo]

The multiculturalists are going to be up in arms over this comment. You should respect everyone culture, no matter how abhorrent it may be.

I don't have to respect the parts which are not just disrespectful, but actively harmful. I don't have to throw away the good parts because some parts are actively abhorrent, either.

I am not remotely against polyamory, polygyny, or polyandry when these lifestyles are lived by choice. I'm not even against wearing bags, given the same caveat. I believe that given a lack of force, natural tendencies will typically produce small relationship units. Most people seem to have little enough idea how to cooperate as a couple, let alone as a triad or beyond, and perhaps ought to get past that before they explore larger and more complex formal relationships.

You're thinking like a man

[rsilvergun]

a woman is thinking, "Can this Man raise children with me?" and the answer is more often than not 'no, he can't hold a decent paying job'. Two $7.50/hr or even $9.50/hr incomes can't raise children.

Also, you're last comment is a standard 'what-about-ism' talking point of the alt-right's 'leadership' (I put that in quotes because it's hard to call somebody a leader when they're really just taking advantage of a desperate group to hit them up for money and cheap political power). You should be ashamed of yourself for thinking it let alone writing it in a /. post. I don't know what you think you're doing, but you're not helping yourself. At best your a foot solider in somebody's war, at worst your a patsy who's going to get fleeced. Wake up already.

Re: Editor, You mixed the links

[Nidi62]

It would be more fair to say that Mormonism has evolved so that it no longer promotes/tolerates violence nor polygamy, just as modern day Christianity mostly does not (barring of course evangelicals who are pushing for wars in the Middle East in order to start the second coming/rapture/Armageddon).

Where would you get the idea that Christianity promotes violence? I know that's a popular meme but as with so many memes it lacks a basis in facts. Please point me towards the New Testament verses promoting wars, I must have missed them. Along the same lines, please point me towards the New Testament verses promoting polygamy as I must have missed those too.

Where did I say that? I said most Christians don't support violence.

This is the issue for Islam: there are many within it that are resisting efforts to modernize the religion. If you want to fix things you can't demonize Islam, you have to support those within the religion who want to moderate and modernize Islam. Animosity and hatred only feeds those who seek to keep Islam in the past.

You do know that the standard practice for an invading Muslim army is to give the conquered people 3 options: convert, die, or become a slave. That's literally taken out of the Koran, it cannot be attributed to wayward followers. There is no reforming that as it's directly from Mohammed. I'm curious where you got the notion that Islam can be reformed.

citation:

https://www.thereligionofpeace...

The natives of South and Central America would like to have a word with you regarding forced conversions to Christianity. And Christian Crusaders would often kill, enslave, and/or rape the entire population of a sacked city, including other Christians.

You missed the entire point of my post: Christianity evolved past the violence of the Crusades (of course it took plenty of wars, persecutions, and inquisitions for it to do so). Islam needs to be given the time and support to do so as well, and that change needs to come from within.