alexa Chauvinism and Solidarity within a <em>Solenopsis invicta</em> Group as an Origin of Patriotism: A Hypothesis | OMICS International
ISSN: 2161-0983
Entomology, Ornithology & Herpetology: Current Research

Like us on:

Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Chauvinism and Solidarity within a Solenopsis invicta Group as an Origin of Patriotism: A Hypothesis

Nugroho DAA*

Department of Primatology and Multidiciplinary Program, Bogor Agricultural University, Indonesia

*Corresponding Author:
Dwi Atmoko Agung Nugroho
Department of Primatology and Multidiciplinary Program
Bogor Agricultural University, Lodaya II
No. 5, Bogor-16151, Indonesia
Tel: +62-251 8313637/8324017
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: April 13, 2017; Accepted date: June 12, 2017; Published date: June 19, 2017

Citation: Nugroho DAA (2017) Chauvinism and Solidarity within a Solenopsis invicta Group as an Origin of Patriotism: A Hypothesis. Entomol Ornithol Herpetol 6:194. doi: 10.4172/2161-0983.1000194

Copyright: © 2017 Nugroho DAA. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Entomology, Ornithology & Herpetology: Current Research

Abstract

Aim: Here we conduct a field-experiment to test a hypothesis about the degrees both of positive and negative level of patriotism in a Solenopsis invicta group to answer a question about: what is the determinant factor which produces patriotism between chauvinism or sense of solidarity.

Methods: We applied behavioral techniques such as providing food stimulus treatment (glucose), food robber, and a friend who was injured in a controlled manner. In first stage (1), we put a piece of candy near a crowd of fire ants. In second stage (2), we tried to rob the candy with a small wooden stick. In third stage (3), we deliberately injuring one of ants with a wooden stick as we continued to rob the candy. Then we calculated two types of responses: A) Negative responses (chauvinism) such as defend the candy from robber (self fish) and attacking the robber (wooden stick), and B) Positive response (solidarity) such as swarming pieces of candy without a fight but sharing and helping the injured (victim one).

Results and Discussion: In first stage (1), there were ants swarming pieces of candy without a fight. In second stage (2), a crowd of fire ants group trying to defend the candy while another group attacked our stick. In third stage (3), a group of ants swarming to help the injured (victim one) while several others still fighting for their candy from our wooden stick. In all responses, they behave negatively 60% and positively 40%. Its meant that the level of chauvinism was more higher than sense of solidarity in this group.

Conclusion: These findings may let us to propose a hypothesis that patriotism seems was more established based on chauvinism than sense of solidarity. It may have natural implications to human behavior that patriotism in all nation was more established based on the need to defend all survival matter including food territories by race instinct than positive traits such as sense of solidarity. Sense of solidarity may exist and has a role in patriotism but in a smaller level than chauvinism. In hope, as human, we could promote our sense of solidarity as a natural inheritage more than chauvinism to make the better life.

Keywords

Chauvinism; Solidarity; Solenopsis invicta

Introduction

Patriotism often to be a reason behind a war. Could we stop it or just let it happen unstopable? As a science of life, biosciences could explain it and contribute any idea to make the better life by looking for its root and mechanism in nature. May we should addressed some questions first before observed the nature such as where does patriotism come from naturally? Is it specific as a human behavior or not? How about its origin? Word of patriotism may has both of positive and negative implication to its meaning. As a positive word then it could refers to sense of solidarity or fraternity but as a negative word then it could refers to chauvinism or rasism [1]. For sure, when it called as a chauvinism then it has negative impacts to its environment, and when it called a solidarity then it has positive impacts to its own group and its environment. As a comparative instance to human behavior, here we try to look another species such as a Solenopsis invicta (fire ant) group as a model to test a hypothesis about the origin of patriotism based on assumption that human and the insect have similarity as social species in some ways according below previous findings.

Previous findings shown that although S. invicta (fire ant) is a species that can has a negative impact on biodiversity (the other types of species that receive negative impact of this species includes 22 species of birds, one amphibian species, 18 species of reptiles and some of plant seeds [2]. But these species may also have a positive traits due to they are social species that have the rafting behavior [3] so as to give the possibility to control it in a large group or community scale. However, this species has some genetic variation [4], so it is necessary to first identify the type of group to anticipate possible social responses that differ between groups although one with another group received the same treatment [5].

Based on findings above, here we conduct a field-experiment to test a hypothesis about the degrees both of positive and negative level of patriotism in a S. invicta group to answer a question about: what is the determinant factor which produces patriotism between chauvinism or sense of solidarity. In other words, we test whether the degree of chauvinism in S. invicta will higher or lower than its solidarity.

Methods

We choose to conducted our field-experiment in a house opengarden of Taman Himalaya Lippokarawaci Tangerang Indonesia at 15.00 pm (evening) due to we only found a crowd of Solenopsis invicta incidentally. The independent variables here were: A) A piece of candy (glucose) stimulus, B) Food robbers by a small wooden stick, and C) Friends who were injured. The dependent variables here were: A) Chauvinism as negative responses to stimuli, and B) Solidarity as positive responses to stimuli. These treatments be given to the crowd in 10 repetitions. This experiment was recorded by using Canon A2300 video camera.

Procedures

In first stage (1), we put a piece of candy near a crowd of fire ants (Figure 1). In second stage (2), we tried to rob the candy with a small wooden stick (Figure 2). In third stage (3), we deliberately injuring one of ants with a wooden stick as we continued to rob the candy (Figure 3). Then we described their responses into two groups to made the calculation more easier as below mention:

entomology-ornithology-herpetology-Stage-1

Figure 1: Stage 1.

entomology-ornithology-herpetology-Stage-2

Figure 2: Stage 2.

entomology-ornithology-herpetology-Stage-3

Figure 3: Stage 3.

Results and Discussion

In 10 repetitions, their response seems constanly (100%). In first stage (1), there were ants swarming pieces of candy without a fight but sharing. In second stage (2), a crowd of fire ants group trying to defend the candy while another group attacked our stick. In third stage (3), a group of ants swarming to help the injured (victim one) while several others still fighting for their candy from our wooden stick (Table 1).

No. Responses Description Stage
1 2 3
1 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
2 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
3 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
4 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
5 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
6 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
7 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
8 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
9 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
10 Negative response Defend the candy from robber  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)    
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight    
Helping the injured (victim one)    
Total Negative response Defend the candy from robber   10  
Attacking the robber (wooden stick)   10 10
Positive response Sharing pieces of candy without a fight 10    
Helping the injured (victim one)     10

Table 1: Negative (-) and positive (+) responses in 3 stages.

Based on the data above then we compare the level of positive and negative response among them. In first stage, they behave positively 20%. In the second stage, they behave negatively 40%. In the third stage, they behave positively 20% and negatively 20% (Figure 4). In all responses, they behave negatively 60% and positively 40%. Its meant that the level of chauvinism was more higher than sense solidarity in this group.

entomology-ornithology-herpetology-responses-3-stages

Figure 4: Level (%) of negative (-) and positive (+) responses in 3 stages.

Conclusion

These findings may let us to propose a hypothesis that patriotism seems was more established based on chauvinism than sense of solidarity. It may have natural implications to human behavior that patriotism in all nation was more established based on the need to defend all survival matter including food territories by race instinct than positive traits such as sense of solidarity. Sense of solidarity may exist and has a role in patriotism but in a smaller level than chauvinism. In hope, as human, we could promote our sense of solidarity as a natural inheritage more than chauvinism to make the better life.

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Recommended Conferences

Article Usage

  • Total views: 444
  • [From(publication date):
    September-2017 - Jul 18, 2018]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 393
  • PDF downloads : 51
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2018-19
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri & Aquaculture Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

+1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

 
© 2008- 2018 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
Leave Your Message 24x7