This is an historical process. It is put in the archetype section because it will be described as an archetypal process, but it could be more accurately called a landscape or paradigm.

Understanding 'unwinding' lets a person see 'national' motives in their proper context.


Humans developed as a species in Africa and Eurasia according to some theories.

A widespread group of pre humans eventually coalesced into modern Homo Sapiens.

For the next few hundred thousand years the race was in expansion, the number of tribes increased as fast as new territory was discovered.

At some point there began to be repeated competition for certain geographic areas.

Groups, or tribes, would differentiate enough to have language unintelligible to other groups, and these groups had both qualities of competing species and qualities of a group with a common cause or goal. In other words there were pressures to both differentiate and to merge, to preserve tribal differentiation and to globalize.


Fast forward to today, and the various tribes which dispersed still have expansionist instincts, but those instincts are being sublimated, changed to different indtincts.


If you pick a typical melting potted person today, almost any urban person in any developed country, he or she has only a faint sense of tribal motives, aside from political noise.

If you analyze the person using certain rules though you can get a sense of a more real identity.


Tribal identity descends along gender lines for an interesting reason.

Looking at the earliest evolutionary history of animals, including humans, it's obvious that there were initially two symbiotic microbes that formed something along the lines of a scoby or lichen. 

These two microbes continue to transmit their unique separate lineages through different forms of genetic material. 

When the two microbes, as two collective groups, transmit genetic information, there is not a strict line between the two, as most references to mitochondrial dna for example suggest. But the general idea of two genetic lineages is obvious, whether you call them 'bacteria and fungi' or 'male and female' or whatever.


Throughout history, many 'tribes' existed and then disappeared. But they did not vanish.

They exist in a way that is only visible if you follow their 'echo' or trace backward. 

So for countless generations 'tribal visibility' was the overwhelming thing people noticed. There was a huge amount of 'noise' in one's current tribe. This made it difficult for individuals to directly perceive history except using irrational functions, which competed with pressures to 'globalize'. 

In other words humans went through an expansion phase, and are now in a consolidation or contraction phase until new space opens up.

Common sense suggests that once adequate space is available there will be various new pressures with regard to how tribes evolve.

While so far the most visible 'evolution' of tribes has been a sort of steady mix of destruction and evolution, things that were genetically prevented due to flaws or quirks in the way tribes select genetic information will eventually be back on the table. For example if there was a 'tribe' or evolutionary branch that was selected against 10,000 years ago, resulting in the loss of 'some unknown' quality e.g. sense or whatever, it will be possible to 'backtrack' and recover whatever was lost, to the extent the 'melting pot' contraction is stopped before it eliminates distinct separate tribes.

The specific process of backtracking to recover a lost evolutionary branch can be seen in a lot of creatures, from fungi that revert mating styles to better assimilate certain kinds of genetic information, like anti microbial resistance, to salamanders that take vast steps back under survival pressure. 

While fungi and salamanders revert under external pressure, and in broad steps, the human equivalent would be much more nuanced from the viewpoint of a person.

The reversion would be along gender lines of course. Women would retreat along a matrilineal history and a men along patrilineal history. At each place where some trait was made recessive and some 'genetic weakness' or 'selection against something that had been previously selected for' occurred, there would be some increase in abilities, survivability, once the confusion was sorted out.

At the point of reversion, any isolated human groups would speciate.


Developmental fugues are obvious in a lot of contexts.

In music, a fugue is something which has a single theme repeated in an unsynchronized way.

If one person starts counting something, 1, 2, 3,  etc, and when they get to 10, another person starts at the beginning, 1, 2, 3, etc, then when the second person gets to 10, a third starts...etc, that would be a fugue. The progression is clear, it isn't original, just repeated.

These fugues are evident in any developmental process of course, but they are interesting in an evolutionary context. 


~In Progress