The Mafias:
An Evolutionary Perspective:
A de-evolved knuckle-crawling Neo-Conservative by any other name is still a Machiavellian
"strong-man" Mafia Alpha male within a defined territory

By

William A. Spriggs

Despite the buzz created by the HBO mini-series, The Sopranos, the popular fictional drama does not enlighten its audience with any new facts concerning organized crime as a group behavioral mechanism. Of course, it never was aired as a serious attempt to explain the Mafia, and all that the show accomplishes is to continue extending cultural stereotypes about an organization devoting time and effort creating wealth outside the social norms of law-abiding society. I hazard to guess that the reason for the show's popularity -- beyond the usual scenes of beatings, gun shot-flesh gushing blood, topless female nudity, and soft porn scenes of copulating couples weaved into the plot line -- is that the lead alpha male, Tony Soprano, (played by James Gandolfini) is a big, likable lug of a guy who cares deeply about his immediate family and the males in his bonded organization. In fact, it appears at times, that this man cares more deeply than we do about our own families; such, are the deep threads of Mediterranean and various other cultures that find themselves barren of natural resources and blocked opportunities in today's modern world.

But, what does this have to do with the evolutionary perspective? Well, if you look at Tony Soprano's group and strip away the stereotypes, what do you have left? You have a group of males who are tightly bonded that have a code of conduct that has been handed down through generations. Although not shown specifically in the show, similar groups would have a period of allegiance to prove loyalty, which most likely would be followed by an initiation ceremony prior to acceptance of an individual formally becoming part of the group. While still within this general framework of ancestral ethics and codes directing behaviors, the group also has rules that are specific to its clan/tribal group and to that group alone. Tony Soprano's group and similar others, establishes a territorial area identified and determined by their conceptual measurements. This territory is then announced and proclaimed to other groups by various forms of messaging, and then the "turf" is defended adamantly to protect any resources.

Then you have the evolutionary purpose of the group: based on the bonded male grouping principle that a group is more successful than one individual, they go forth and gather resources to provide subsistence for others in the clan and then, perhaps ultimately, to find a mate. This of course leads to the ultimate reason for our existence; the passing of one's genes into the next generation. In the HBO series, Tony's organization does not hunt for wild game in the deep primal history, but carves out, not just subsistence, but what appears by the standard of today's American culture, success and affluence.

In our modern American society, vast accumulations of wealth by individuals or groups, whether accumulated legally or illegally are generally rewarded in the popular culture with praise in word, song, or screen plays adnauseaum. But, being well known in the culture does not seem to transfer into power and influence the higher reaches of our social hierarchies where the pure bloods of Anglo-Saxony's reign supreme in America. It seems there appears to be a very large asterisk placed on such "successful" behavior when accomplished by similar groups like our fictional hero's. Could it be that their ability to accumulate vast sums of wealth and resources despite being labeled as "immigrant undesirables," as defined by the 1924 Immigration Act and the American eugenics movement of the late 1920s, causes severe forms of angst within elite hierarchical groups? Are the elite of our country so afraid that the children of these "genetic imperfections" might attempt to breed with their children and harm their lineage? And despite all attempts at stopping their ascent by strongly supporting beta male law-enforcement agencies, whom stalk and profile all "inferiors," many of these organized groups still manage to succeed, causing even more angst in our able populations?

So, can you begin to see the defensive reasoning behind the "undesirable's" bonded code of behavior? The fictional Tony Soprano and other real life male bonded groups that lack resources know that in order to operate at peak efficiency, there must be close coordination and complete loyalty as to the essence of the group's meaning and functioning; a chain link fence is only as strong as its weakest link. Our fictional hero most likely knows that survival surrounded by those who wish him and his group extinction calls for sacrifice, diligence, and constant preparedness. Was it similar for our deep primal hunter-gathering ancestors? Were groups constantly on a defensive posture while attempting to obtain resources? Does the show's popularity on HBO -- sometimes jokingly referred to as Hispanic Box Office -- resonate a deep cord in those subordinate groups in our American society who find themselves on the outside of society’s affluence -- looking in? Are these submissive groups surrounded by resisting able elite whom constantly stand guard as gatekeepers to the entrances to their territories and send forth beta males to encircle and keep those populations iin check? (And, here's the bonus!!! -- If you lock them up and "throw away the key," you keep them from breeding more "inferiors").

Another reason for the show's popularity is no doubt because we are presented with a rare glimpse of our hero confessing to a mental health professional his dreams, fears, and personal point of view that encompasses his life. Also, what a brilliant concept by the show's creator, David Chase, to have the psychologist with whom Tony Soprano confines these inner thoughts to be played by a well-educated, strong-willed, and attractive available woman, played by Lorraine Bracco. The characterization and treatment of respect given to this well-educated female in the show is in stark contrast to how the show's main characters treat the frontline, uneducated women in the show. Perhaps, it could be an unspoken desire by the show's creator to see all females stand up equally with Dr Melfi. And speaking of strong female roles in the show, how about that Mom Livia Soprano! (having just passed in late June 2000).

Played by Nancy Marchand, Livia Soprano's role in the show typifies many close Italian families in real life, (I speak from personal experience growing up in the same general area of northern New Jersey where the show takes place). This is where the male rules, but the female makes all the decisions (that's a joke). The typical behavior is of a patriarch roaming from home, declaring his strength and endurance in gathering resources, but when he returns home, the male passes the burden of responsibility to the female to run the household; she then becomes the matriarch within this realm. Since risk is higher for males to roaming from home, it is the woman who stays near the group's center camp and holds the family together through all adversity. As such is the case in many lower income families, the harder it is to exist in the local environment, the greater the possibility of males being eliminated from the gene pool. It does explain part of the reason for large families in resource-poor cultures and it is the female that is the pillar of survivability. Perhaps the originators of the show went a bit overboard in its characterization of the iron-willed matriarch attempting to gain control of the resources in her family by attempting to kill her own son, but this does bring up a point about a serious and important subject where scientific studies are lacking. What I am suggesting, is that the cliché phrase, "behind every successful male is a women," may have more validity in a scientific category than previously thought and is well worthy of more study. The challenge, of course, is getting past the veil of deception raised by the female to hide a strong-willed mind of action.