Easing the stress between nature and nurture in political philosophy

Raymond Cattell used the analogy of a tennis ball in a game of tennis to show the genetic-cultural interaction, changes produced by one player affects change produced by another.

The main dynamics and concern here is the stress between our ancient, perhaps hundred thousand-year-old hunter-gatherer genetic nature, and the present, relatively new, five-thousand-year-old culture.

Our genetic human nature changes much slower than culture changes. Culture can't demand more than the genes can deliver---an example of this would be communism, which was a cultural creation with few links to our real human genetic nature.

So what can nurture-culture come up with that will work in harmony with our real genetic human nature? Small states or ethnostates work best with what we actually are. And what we are is individualistic, kin-centered, and group-selecting. The localism and regionalism of small states, or ethnostates, allows the natural bonding dynamics of real human nature to flourish. Then light federalism can help keep harmony in the larger whole of the nation or the world.

Sounds simple but is not easy to create or maintain, given the various shorter-term unhealthy schemes mankind can promote.  As Cattell also pointed out, we need to learn to tell the difference between change from ethical creative deviation, and schemes that are unethical anti-social deviations.