The Mental Origins and the Evolution of Political Order

The paper proposes that the four-component structure of political order consists of state, imagination, rule, and accountability whose mental origins are the social brain, theory of mind, the rational brain, and the empirical brain, respectively. The rational brain and the empirical brain are from the thinking brain. This paper posits that in the evolution of political order, the main function of political order is to pacify changed social structure derived from technological revolution. Therefore, the four technological revolutions (the Upper Paleolithic, Agricultural-Bronze, Iron, and Industrial Revolutions) produce the four changed social structures (linked bands, tribe, mega empire, and modern nation, respectively) whose internal conflicts are pacified by the four political revolutions (the imaginative, hierarchical, thinking, bottom-up political revolutions, respectively) to form the four politics (the imaginative egalitarianism, decentralized hierarchical tribalism, centralized top-down thinking, and multilateral bottom-up thinking politics, respectively). In the competitive West originated from Greece and Middle East, the rule of law is the rational rule of competition among competitors, and the accountability of election is the empirical accountability of competition among competitors. In the cooperative East originated from India and China, the rule of relation is the rational rule of cooperation among kin-friends, and the accountability of professional qualification is the empirical accountability of cooperation among kin-friends. For political order, the two viable politics are competitive liberal democracy based on liberty and cooperative well-off democracy (well-off socialism) based on wellbeing. The direction of political order is middle democracy between liberal democracy and well-off democracy based on the multilateral bottom-up thinking politics.

brain and the empirical brain are the parts of the thinking brain with deliberation, precision, reason. The thinking brain is important to establish proper rule and accountability. State and imagination are derived mostly from the emotional-instinctive brain. Rule and accountability from the thinking brain modify state and imagination from the emotional-instinctive brain. The solid foundation of political order can be built on the mental origins of political order. This paper deals with the evolution of political order. This paper posits that in the evolution of political order, the main function of political order is to pacify changed social structure derived from technological revolution. An initial social structure with simple technology is converted into a transitional social structure with complex technology through technological revolution. Complex technology induces changed network for the production-distribution of complex technology, and produces technology-driven changed social structure. The changed social structure inevitably produces internal conflict, resulting in disordered changed social structure. Such internal conflicted is pacified by pacifying politics as political order derived from political revolution as the equation below.  whose internal conflicts to be pacified by the four political revolutions (the imaginative, hierarchical, thinking, bottom-up political revolutions, respectively) to form the four politics (the imaginative egalitarianism, decentralized hierarchical tribalism, centralized top-down thinking, and multilateral bottom-up thinking politics, respectively) as in Equation (2)

The Mental Origins of Political Order
The paper proposes that the mental origins of the generalized four-component structure of political order consisting of state, imagination, rule, and accountability are the social brain, the theory of mind, the rational brain with priories, and the empirical brain without priories, respectively.

The Social Brain: State
The social brain is used in interacting with other people, planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making, and moderating social behavior. The social brain includes amygdala, orbital frontal cortex, temporal   cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and mirror system as its major components [4].
After lesions to the amygdala, monkeys become socially isolated. The amygdala attaches emotional value to faces, enabling us to recognize expressions such as fear and trustworthiness. Lesions to orbital frontal cortex can also alter social behavior. Neurons in the superior temporal sulcus respond to aspects of faces such as expression and gaze direction. The medial prefrontal cortex is consistently activated when people think about mental states to represent someone else's representation of our own mental state. The mirror system in the brain arises from the observation that the same brain areas are activated when we observe another person experiencing an emotion as when we experience the same emotion ourselves.
The social brain contains instinctive relations to form the default social structure. All social animals have instinctive relations to form the default social structures without training or with little training. The human social brain [3] consists of sociality for instinctive intragroup relations and worldview for instinctive intergroup relations. In the human social brain, sociality for intragroup relations consists of collectivistic, individualistic, interdependent, and generativity relations. Collectivistic relation benefits vulnerable children against neglect by forming kinship group [3] [5] whose relations depend on commitment to a social group rather than reciprocal benefit of individuals. The origin of collectivistic sociality is the social group of caregivers and vulnerable children. The neurotransmitter to promote kin relations in collectivistic sociality is oxytocin, so people feel good when they are with their kin.

Individualistic relation benefits vulnerable individuals against predation by
forming an alliance group [6] [7] [8] whose relations depend on reciprocal benefit of individuals rather than commitment to a social group. The base of individualistic sociality is extensive and complex socialization. For primates, the brain size for individualistic sociality is proportional to the group size and the complexity of socialization. The neurotransmitter to promote alliance in individualistic sociality is endorphins, so people feel good when they have friends.
Interdependent relation benefits vulnerable specialists against handicaps by forming a specialist group from specialists whose relations dependent on existential division of labor [9] [10]. The early hominins formed the interdependent specialist groups consisting of the forest group of homemaker-forager for women and children and the woodland group of explorer-forager for men in the mixed forest-woodland habitat. The handicap was the feet which were still suitable for climbing trees, and not suitable to walk long distance and run fast on the ground especially for pregnant women and small children in woodland area.
Later, the division of labor became gatherer-hunter in open savanna habitat.
Generativity relation benefits future generations by forming multiple-generation group whose relations depend on legacy [11] [12] [13] [14]. Unlike great apes, infertile women have a long life after menopause allows multiple generations to live together. The caring of infertile women after menopause for their grand-Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science children and great-grandchildren is the base of legacy. Therefore, the four sociality relations are collectivistic relation from kin-friends to benefit vulnerable children through commitment, individualistic relation from allies to benefit vulnerable individuals through reciprocity, interdependent relation from specialists to benefit vulnerable specialists through division of labor, and generativity relation from multiple generations to benefit vulnerable future generations through legacy as in Table 2. These instinctive intragroup relations produce the default social structure with kin group, alliance group, division of labor, and generational assistance.
In the social brain, worldview is for intergroup relations based on ingroup and outgroup. In ingroup, individuals have similar interests and outlooks, and produce the feeling of connection among them [15]. Individuals in outgroup outside the boundary of one's own group are different in interests and outlook, and produce the feeling of zero-sum competition toward outgroup. The proper behavior as morality toward ingroup is cooperation, whereas the proper behavior toward outgroup is zero-sum competition [16]. Such ingroup-outgroup boundary instinct appears even in infants at few months old [17]. Worldview relations include territorial relation for ingroup-outgroup intergroup with a clear boundary between ingroup and outgroup, competitive relation for outgroup-like intergroup without a clear boundary between ingroup and outgroup, and cooperative relation for ingroup-like intergroup without clear boundary between ingroup and outgroup as shown in Table 3. These instinctive intergroup relations produce the default social structure with respect to boundary. For competitive worldview, there are win and loss in competition, and for cooperative worldview, there are fulfillment and nonfulfillment of role in cooperation

Theory of Mind: Imagination
Political imagination is the imagination about an imaginary world which has its own mind. The imaginary world includes imaginary common guardian supernatural  According to a PET study, theory of mind activates the medial prefrontal node to handle the mental state of the self, the superior temporal sulcus to detect the behavior of other animals and analyzes the goals and outcomes of this behavior, and the inferior frontal region to maintain representations of actions and goals [18]. According to Kapogiannis and Deshpande in the functional MRI study of the brains of both self-declared religious and non-religious individuals, individuals with stronger theory of mind activity were found to be more religious [19].
Thinking about God activates brain regions associated with theory of mind [20].
Autistic individuals with problems in imaginative capacities and pretend plays are incapable of theory of mind [21] [22] [23]. Autism with the deficits in theory of mind is linked to lower belief in God [24]. Robust religion is unique to humans, because robust theory of mind is unique to humans [25]. According to Maurice Bloch [26], the first widespread human religion was derived from the imagination to produce imaginary female figurines and imaginary cave paintings to helps them to survive under existential pressure at the time of the Upper Paleolithic Revolution [27]. As shown in the previous paper [24], theory of mind was not evolved originally to accommodate religious behaviors. Theory of mind was evolved originally to accommodate interdependent division of labor between the forest specialist group (women and children) and the woodland specialist group (men) in early hominins who lived the mixed forest-woodland habitat. To complement each other's work without interfering each other's work, one specialist group had to recognize (imagine) that the other specialist group existed to think for themselves and to do different works. The result was theory of mind which is to recognize (imagine) that the others exist to think for themselves. (The forest-woodland groups became the hunter-gatherer groups for the Homo species in the savanna habitat.) Under normal condition, specialists in division of labor were real. Since theory of mind is closely related to imagination, humans under existential pressure invented imaginary specialists as imaginary agents who existed to think for themselves and to do different work in imaginary division of labor to enhance survival chance, resulting in the religious relief of stress and anxiety to enhance the survival chance of individuals [28]. Under existential pressure, such political and theistic imagination can also be the reinforcement of social bonds to enhance the survival chance of social group [29] [30].

The Rational Brain and the Empirical Brain: Rule and Accountability
Rationalism maintains that some human knowledge is gained through a priori (prior to experience) or innate idea as distinct from sense experience. Empiric-Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science ism maintains that human knowledge comes from experiences gathered through the five senses. According to empiricists, our learning is based on our observation-experience. Empiricism is an important part of the scientific method for verification because theories and hypotheses must be observed and tested to be considered accurate. Rationalism and empiricism are the direct opposite of each other. Rationalism is the belief in innate ideas, reason, and deduction, while empiricism is the belief in sense perception, induction, and that there are no innate ideas. Both rationalism and empiricism are derived from the thinking brain with deliberation, precision, and reason. The rational brain with priories is for rule, while the empirical brain without priories is for accountability (verification).
The political brain includes the emotional-instinctive brain, the subjective thinking brain, and the objective thinking brain [31]. The emotional-instinctive brain locates in the subcortex and the limbic regions, and the neurotransmitters include endorphins for individualistic sociality and oxytocin for collectivistic sociality. Emotion and instinct are blunt and black-and-white reactions without discerning. They occur extremely rapidly before conscious thoughts. The subjective thinking brain uses reasoning to defend the view derived from instinct and emotion against the opposite point of view. The subjective thinking brain locates in the orbital frontal cortex for the processing of emotions, the anterior cingulate for conflict resolution, the posterior cingulate for making judgments about moral accountability, and the ventral striatum for reward and pleasure. The neurotransmitters are glutamine and dopamine. The objective thinking brain locates in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for objective reasoning and analysis without bias. The neurotransmitter is glutamine. Political brain is described in Table 4.
Objective thinking plays a limited role in political decisions. According to Drew Westen [31], only between 0.5 and 3 percent of the most important political decisions utilize objective thinking. Ideally, the rational brain for rule and the empirical brain for accountability are derived from objective thinking brain.

Realistic Egalitarianism Politics, Imaginative Egalitarianism Politics, and Decentralized Hierarchical Tribalism Politics
This paper posits that in the evolution of political order, the main function of political order is to pacify changed social structure derived from technological revolution. Therefore, the four technological revolutions (the Upper Paleolithic,

Realistic Egalitarianism Politics: Band Social Structure
The evolution of political order starts from realistic egalitarianism politics with the band social structure around 200,000 years ago to the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic Period about 40,000 years ago. A band society of hunter-gatherers is the simplest form of human society. A band generally consists of a small group ranging from 30 to 50 people [32]. Their power structure is egalitarian. The cooperative behaviors in a band, however, are not entirely derived from kin relation. Hill and colleagues found that the bands in their dataset are not composed mainly of close kin [33]. Bands are mainly composed of individuals either distantly related by kinship and/or marriage or unrelated altogether. In their sample of 32 societies, primary kin generally make up less than 10% of a residential band. They found that hunter-gatherers display a unique social structure where 1) either sex may disperse or remain in their natal group, 2) adult brothers and sisters often co-reside, and 3) most individuals in residential groups are genetically unrelated. Therefore, in terms of the social brain, individualistic sociality to form alliance group is much more important than collectivistic sociality to form kinship group for the human band social structure. Instinctive interdependent relation provided the social structure for division of labor in terms of hunters and gatherers. Instinctive generativity provided the social structure of infertile grandparents as caregivers. The worldview was territorial worldview with a clear boundary. The human social brain can manage the social group size of about 150 people (Dunbar's Number) [34], so people in a band from 30 to 50 people can deal with several bands at the same time.

Decentralized Hierarchical Tribalism Politics: Tribe Social Structure
The worship and high gods. Ancestor worship is defined as belief that the spirits of ancestors remain active in another realm where they may influence the living and can be influenced by the living [41]. Ancestor worship allowed the hierarchical social structure to be inherited. "High gods" is defined as single, all-powerful creator deities who may be active in human affairs and supportive of human morality [42]. Ancestor worship and high gods appointed hierarchical social structures. Each tribe had one dominant ancestor or high god.
A single tribe was in the agricultural-bronze technology driven changed social structure containing many other tribes. The result was the decentralized union of hierarchical tribes. The union could be the alliance of tribes or a mid-size overlord empire with a number of client tribes. At that time, no single tribe was strong enough from available technologies to centralize the powers in the union.
The lack of centralized power was manifested in decentralized hierarchical tribalism politics with polytheism. Therefore, the social structure change to the tribe social structure derived from the Agricultural-Bronze Revolution had the internal conflict due to egalitarianism which was pacified by the hierarchical political revolution to produce the peaceful tribe social structure with decentralized hierarchical tribalism politics in the equation below.
The actual rulers were local tribal chiefs. Each tribe had its own deity under the chief deity, resulting in polytheism. In polytheism, the chief deity was typically remote, and people worshiped their local deities. One typical example of polytheism is the polytheism in Canaan. Canaan, an ancient region between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean, located in the Levant region of present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Israel. The chief deity was El. During the Bronze Age and the early Iron Age, each tribe had its own local tribal deity under El as el in the word of Israel [43]. Israel and Judah shared Yahweh as their tribal god.
The various tribal gods were more or less equal. Because of the intermarriages and alliance among these tribes, each tribe had altars for the national gods of neighboring tribes. According to archeological evidence [44], during this time, idols represented other religions were found commonly in Jewish homes. On the whole, Mark S. Smith shows how Israelite polytheism was a feature of Israelite religion until the seventh and sixth centuries [45]. In terms of political order, decentralized hierarchical tribalism politics has state and imagination components.

Centralized Top-Down Thinking Politics: Mega Empire Social Structure
The Iron Age (the Iron Revolution) started between 1200 BC and 600 BC, depending on the region. Iron is tougher and lighter than bronze and was used to make much better sharp objects like spears, swords, and sharp tools than bronze.
The source for iron was much more abundant than bronze. Through the Iron Revolution, the decentralized union of hierarchical states with agricultural-bronze technologies was converted to the transitional social structure with iron technology. The iron technology produced changed network of the production-distribution for iron technology with the world's urban population nearly doubled in the years 600 to 450 BC [46]. The changed network led to the iron technology-driven changed social structure which was a mega centralized empire. The state with iron technology was strong enough with enough destructive power of iron weapons to centralize powers in the transformation of decentralized union of hierarchical states into a mega centralized empire. The earliest proto-mega centralized empire is the Hittite Empire based on the advantages entailed by its high advancement on ironworking at the time [47]. The Hittite Empire was not very large, and did not last long. The earliest mega centralized Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science empires were the neo-Assyrian empire (934-609 BC) and the neo-Babylonian empire (612-539 BC). In some regions, such as China, the late bronze period and the early iron period were overlapped, so mega empires were formed in the late bronze period, and completely solidified in the iron period.
Under a centralized mega empire, different cultures under different standards and forms were in conflict, resulting in the disordered mega centralized empire.
Such conflicting cultures simply overwhelmed the emotional-instinctive political brain, resulting in the rises of the thinkers with the thinking political brains.
They found the rational brain for rule and the empirical brain for accountability For the mega empire social structure, a powerful emperor could eliminate boundary easily, so boundary was not clear, resulting in competitive worldview or cooperative worldview without a clear boundary. For competitive worldview to have winners and losers, most people are competitors. In competitive worldview, to rule competitors, force is necessary for a government to settle disputes among competitors, and to be accountable among competitors, a ruler has to be a winner among competitors. As a result, in competitive centralized top-down thinking politics with the thinking brain and competitive worldview, the rational rule of competition among competitors is the orderly rule by law, and the empirical accountability of competition among competitors is the orderly accountability by election. A government has to use force to enforce the orderly rule of law among competitors, and a ruling government has to be a winner in the orderly accountability by election among competitors. Under the rule by law among competitors in the top-down politics, everyone did not have an equal chance to compete in legal court. Under the accountability by election among competitors in the top-down politics, everyone did not have equal chance to compete in the accountability by election.
For cooperative worldview, most people are kin-friends. In cooperative worldview, to rule kin-friends, morality is necessary for a government to establish cooperative relations among kin-friends, and to be accountable among kin-friends, a ruler has to be a professional to manage the group of kin-friends. In the West originated from Greece and Middle East, competitive worldview dominated cooperative worldview, and in the East originated from India and China, cooperative worldview dominated competitive worldview. Instinctive worldview affects perceptions. For cooperative worldview, the perception that focuses in cooperative ingroup is "relationship perception" to build relationship among members in ingroup, while for competitive worldview, the perception that focuses in competitive outgroup is "identity perception" to differentiate the identity of outgroup from the identity of ingroup. With instinctive cooperative relationship perception from cooperative worldview, the Easterners see a world of continuous and connected objects with relationships, while with instinctive discrete identity perception from competitive worldview, the Westerners see a world of discrete and unconnected objects in categories based on similarity and difference. The Westerners pay attention to the focal object separated from its surrounding based on discrete perception, while the Easterners attend more broadly to the overall surroundings and to the relations between the object and the field [48] [49]. Therefore, in the competitive West originated from Greece Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science and Middle East, the rational rule of competition among competitors was the rule by law, and the empirical accountability of competition among competitors was the accountability by election. In the cooperative East originated from India and China, the rational rule of cooperation among kin-friends was the rule by relation, and the empirical accountability of cooperation among kin-friends was the accountability by professional qualification.

The Rule and the Accountability in China
In China, cooperative worldview is represented by Confucianism, and competitive worldview is represented by Legalism. Confucius (551-479 BC) was born in effectively independent state of Lu notionally controlled by the kings of Zhou during the Spring and Autumn period (771-476 BC). The states were at war with each other, and high government officers within a state were at war with each other. During this Hundred Schools of Thought era, many schools of philosophy offered rulers advice to govern the states. Confucius travelled to many states to offer advice. To Confucianism, the explicit expression of the rule by relation is li that is the ritual propriety to express the different manners toward the different relations, in particular, the "five relations": ruler and subject, parent and child, husband and wife, elder and younger sibling, and friend and friend. To Confucianism, people are mostly kin-friends. Li is derived from the deliberate thinking brain to control the impulsive emotional-instinctive brain. The difference between civilized society and barbarian society is li. Each relation in li is supported by different aspects of morality, so each human interaction in manner and in motivation is supported by morality and the thinking brain.
The relations in Confucianism are derived from the instinctive relations from the social brain, including sociality for intragroup relations (collectivistic sociality, individualistic sociality, interdependent sociality, and generativity sociality) and worldview for intergroup relations (cooperative worldview, competitive worldview, and territorial worldview). Collectivistic sociality is for kin group whose principle is commitment. In Confucian morality for kin group, parent-child relation involves care and teaching from parent and filial piety from child. Husband-wife and elder-younger siblings show respect, responsibility, and loyalty for each other. Individualistic sociality is for alliance group whose principle is reciprocity. The Confucian morality for alliance group involves ren (benevolence), yi (uprightness), xin (faithfulness), shu (reciprocity), and li (propriety). Interdependent sociality is for specialist group whose principle is division of labor. The Confucian morality for division of labor involves the specific responsibility of each specific role. Duke Jing of Qi asked Confucius about government. Confucius replied: "Let the ruler be a ruler, minister be a minister, father be a father, son be a son." (Analects 12:11) Generativity sociality is for multiple-generation group whose principle is legacy. The Confucian morality for generativity is ancestor veneration to keep the memory of many generations. For intergroup relations (worldviews), Confucianism encourages cooperative worldview. Cooperative worldview is expressed as harmony. "In practicing the rules of pro-Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science priety, it is harmony that is prized." (Analects 1:12) Harmony is prized among the differences. Confucius said: "Noble persons seek harmony but not sameness. Petty persons seek sameness but not harmony." (Analects 13:23).
Han Feizi (280-233 BC) was one of China's most prominent legalists. One of Han's main concerns was how to prevent uprisings and treason, and how to govern in such a way that all subjects will obey the ruler. To Legalism, people are mostly competitors fighting against one another. Li in Confucianism is equivalent to fa (law) in Legalism. Fa is derived from the deliberate thinking brain to control the impulsive emotional-instinctive brain. The legalists rely on the force of sanctions to obtain obedience to and compliance with the law, and therefore law had to be adjusted by the rule by relation. All high administrators in government had to be professionally qualified through the national examination system and the national promotion system. All princes had to be educated and Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science trained to be professional rulers. There was no competitive election system, because such partisan competition was considered immoral in the cooperative society. The Chinese word for party is dang which has a bad connotation as a group of factional-minded people. Both Legalism and Confucianism endorsed the concept of absolute monarchy. They never questioned the legitimacy of the imperial idea. Therefore, they basically followed top-down politics.

The Rule and the Accountability in India
In India, the rule by relation was the Varna ( Varna is actually not equivalent to caste which is a Western word. "Varna" means one that is adopted by choice. "Caste" means one that is adopted by birth.
In Vedic culture, everyone is considered to be born as Shudra.

The Rule and the Accountability in the West
In the Middle East, monotheism for centralized top-down thinking politics cen- Empire adopted Christianity as the state religion. Islam is another personal monotheism suitable for mega centralized empires.
In the West originated from the Middle East and Greece, the top-down rule by law is a method that governments and people in power use to shape the competitive behavior of people as competitors. The top-down rule by law usually has the end goal of psychologically or forcefully persuading people to agree with policy decisions they otherwise would not agree with. The rule by law is derived from the rational brain with deliberation, precision, and reason to control the impulsive emotional-instinctive brain, resulting in rational competition instead of impulsive competition. For example, the 10 commandments in the Bible are as follows.
1) You shall have no other Gods before me 2) You shall not make for yourselves an idol 3) You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God 4) Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy 5) Honor your father and your mother 6) You shall not murder 7) You shall not commit adultery 8) You shall not steal 9) You shall not give false testimony 10) You shall not covet The first four commandments are for competitive gods. The fifth commandment is for competitive parents and children. The other five commandments are for the competitions for life, love, property, favoritism, and good thing. The Bible also mentions the rule by relation in Matthew 22:37-40, Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." Therefore, according to Jesus, the rule by relation should dominate the rule by law, as Jesus himself transformed the rule by law into the rule by relation through his sacrificial death and resurrection.
Aristotle recognized that the rule by law required the separation of powers, including legislative branch to make the rule by law, the executive branch to enforce the rule by law, and the judicial branch where individual judges base their decisions solely on facts and law of individual cases independently of either the executive or legislative powers. This separation of powers for the rule by law served as a direct model of government for the writers of the American constitution.
The top-down accountability by competitive election involves only the elite competitors at a low percentage of total population. The accountability by election is derived from the empirical brain with deliberation, precision, and reason to control the impulsive emotional-instinctive brain, resulting in the accountability by winning election instead of the accountability by winning the battle. The accountability by election is elite competitive democracy. It was practiced in Athens and Rome. Around 460 BC, Athens established the constitution which is called a democracy because it respects the interests not of the minority but of the whole group of elite competitors. When it is a question of settling private disputes, every elite competitor is equal before the law. Elite competitors probably accounted for 10% -20% of the polis population with about 3000 active participants in politics. Of this group, perhaps about 100 wealthiest and most influential elite competitors dominated the political arena both in front of the assembly and behind the scenes in private conspiratorial political meetings and groups. The contemporary critics of democracy pointed out that competitive democracy could be too easily swayed emotionally by a good orator or popular leaders (the demagogues).
Plato's ideal government is a mixed government which combined the tyrannical Persian Empire and the purely democratic city-state of Athens. The Roman Republic (509-27 BC) combined both tyranny and democracy. The Republic was divided into the three basic parts including elected non-hereditary magistrates, a Senate to advise and consent, and popular assemblies. Instead of a king, and to guard against despotism, the Republic chose two consuls as executive magistrates appointed by the popular assembly. The two consuls represented tyranny. The Senate served as an advisory body to the consuls. Throughout most of its existence, the Roman Senate remained the domain of the wealthy. It was the embodiment of oligarchy, a lawmaking body governed by the aristocracy. The democratic part of Roman government was in the form of assemblies, in which the Roman people directly elected executive magistrates. The Roman Republic served as a direct model of government for the writers of the American constitution.

Multilateral Bottom-Up Thinking Politics: Modern Nation Social Structure
The The internal political power structure of a modern nation is much more diffused than the internal political power structure of a mega empire because of ubiquitous individual rights. As a result, the actual ruling class consists of bottom-up thinkers and all people. The bottom-up thinkers during the Industrial Revolution include Abraham Lincoln to promote equal political right for all races and Karl Marx to promote equal political right for all people to become a classless society. Their principles have become the foundations for the democracy for all races and people. The ruling class for the prehistoric band society was Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science people in a small social group without using imagination and the thinking brain. The ruling class for the modern nation is also people in a very large social group with imagination and the thinking brain. The class struggle and conflict always exist in human history, but with the high concentration of power due to technology, it was very hard for the lower class to win. The Industrial Revolution requires all people to be literate and educated, resulting in the diffusion of the political power structure of a modern nation. The

The Competitive Bottom-Up Thinking Politics
The 1) The law is superior to all members of society, including government officials vested with either executive, legislative, or judicial power.
2) The law is known, stable, and predictable. Laws are applied equally to all persons in like circumstances. Laws are sufficiently defined and government discretion sufficiently limited to ensure the law is applied non-arbitrarily.
3) Members of the society have the right to participate in the creation and refinement of laws that regulate their behaviors.
4) The law is just and protects the human rights and dignity of all members of society. Legal processes are sufficiently robust and accessible to ensure enforcement of these protections by an independent legal profession.

The Cooperative Bottom-Up Thinking Politics
The principles in the cooperative bottom-up thinking politics are the rule of relation and the accountability of professional qualification bottom-up and equally for everyone. The cooperative bottom-up thinking politics is well-off democracy based on wellbeing. The top-down rule by relation is a method that governments and people in power use to shape the cooperative behavior of people as kin-friends.
In the bottom-up rule of relation, all people, including people in power and people at the lowest level of citizenship, are all equal under the relation itself. No one is excluded from the relation, and any relation that is excluded should be equally repaired across the board, regardless of status in society or local community. Rational competitors engage in rational checks and balances, while rational kin-friends engage in rational division of labor. Kin-friends are happy to be included in wellbeing, while competitors are happy in liberty to compete. For the cooperative bottom-up thinking politics, the citizens are kin-friends, and to be included in the wellbeing among kin-friends is the goal of the constitution. To achieve the goal of inclusion of all people in wellbeing, the rule of relation in terms of everyone's role and effort is under continuous examination, openness, and reform. The foundation of the rule of relation is in family and community. Therefore, the rule of relation in family and community is heavily promoted to make sure people understand and appreciate family root and community root and to behave properly in the rule of relation in family and community. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science

The Multilateral Bottom-Up Thinking Politics
The current global politics is multilateral with multiple nations and political systems. Since the end of the Cold War in early 1990s, competitive liberal democracy has become a major political system as described in "The End of History" [54] by Fukuyama who claimed that the human history was ended with liberal democracy and private free market economy. However, competitive liberal democracy has not dominated the world. According to the Democracy Index by the Economist Intelligence Unit (the world's leading resource for economic and business research) [55], in 2018, only 20 countries (4.5% of the world population) are "full democracies", 55 (43.2%) are "flawed democracies", 39 (16.7%) are "hybrid regimes (illiberal democracy)", and 53 (35.6%) are "authoritarian regimes". Full democracies are nations (mostly Northern and Western European countries) where civil liberties and basic political freedoms are not only res-Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science pected, but also reinforced by a political culture conducive to the thriving of democratic principles. Flawed democracies are nations (mostly the USA, Central European, Southern American, and the Eastern Asian countries) where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honored but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement). Hybrid regimes are nations (mostly African, Central Asian, and Eastern European countries) where consequential irregularities exist in elections, regularly preventing them from being fair and free. Authoritarian regimes are nations (many locations) where political pluralism has vanished or is extremely limited. These nations are often absolute monarchies or dictatorships, may have some conventional institutions of democracy but with meager significance, infringements and abuses of civil liberties are commonplace, elections (if they take place) are not fair and free, the media is often state-owned or controlled by groups associated with the ruling regime, the judiciary is not independent, and there are omnipresent censorship and suppression of governmental criticism. The 2017 Democracy index registered the worst year for global democracy since 2010-11 in the aftermath of the global economic and financial crisis. In 2016, the United States was downgraded from a full democracy to a flawed democracy.
One major reason for such multiple political systems is different degrees of industrialization in different countries. The bottom-up thinking politics is a product of the Industrial Revolution. With a low degree of industrialization, some countries still practically practice the decentralized hierarchical tribalism politics without significant rule and accountability from the thinking brain. The hierarchical tribalism politics in the modern nation social structure produces a chaotic regime or authoritarian regime as described in the Democracy Index by the Economist Intelligence Unit. Some countries practice the top-down thinking politics for only the upper-class people. The top-down thinking politics for a top-down society in the modern nation social structure produces an unfair election to favor the upper-class people as hybrid democracy in the Democracy Index. Recently, in highly industrialized countries, such as the USA, the ubiquitous social media generates social media tribalism where the groups of politically homogeneous people live separately in social media [56]. In social media tribalism, people use mainly the emotional-instinctive brain without the thinking brain for rule and accountability. This social media tribalism is a major reason for the USA downgraded from a full democracy to a flawed democracy in the Democracy Index. Terrorism is the product of violent tribalism mainly from social media in industrialized countries.
All major traditional religions in their original forms are the centralized top-down thinking religions derived from the religions for real or imaginary mega empires. They use both the emotional-instinctive brain and the thinking brain. In the USA, evangelical Christianity is a Bible-based religion in its original form as a centralized top-down thinking religion, so it favors the centralized top-down thinking politics to follow strictly top-down Christian tradition. Mainline Christianity is a multilateral bottom-up thinking religion for multilateralism and Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science all people, so it prefers the multilateral bottom-up thinking politics. Extreme Christianity is a tribal religion using mostly the emotional-instinctive brain, so it favors the hierarchical tribalism politics. Different religions follow mostly different politics.

The Evolution of Political Order in China
The

The Evolution of Political Order in Israel
The first legendary leader of Israel with the orderly decentralized hierarchical  Table 5.

Summary
The paper proposes that the four-component structure of political order consists of state, imagination, rule, and accountability whose mental origins are the social brain, theory of mind, the rational brain, and the empirical brain, respectively. This paper posits that in the evolution of political order, the main function of political order is to pacify changed social structure derived from technological revolution. Therefore, the four technological revolutions (the Upper Paleolithic, Agricultural-Bronze, Iron, and Industrial Revolutions) produce the four changed social structures (linked bands, tribe, mega empire, and modern nation, respectively) whose internal conflicts to be pacified by the four political revolutions According to Dunbar, the size of the human social brain is adapted to the manageable group size of about 150 people (Dunbar's Number) which was the group size of the prehistoric hunter-gatherer society dependent only on state derived from the social brain. The politics was realistic egalitarianism politics with bad as social structure and people as actual rulers. After the Upper Paleolithic Revolution, the prehistoric band social structure was converted into linked band social structure by the use of complex tools. The internal conflict resulted from linked bands with group size much larger than 150 people was pacified by the imaginative political revolution through religious imagination derived from theory of mind which was originally used for division of labor. The politics was imaginative egalitarianism politics with people as actual rulers. After the Agricultural-Bronzed Revolution, the linked band social structure was converted into the tribe social structure. The internal conflict from the hierarchical tribe social structure was pacified by the hierarchical political revolution. The politics was decentralized hierarchical tribalism politics with tribal chiefs as actual rulers.
After the Iron Revolution, the tribe social structure was converted into the centralized mega empire social structure. The internal conflict from the multiple tribes was pacified by the thinking political revolution through the rational brain for rule and the empirical brain for accountability. The thinking brain was originally used to deal with difficult problems. The politics was centralized top-down thinking politics with thinkers as actual rulers. After the Industrial Revolution, the empire social structure is converted into the modern nation social structure.
The conflict from rise of individual rights is pacified by the bottom-up political revolution. The politics is the multilateral bottom-up thinking politics with people as actual rulers.
In the competitive West originated from Greece and Middle East, the rule of law is the rational rule of competition among competitors, and the accountability of election is the empirical accountability of competition among competitors.
In the cooperative East originated from India and China, the rule of relation is the rational rule of cooperation among kin-friends, and the accountability of professional qualification is the empirical accountability of cooperation among kin-friends. For political order, the two viable politics are competitive liberal democracy based on liberty and cooperative well-off democracy (well-off socialism) based on wellbeing from cooperation. The summary of the evolution of political order is in Table 6.

Conclusion
The origin of human behaviors is the human brain. Human behaviors are controlled by human cultures which are the product of human cultural evolution.
D. Y. Chung Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science Consequently, the mental origins and the evolution of political order improve the comprehension of current political order and the projection of future political order. The Industrial Revolution also has produced completely new complicated and confusing issues. The three important complicated and confusing issues are the artificial sociality as social media, the artificial brain as artificial intelligence, and global warming. Humans have not dealt with the artificial sociality as social media which is distance-independent, time-independent, and nearly invisible. Humans can recognize and control a normal social group, but it is very hard to recognize and control a social media social group which is distance-independent, time-independent, and nearly invisible. In liberal democracy, uncontrolled invisible social media is dishonest and destructive in terms of fake news (rumor) Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science and terrorism. The artificial brain is artificial intelligence which is much faster, more precise, more reliable, and higher capacity in memory than the human brain. The artificial brains gradually replace the human brains in many areas, resulting in the great changes in employment. The global warming derived from the Industrial Revolution has become increasingly disruptive, and has produced serious social and environmental problems. Uncontrolled artificial sociality as social media, artificial brain as artificial intelligent, and global warming are harmful to human wellbeing. The two viable multilateral bottom-up thinking politics are cooperative well-off democracy based on wellbeing and competitive liberal democracy based on liberty. The world gradually recognizes that to control properly artificial sociality as social media, artificial brain as artificial intelligent, and global warming from harming human wellbeing, the middle democracy in between cooperative well-off democracy and competitive liberal democracy is necessary. Therefore, the direction of political order is middle democracy between liberal democracy and well-off democracy based on the multilateral bottom-up thinking politics.