The US biologist Edward O Wilson (1929-2021) is widely known and celebrated as “Darwin’s natural heir”, a title reflecting his foundational work in sociobiology and biodiversity. This extended evolutionary principles into human behaviour and conservation, much like Darwin synthesised natural selection for his era. Wilson was not a direct successor but a visionary scientist who built upon Darwin’s legacy, linking genetics, behaviour, and ecology.
Wilson was a prolific researcher and author, and – much like Darwin – some of his ideas proved controversial. A case in point was his book Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, which argued that all human behaviour was a product of genetic pre-determination, not learned experiences. Published in 1975, it attracted widespread criticism, with some accusing him of racism and sexism. The biologist was never one to shy away from arguing his case and famously had a long-standing professional rivalry and personal falling out with James Watson (co-discoverer of the structure of DNA) that lasted for decades, primarily driven by a clash of scientific fields and personalities at Harvard University. Despite their animosity, the two scientists eventually buried the hatchet. They appeared together in a public event in September 2009 at Harvard, titled “An Intellectual Entente,” where they reflected on their past rivalry. During this debate, Wilson made a statement with has resonated with us as we prepare this end of year review:
“The real problem of humanity is the following: we have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and god-like technology.”
Looking at each of these three messages, the subject of Behavioural Finance has long taught us that Paleolithic emotions – fear, greed, and herd mentality – commonly drive financial market performance and periods of irrationality. Looking beyond this, Wilson argued ‘the selection pressures of hunter-gatherer existence have persisted for over 99 percent of human evolution’ meaning our brains are fundamentally built for life in small, coordinated packs rather than massive, globalised digital civilisations. This fundamental difference is surely a challenge all investors should be thinking about as they formulate their long-term asset allocation plans.
We all know humankind now possesses world-altering powers – god-like technology ranging from nuclear weapons to the ability to modify the human genome, through to the rise of artificial intelligence. Our ability to handle these responsibly is, quite rightly, coming sharply into focus during the second half of this decade.
We believe Wilson’s reference to ‘medieval institutions’ is the most relevant message as we consider the macroeconomic and geopolitical environment moving into 2026. Our systems of governance, societal values and finance are undergoing huge upheaval as they struggle to remain relevant. Moreover, the rules-based world order which has characterised the last 80 years is being reconfigured, at pace, by friends and foes alike.
Might is Right
At the start of 2025, foreign policy watchers warned of an isolationist second Trump administration, with Europe and NATO members quickly made aware the US would be less supportive of the grand Atlantic Alliance than had previously been the case. However, as the year developed world leaders were increasingly forced to operate with a highly interventionist White House that ripped up the old playbook. America First seems to have evolved into America Everywhere, with increased unpredictability*. Or was some of this hiding in plain sight? The US National Security Strategy published in Q4, 2025 is very clear in setting out strategic priorities – to quote:
“The United States must be preeminent in the Western Hemisphere as a condition of our security and prosperity…”
This new era is being increasingly defined by transactional geopolitics. Central to this new calculus is not commercial imperatives but pure power projection. Narrowly defined ‘national interests’ are the common denominator, accompanied by what seems a total and dangerous disregard for the potential blowback and fallout. At the core of this new power calculation is the perceived willingness and ability of counterparties to either meaningfully retaliate or offer appealing sweeteners to ensure protection and support. For those countries playing by the ‘old rules’ – i.e. those constrained by institutions, national values, or public opinion – this is difficult. Countries in possession of chips, critical minerals or other coveted resources, but regarded as lacking the military muscle to defend them, have been put on notice by the recent events in Venezuela.
The Advantages of a Prepared Mind
Aggressive, expansionist and revisionist are now terms that seem equally applicable to Washington, Moscow and Beijing. Where does this leave the UK and Europe? Blaise Metreweli, the newly appointed Chief of MI6, recently made very clear the threat posed by Putin – ‘Our world is more dangerous and contested now than it has been for decades. We are now operating in a space between peace and war.’ Adding that the export of chaos is a feature, not a bug in the Russian approach to international engagement, and the UK should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his methods.
Turning to Europe, 2025 saw the Danes experience threats from both the White House and the Kremlin, and countries like Poland could already be considered to be on a war footing. We should note Russia has demanded that Sweden and Finland withdraw from NATO, and more recently cast doubt on the integrity of Finland’s borders.
Implications for portfolios
At this point we should perhaps pause and reflect that “things are rarely as good as you hope or as bad as you fear”. Despite a year full of geopolitical concerns, this new calendar year begins with numerous asset prices and indices at record highs, having delivered double-digit returns over the last 12 months. Wisdom suggests our perception often exaggerates reality, leading to excessive anxiety about potential negative outcomes and unrealistic expectations for positive ones. This is a reminder to manage emotions, avoid catastrophising, and recognise that most situations are more manageable or moderate than our minds imagine.
A shortlist of geopolitical tail risks includes the growing possibility of direct Russia-NATO conflict; disrupted and/or disputed US midterm elections; renewed outbreak of war in the Middle East; or China taking military action against Taiwan.
As we appear to shift into an era where ‘Might is Right’, and where government intervention is an increasingly important market dynamic, we should remind ourselves that through the longer course of history, it was ever thus. Through our working lives we have managed assets within a largely ‘rules-based’ global environment, but we recognise the ground is shifting, and as we oversee portfolios we are mindful we may already be operating in a changed world.
*Source: The Front Line is Everywhere – Tina Fordham, Fordham Global Foresight December 2025
The views, thoughts and opinions expressed within this article are those of the author, and not those of Capital International Group Limited (Group) and/or any of its subsidiary companies and as such are neither given nor endorsed by the Group or any company within the Group. Information in this article does not constitute investment advice or an offer or an invitation by or on behalf of any company within the Group to buy or sell any product or security or to make a bank deposit. Any reference to past performance is not necessarily a guide to the future. The value of investments may go down as well as up and may be adversely affected by currency fluctuations. The Group, its subsidiary companies, clients, and officers may have a position in, or engage in transactions in any of the investments mentioned. Opinions constitute views as at the date of issue thereof and are subject to change.
