Even conservatives confuse ethnocentrism with supremacy and imperialism

Even the paleoconservatives, the best of the conservatives, confuse ethnocentrism with supremacy, imperialism, and even Nazism. Real conservatism, deep conservatism, affirms ethnopluralism, that is, regions and states set aside for the protection and flourishing of different ethnic cultures, and denies supremacy and imperialism.

Who benefits from confusing ethnocentrism with supremacy and imperialism? Both international capitalism and socialism have benefited, as well as various powerful special interest lobby groups, at least in the short term. In the U.S. real conservatives should be spending there time in trying to figure out how the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states can conservatively accommodate ethnopluralist states and regions.

Ethnopluralism is the instinctive and reasonable way to include real human nature in political philosophy, since real human nature remains kin-centered, ethnocentric, and primarily group-selecting, along with other traditional traits, such as being gender-defined and heterosexual marriage-making. Common sense and the evolutionary sciences have been telling us this since the dawn of human history. These are bonds rooted in biology and traditional culture and men are not “free” to reject what they are biologically---why would they want to?! In modern life, both liberals, and less so conservatives, have attempted to denature man with disastrous results.

Religion shares some of the blame for the denaturing of man, in the spiritual non-materialism and universalism it has espoused, which is why I believe theological materialism is the transformation---not rejection---of religion needed. Long-lasting civilizations ultimately depend on the sacred values and virtues of religion.