Monday, September 24, 2018
Nature isn't enough for many theologians and philosophers. What utter arrogance. Nature created and developed what they are, including their religions, their spirituality, and their supercilious absolutes.
They define their highest values and moralities as beyond nature, and they define human nature as something nature doesn't recognize, which vastly underestimates nature.
Although humans can become neurotic or psychotic enough to be suicidal, it is impossible to shake off the demands of nature, why would we want to?
Even altruism, the basis of most traditional values and morality, is grounded in advancing the gene pool which we are related to. Granted, that limits the reach of "unselfish" concern for others at about the ethnic group, but that is no good reason to invent a spiritual universal altruism which does not exist, especially since there are better ways than Marxism or ascetic monasteries to help people live together more harmoniously, such as an ethnopluralism of ethnostates which protects the people and the states against marauding empires.
The zenith of most definitions of power and greatness is defined as Godly or as Godhood, but Godhood is evolved to in nature by way of the material evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood! We don't even lose Godhood or religion when we lose arrogant spiritualism or bogus idealism!
I suspect that nature is working unconsciously, or sometimes consciously, with the inventors of Marxism, ascetic monasteries, etc. as a way to advance the practitioners of Marxism, ascetic monasteries, etc.
The Great Spiritual Blockade against life materially evolving toward Godhood will one day end and we may then say as Shakespeare had Puck saying: "Shall we their fond pageant see? Lord, what fools these mortals be!"
Sunday, September 23, 2018
Material evolution is like jazz or classical improvisation which does not reject the great music of the past but improvises new versions of the classics. That is the real definition of order. That also defines conservatism and not a traditionalism that refuses to adapt or change or spends too much time harkening back to some golden age.
If I were to accept the standard idea of the diabolical, which most religions use to scare their followers into following their dictates, and if I was to accept the definition of the diabolical as being separated from "the order," I would define true order as the path of natural evolution, which means changing while keeping the best of the past. The diabolical might then be defined as blocking material evolution with a spiritualism that does not approve of the material world or of material evolution.
But most importantly, real Godhood and religion are not lost if we affirm a supermaterial Godhood evolved to in the material world. The "triumph over evil" fundamentally becomes the triumph over the dark cloud of asceticism and spiritualism which has blocked material evolution to real Godhood. Morality and values are ultimately involved in helping not hindering the evolution of material life toward supermaterial Godhood.
Saturday, September 22, 2018
Inspired by the models or pattern-making of Hegel, I define "faith" as projecting the realities of the natural world and the world of science into the utmost future. As I said yesterday, in theological materialism I see evolution moving inevitably in a pattern, even though it has its random elements, and the pattern has a discernible direction, in spite of instances of stagnation and retreat, toward higher and higher more effective living forms, ending in supermaterial Godhood. "Faith" derives from projecting the realities of the natural world and the world of science into that future.
That faith can add to the noble way of overcoming selfishness and being-for-itself as well as overcoming anthropomorphism in predicting the future. But perhaps even more importantly we can avoid having faith in an absolute spiritualism which removes itself from the realities of the natural world and the world of science---alas, even Hegel couldn't avoid that kind of faith.
That is also the rational, and instinctive, way to identify the individual with the future of the group or the collective---I hesitate to identify with the "Absolute" mainly because I don't think evolution ever ends, there are always Gods evolving and arriving at the zenith of success in survival and reproduction.
Friday, September 21, 2018
Godhood is not lost if the material world is all that exists because the material world evolves to Godhood
If the material world is all that there is (which includes the supermaterial world) this does not mean that the world is a nihilistic void or a horror story, as the spiritualist's want us to believe. Even Godhood is not lost if the material world is all that exists because the material world evolves to Godhood, with or without our help, although our help could speed up a very slow process (eg. the genetic sciences) and prevent many wrong turns that are damaging to life.
The horror story of Satan has been conjured up to define the fate of the world if the world doesn't bend the knee to sacred spiritualism. What is sacred is the material world evolving to supermaterial Godhood. Even science, one of the marvels of man, is afraid to posit the Godhood goal of material evolution---I suppose they don't want to give any credence to religion at all or to there being a direction to the random evolution they prefer. I see evolution moving inevitably in a pattern, even though it has its random elements, and the pattern has a discernible direction, in spite of instances of stagnation and retreat, toward “higher and higher more effective living forms,”as Cattell once put it.
And the moral world is also not lost if the material world is all that there is. Traditional religious values and morality originally came from the natural material world. The evolutionary science of sociobiology has showed us that human nature evolved in the material world to be kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection creating altruism as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection; religious views of human nature and morality look much the same as that, although human nature is also ethnocentric and even xenophobic which the universalism of spiritualism could not accept.
We can say goodbye to Satan and to those who tell us that without spiritualism the material world leads only to a nihilistic void---that is the real horror story. If the world is a battleground between the forces of materialism and spiritualism, only a very few materialists are applying their greatest argument or armament against the spiritualists, which is the path of material evolution to real Godhood---a Great Spiritual Blockade has been put up against it.
Thursday, September 20, 2018
Real cultural altruism is not produced by libertarian individualism or by universalist Marxism but by an ethnopluralism of ethnostates
Altruism, unselfish concern for others, originated and remains working in human nature as bonding best with those who share the same genetic pool as oneself, that way altruism helps advance one own related genes, so it's not quite an unselfish as we think it is.
It is through the group, that is, the ethnic/racial group (leftist boo) that the individual acquires the reality of real social bonding after the alienation of both libertarian individualism and collectivist/universalist Marxism.
We move beyond the reality of standard human nature and altruism when we move beyond the natural altruism of the ethnic/racial group. We did evolve the abnormal ability to occasionally move beyond natural ethnic altruism for times when we might need to, say, bond with earth allies who are not closely related to protect ourselves from unearthly extraterrestrial invaders, but that is abnormal hyper-altruism not evolved for normal living in natural human conditions.
Healthy human culture needs to rescue us from the alienation of our bogus culturally Marxist societies as well as from libertarian hyper-individualism, by declaring that ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all (rightist boo) are not "evil" but are liberating.
This is the tradition that conservatives as well as liberals need to return to if they really want people to show "unselfish' concern for others. The bogus cultural Marxism we live under has alienated us, tore us apart, and increasingly caused civil unrest and eventually civil war between naturally competing groups.
As is said here often an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could even be established legally in the United States by adapting our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected from each other, or from marauding imperial forces, by a lighter form of mainly protective federalism.
I do believe we will eventually get-up-and-go to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates voluntarily and rationally (which I advocate) or unvoluntarily and violently (which I don't advocate) because it is a return to what we actually are as human beings.
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
There isn't a real difference between the subject and the object, just as there isn't a difference between materialism and spiritualism, and here is why: they are material or supermaterial subjects/objects evolved to different levels of evolution, and there is no real spiritual.
In the past God and the spiritual have been only expressions of the states of the material mind and body, with ascetics experiencing bodily bliss from blocking all material desires and calling that bliss "god." And philosophers have conjured up thought-games that falsely define "ideas" as beyond the material body, or spiritual. There is no separation between the material world and the "eternal" other than differences in levels of material evolution, and it has been human wish-fulfillment to call it so.
This means that the philosophy of theological materialism can describe real Godhood without the usual fictions and without requiring the false separation between religion and science, which can and should join together. But both religion and science will need to affirm the inward material direction of material evolution toward Godhood, which has environmental starts, stops, and sideways going along the evolutionary path toward supermaterial Godhood. Life seeks the zenith of successful survival and reproduction, which eventually defines the subjects and objects of supermaterial Godhood.
Tuesday, September 18, 2018
These arrogant fools don't even seem to realize that they are losing the audience who used to adore them and pay for their lavish life styles. They have now re-acquiried the low-life reputations they used to have back in more civilized times when actresses and actors were considered only slightly above hookers and wandering vagabonds.
These actresses, actors, and directors sold their bodies and minds for fame----even their "me-too" movement and their half-learned cultural Marxism can't redeem them now.
Good riddance. We need a new center for respectable, moral, theater and the arts. And no past producers need apply.
The statement that the state "absorbs but does not destroy the individual" (Eliot Jurist) is more realistically accomplished by the genetically related group, that is, the ethnic/racial group and the ethnostate, and not the universal multicultural state. Modern cultural Marxism and universalism casts off the individual from the group and unmoors the group from the individual.
There certainly can be healthy competition between individuals in a healthy ethnostate, but selection between groups is where selection finally takes place, as the famous quote by E. O Wilson says: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals."
If the evolutionary science of sociobiology was positively taught in our schools and political science departments then cultural Marxism and leftist universalism would be seen for the flim flam con game that they are. Then next could come recognition for the political configuration of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature and the biological origin of most of our social behavior.
This simplifying and fair-minded intellectual and political path is now blocked by the cultural Marxism and universalism of the academic world and the Big Media, and even blocked by universalized religions that promote collectivism and universalism. This blockade up-anchors both the group and the individual while allowing the group promoting the flim flam con game of cultural Marxism and universalism to hypocritically prosper over the other weakened groups...Nasty, nefarious, but true.
Monday, September 17, 2018
The invention of Satan and horror comes from the spiritual religious worldview and not from the material religious worldview. Spiritual ascetics believe that ultimately materialism leads to nothingness while spiritualism leads to a non-material spiritual God. But that is fundamentally upside-down: the material world is evolving toward real Godhood and the non-material spiritual God does not exists other than as an inward experience of bliss confounded by ascetics as God.
The problem for the philosophy of theological materialism, which I affirm, is that, so far, religion and science will not affirm that the path of material evolution leads to real supermaterial Godhood, even though we see that the material world has been evolving over great time from the simple to the complex and toward more and more consciousness, with starts and stops along the way.
"Life" itself is defined as the internal manifestation of growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to the outside environment, but life also ultimately and endlessly seeks the zenith of successful survival and reproduction, and that zenith defines real Godhood. Spiritualism doesn't enter into this path.
However the wisdom of conservatism doesn't reject the spiritual view of God; in the Twofold Path the old Inward Path is retained but transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood.
Spiritualism created the idea of Satan and horror not materialism. Materialism leads to real Godhood not spiritualism. The curse hurled by spiritualism at materialism calling materialism satanic and the originator of horror has lost its potency.
Sunday, September 16, 2018
The present trend of hypertrophied feminism will only prevail as long as America and the West don't need territorial defending
I don't define the loudmouth leftist Joe Biden as a "bully" when he says he would like to take President Trump outside and beat him up because he says Trump is a "bully." Neither one of them are "bullies," they are just assertive and aggressive males, and Biden is hypocritically promoting himself by signaling the exaggerations of modern day feminism.
I wish women well and want them to be the very best they can be, but like the Marxists, the feminists have ignored the biological origin our social behavior and explain social and gender differences as entirely environmentally caused; that makes me lose respect for Marxists, feminists or whoever believes it, including Biden. And our past president Obama always struck me as demagogically appealing to the matriarchy he was raised in---remember his wimpy and inept exercise video? Good lord.
Our mostly black professional football gladiators seem to be the only males allowed to be assertive and aggressive without being called "bullies." I suppose that's due to Affirmative Action programs for minorities, who soon won't be minorities largely do to the Marxists and feminists.
Anyway, "men and women have different body structures, sexual systems and biological responses and processes "(differencebetween.net), and only fools and demagogues deny it. The present trend of hypertrophied feminism will only prevail as long as America and the West don't need territorial defending. When we do, our excellent Special Forces will not be nearly enough in number to defend the West against assertive and aggressive males who hate the West. The assertive and aggressive Islamic Afghans are still going strong and remain undefeated even by the superpowers---and they aren't much bemused by feminism.
Saturday, September 15, 2018
Evolutionary sciences such as sociobiology have shown us that "universalism" has limits related to real human nature. Individuals legitimately and naturally "sacrifice'" themselves, not to the nothingness of an airy unrealistic idea of the universal, but to the genetic pool which realistically relates the individual to kin and group. That is the origin and natural extent of real altruism, which quickly disappears in any universalism defined much beyond that relatedness---we have enough problems feeling or showing selfless concern for the well-being of even related gene pools. We can keep the idea of the "universal," if we must, as long as it is adjusted back to its natural circumference and limitation.
This also applies to those fantasies of universalist religions and philosophies which actually deceive and even block the natural flow of evolution toward real Godhood, which is evolved to in the material world. So religion is not lost when universalism is adjusted back to realistic levels. When universalism is naturalistically understood we can spend more time trying to figure out how we can actually all "get along" as we evolve.
That is when the political configuration of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates occurs to us, which adjusts universalism to its natural limits. In the U. S. the constitutional separation of powers, states, and regions can be adapted to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. This will not be easy, of course, but it is a far more realistic goal than the present goal of global universalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates can be secured from marauding states or empires by a light protecting form of federalism.
Who is against this realistic adjustment of universalism? Not counting those who are simply ignorant of real human nature, usually it is related individuals and groups who benefit, at least in the short term, from promoting a universalism unhinged from real life and real human behavior, which weakens their competition.
Friday, September 14, 2018
Russell Kirk's conservative philosophy kept me from wholeheartedly joining the Alt Right philosophy and the Alt Right kept me from wholeheartedly joining Kirk.
The main problem I have with both of them is their lack of respect for biological evolution. Although the Alt Right formerly respected the biological origin of social behavior, their embrace of the Traditionalist School, influenced by the Russian Aleksandr Dugin, diminished their respect for material evolution. This might have brought them closer to Kirk's conservatism.
I think the Traditionalist School is perhaps a more profound kind of conservatism than Kirk's---especially the writings of René Guénon. Kirk might even have seen it that way while perhaps holding on to his rejection of the empires which Dugin and the Traditionalist School are enamored with, and Kirk had his preference for Western Christianity whereas the Traditionalist School affirmed a more ancient view of tradition, not always Western.
Then there is that weird Vedic business of cycles that the Traditionalist School embraces, which really demeans the idea of evolution and progress---they harken way back and prefer a pre-Christian golden age. Kirk and Edmund Burke had a better take on how conservatism brings the new in while keeping what is best of the past.
So I embrace Kirk's view of the American conservative separation of powers and states---against empires---while affirming the adaptation of that separation to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in line with the kin and ethnic-centered biological origin of our social behavior, which the Alt Right would have less of a problem with.
As to my religious philosophy of theological materialism, which both Kirk's philosophy and the Traditionalist School don't affirm, it is grounded in the biological evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood, and the biological origin of our social behavior (which includes religion). Theological materialism welcomes the cultural and biological new while assuredly retaining the best of our cultural and biological past, as we evolve on the long path toward Godhood. I call it deep-conservatism.
Thursday, September 13, 2018
Our penchant for dreaming up "universals" unhinged from the natural world has had philosophers saying such hings as: we move from the natural to the ethical universal. Slow down boys and girls. The natural is the source of the ethical.
Altruism (disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others) was evolved in nature to advance specifically related gene pools. Universalism enters the scene only at the distant end of altruism, say, if space aliens came to try to conquer the earth whereupon earthlings might then become planetary altruists.
I also don't see Greek Tragedy saying that we move from the natural to the ethical universal, the city states were ethnostates and came together only when outsiders like the Persians came to threatened them. Later Roman imperialism brought in "universals" unhinged from the natural world, and collapsed because of it. Greek art is superior to Roman art due to Greek ethnostatism, and not due to empires.
One thing we can learn from this is that we need to form not merely single ethnostates out of our constitutional separation of powers and states, but an official ethnopluralism of ethnostates to help in avoiding war between ethnostates, and protected from marauding empires by a lighter version of federalism.
We can't escape the natural, why the hell would we want to? Escaping the natural mainly seems to come from greedy men seeking to weaken the social bonds of others so they can strengthen their own bonds and thereby dominate---priests have done this as much as emperors.
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
Matter is energy, but energy is matter. There would be no matter without energy but also no energy without matter. Do we really want to rate one higher than the other? I would then rate living matter as more evolved than simple energy. Spiritualism turns the real material world upside-down and claims that the religious/philosophical ideal is not really material, is not matter, or is more sacred energy than lowly matter. They claim that their supreme ideas are non-material and Godlike, or even God.
Why the hatred of the material world even to the point of blocking all material desires or blocking all life, at least for ascetics? They do it so that they can dwell in the blissful bodily experience of supreme ideas, unbothered and unaffected by material desires. It is a cloistered world ultimately driven by hedonism.
The main problem with traditional asceticism is that it blocks the path of material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood, which requires material desires, but channeled desires that need to genetically and culturally funnel evolving life-forms toward the supermaterial zenith of beauty, truth and goodness. This allows material science to enter religion as a help-mate. That is the future of religion transformed.
We can conservatively keep the old ascetic inward path to the "god" within in the Twofold Path, but only as a symbolic glimpse of the real Godhood reached in the outward path of material evolution to real Godhood.
Tuesday, September 11, 2018
Hegel gets bogged down in such things as the connection between being-for-itself, being-for another, how the self knows itself, and how we move from reason to spirit (Geist).
At least Hegel thought we can move to something beyond reason and empiricism (although he wishfully called it Absolute Reason), which is more than modern science will do, but then Hegel drags out the same old non-material spiritual definition of the Absolute or God, as traditional religions do.
But science will not move beyond reason and empiricism and will not acknowledge the material force within life (which I call Tirips) which activates life from within to evolve to the zenith of survival and reproductive success and toward the supermaterial, not spiritual, object or objects of Godhood. Nietzsche's will-to-power was closer to this, but I suspect he thought of the will as a non-material spiritual force.
The self-alone moves from self to seeing kin, to seeing ethnic group, to seeing reason, to seeing the biological origin of social behavior, to seeing the ethnic leash on universalism from genetically-derived altruism, to seeing the necessity of variety in evolution, to seeing the harmony of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, to seeing all of material life steadily, but not always directly, evolving toward supermaterial, not spiritual, Godhood.
That is the synthesis of religion, philosophy, science and culture I prefer.
Monday, September 10, 2018
Trump's instincts for borders and division are more humane than Obama's Marxist flim-flam about bringing all people together
Former president Barack Obama gave a typical holier than thou speech the other day implying that he is better than President Trump because he seeks to bring all people together and Trump seeks to divide people. That is the standard notion of both Marxism and modern liberalism. But it is deceptive flim-flam, whether its purveyors know it or not.
By the time of the advent of Homo-sapiens human nature had biologically or genetically become kin-centered, gender defined, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Human nature evolved to be that way because it was most successful in survival and reproduction in a very difficult world, and it advanced human genetic pools best.
Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against real human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but culture is eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature. Humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.
That defines the natural origin of our moral sense, and that is why human beings naturally divide and separate, and that is why it is hopeless to try to make distinctly different people live together in the same living space. That explains why the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states, created by the Founders, works well with real human nature. And that is also why ethnopluralism is the most natural political configuration for humans beings to live within, protected with some version of federalism.
So Trump's instincts for borders and division are more real and more in sync with how human beings best live and survive, and even more humane, than Obama's universalist Marxist flim-flam about bringing all people together no matter how different they are, which leads to civic disruptions and even civil/racial war.
Sunday, September 09, 2018
"Merit" should not be defined only as talent and aptitude, just as IQ scores alone are not enough in choosing our leaders; character traits also have to be included, otherwise we would have only genius-monsters as leaders.
But that describes the old Western preferences. There is not one good or one bad when comparing apples and oranges and there is not one good or bad when comparing one ethnic/racial group to another. They are just different.
Our culture and our Big Media now seems to want emotional outbursts and agit prop and finds traditional etiquette and decorum too confining. How many young tennis players and football players will now destroy their tennis rackets, loudly argue with the umpire, or protest various political injustices on the football field?
Serena Williams and Colin Kaepernick, who are African Americans, illustrate the change in the character and tone of professional sports. Our sports have become more rude, unmannerly, and vulgar when compared to the old WASP (white Anglo/Saxon Protestant) standards. But it also more deeply illustrates the politically incorrect reality that when the ethnic/racial group changes the culture changes.
Not one, I repeat, not one, announcer or commentator took the side of the beleaguered umpire when he tried to uphold the old traditional etiquette and decorum of tennis from being trashed by MS Williams. The New York crowd had to be chastised later by Williams, to her credit, to stop booing on her behalf because it was ruining the win of Naomi Osaka, who played well and showed that elite Japanese athletes are more civilized than many Americans athletes.
These are just the facts, man, just the facts.
Saturday, September 08, 2018
Rene Guenon was a real genius putting together and synthesizing the ancient Hindu Vedanta along with his deep studies in the esoteric occult and exoteric religions, and he wrote like a demigod. Guenon's studies became what has been called the Traditionalist School, which was later more or less affirmed by Julius Evola, the New Right, Aleksandr Dugin, and the Alt Right.
It was a brilliant work by Guenon full of old and new philosophical/religious truths, but mistaken in a fundamental way: it continued the tragic Great Spiritual Blockade promoted by old religious sages against life evolving in the material world to real supermaterial Godhood.
Guenon believed in an ancient, vastly superior, abstract, spiritual world which set the pattern for the "unreal" material world; a spiritual world that could be blissfully experienced only after deep ascetic discipline which involved "rising above" all the material drives and desires. The realty is that this was not a spiritual world, it was a world brilliantly mythologized by human minds and a world very much contained in the material brain and body of the Gurus.
A religious change in accord with natural material evolution is needed. Traditional religion put up a Great Spiritual Blockade against material life evolving to Godhood. It is not materialism which is at fault, it is the blocking of material evolution that is at fault. Theological Materialism sees the material world evolving to Godhood, which is the real path out of nihilism and the decadence of the modern world.
The “unconcealed” which seems to define truth in Heidegger's ontology (and in Ancient Greek philosophy) is defined in theological materialism as a living object, or objects. “Unconcealedness” is really the zenith of real Being attained when real material life evolves to the highest truth and beauty, which is not merely a definition or denotation but is a supreme supermaterial object, or objects, called Godhood. Theology and philosophy always end up perpetuating the same belief in nothing but a mode of thinking, definitions and denotations or blissful human experiences defined as God. Definitions become Gods themselves.
To bring back the missing transcendent, and tradition, lost in modern liberalism, many in the far right have harkened back to the Traditionalist School in religion and politics, which at bottom sees the world---and not just the modern world---as something to revolt against. God is seen as beyond the "evil" material world in a world of non-object definitions, equations and blissful states of mind. Theological materialism does not see the world this way, but the Twofold Path conservatively does include the Inward Path to the God Within of Tradition, which is seen as only a mirror of real Godhood reached in the Outward Path of evolution (the opposite of Plato's mirror.)
All the “isms” that Traditionalism deconstructs need to be seen in terms of the evolution of material life, and ultimately the evolution to Godhood. Modern liberalism, Marxism, Fascism, multipolarism, etc can only be fully understood from the perspective of evolution. The modern world, which was more or less invented by the West would not look so evil if science and religion could meet and help one another in the evolution of life to Godhood.
It would have been better if the New Far Right had spent a little more time examining two great Western geniuses, Edward O. Wilson and Raymond Cattell, a research sociobiologist and a research psychologist, who had the courage to see and examine the long-term implications of the biological origin of most of our social behavior in the face of totalitarian political correctness.
In political and social terms, imperialism and one-race supremacy get in the way of basic kin-centered and ethnocentric human nature, and homogeneous social interactions, and also damages the variety needed in ongoing upward evolution. A light federalism can protect the independence of many small states, or ethnostates, as each in its own way evolves toward Godhood. Some states will be democratic republics, as in the United States, some will not. America gives (or is supposed to give ) great freedom to many small states and regions if the Constitution is traditionally interpreted.
This is the religious, philosophical, political, and aesthetic future the great Western world needs and deserves---and it wouldn't hurt the East to take serious look at it too. As to the South, what if Africa could create an ethnopluralism of ethnostates out of that huge continent, showing the misreckoning of having the inevitable cycles of Guenon and Oswald Spengler, rather than following the old coarse of decline from colonization (China?) or violent attempts at creating one decadent empire?
Friday, September 07, 2018
When Patrick Buchanan was prevented from becoming president it seems to me that something hopeful and vital ended in America. Buchanan was born and bred to be president. He was and remains a rare combination of astute political intellectual with big courage and good character.
I can't decide if Buchanan would have been able to take on globalism as successfully as president Trump has done; maybe the brash seemingly amoral character of Trump, with the lies and the girlfriends, needed to be there to also have that high audacity to take on the world. But then Buchanan was wiser than Trump and just as tough and bold; for example, Buchanan didn't make friends with the Israeli lobby as Trump did.
Now we have a real big mess in Trump's Washington, half of which wouldn't be there if Buchanan had been President. But perhaps only someone with the big ego of Trump could stand up to the powerful onslaught against him.
One thing I do know, the United States is a great country and it needs to stand. But I believe the U.S. will eventually need to transform to harmonize and contain an ethnically/racially diverse and increasingly competing population. My hope is that we will one day legally transform the constitutional separation of powers and states into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions. Will we be wise and strong enough to do it? That is our survival question.
Thursday, September 06, 2018
I don't mean to piss off the epistemologists but it seems to me that how we know what we know as well as the origin of desire follows the same pattern of activation, that is, desire as well as consciousness do not "seek" they "receive" stimuli from the biological body.
Consciousness does not initially create stimuli, consciousness is created by stimuli. As long as we are alive every cell in our body demands survival and reproductive success. This natural activation can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied.
I don't see a specific center in the body for this activation, for example like the pineal gland of the ancient mystics, but the brain at least coordinates the mass of stimuli coming in from the biological body.
I think there is also a deeper "desire" or activation beneath this pattern of activation which essentially defines "life," or activates the metabolism growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction which defines life. I call it "Tirips," after previously calling it "spirit-will," because it is an entirely material or supermaterial activation.
Tirips is that deep motivation of life not to just survive and reproduce successfully, or to merely satisfy biological desires, but to endlessly seek to reach the zenith of material evolution, which is Godhood, and to never to be satisfied until it attains Godhood---but even then it keeps activating life toward higher life forms, working along with the ups and downs of natural evolution...That unifies religion, science, and culture, if we dare.
Wednesday, September 05, 2018
Burke and Kirk convinced me of the wisdom of conservatism, but Darwin and E. O. Wilson convinced me of the wisdom of the evolutionary sciences. Our social bonds do not solely come from ideas, they derive more deeply from biological bonds. And so "civility" also originates in biological bonds. Contrary to the abstractions of liberalism, civilization does not require a blocking or weakening of kin and ethnic-centered human behavior. We are not more civilized when we try to neuter all biological and local bonds to try to serve a Utopian fantasy of universalism or equality---which both religion and politics have attempted to do.
If there is to be a real social bonding it must come from biological bonds that do not try to move outside of what human nature actually is, and that is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.
This means civility in reality is best grounded and even depends on natural separations, such as an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where distinctive groups can develop distinctive cultures in line with real biological bonds and the biological origins of most of our social behavior. We are now seeing what multicultural/multi-ethnic/multiracial diversity in the same living space has brought us, declared and undeclared civil/racial war.
And standing on the shoulders of Burke, Kirk, and Wilson, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates can be adapted legally (no radical revolution here) from the traditional constitutional separation of powers and states, and protected externally and internally by federalism.
As to the bonds of religion, I find a conservative synthesis of these fields in the philosophy of theological materialism, which says that both the Inward and Outward Path experiences of Godhood in the Twofold Path are material and supermaterial not spiritual and are of the phenomenal material world. The traditional material inward experience of Godhood as seen or experienced in traditional religions is retained in theological materialism but transformed and fulfilled and reached in the Outward Path of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood, a Godhood which is ever evolving.
We need not give up on "saving the world."
We need not give up on "saving the world."
Tuesday, September 04, 2018
Satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not the parameters of consciousness any more than they are the parameters of life itself.
Satisfaction and dissatisfaction are the secondary reward system of the activation of life to successfully survive and reproduce.
But then successfully surviving and reproducing are also a subservient reward system directed toward the activation of life to evolve all the way to Godhood, which is the zenith of satisfaction and consciousness and the zenith of successful survival and reproduction.
Life and consciousness do not seek something outside of themselves, such as spiritualism, life seeks the supermaterial zenith of material objects, which is Godhood.
Nike Inc. has take the side of Colin Kaepernick in the undeclared racial/civil war now taking place in the U.S. and the West. Kaepernick, the black athlete who won't stand for the U. S. flag because he says the country oppresses black people and people of color, has been given a multi-million dollar Nike deal with his own line of shoes, shirts, jerseys, etc.
Nike clearly demonstrates the big problem the West has with global corporations who have no loyalty to borders. Money is their only country and patriotism is meant only for the leadership of the corporation. This is why the U.S. needs to reign in globalism with economic nationalism, which President Trump and Pat Buchanan him have been pointing toward.
We will see where this undeclared racial/civil war takes us. The U.S. probably won't look the same in the future. Given real human nature, which remains kin-centered and ethnocentric, one hopes an ethnopluralism of ethnostates will eventually legally develop, adapted from the constitutional separation of powers and states. Then peace and harmony will have a better chance for us all.
Monday, September 03, 2018
There has always been a problem understanding the connections between the universal and the particular, the abstract and concrete, the group and the individual, etc. I think the biological origin of social behavior goes a long way in clearing up this problem.
"Liberalism" seems to have arrived by seeing the individual as far more important than the group, and so individual freedom became the great political mantra. But the biological origin of social behavior changes that liberal mantra around because group-selection has precedence over individual-selection, although they work together in a co-evolutionary way: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals" as E. O. Wilson put it, and there we have the origin of altruism.
Altruism can be understood as the individual best advancing over the long term by concern for the well-being of others, which therefore isn't really selfless. Abstract morals and values regarding concern for others don't come before this natural biology, they follow after and affirm naturalism.
The old idea of the "common good" took for it granted that cities and states were made up of the same homogeneous ethnic groups. Aristotle took that for granted when he spoke of the common good, and so did the Founders of United States, although they were a bit biased toward the individual. The idea of a universal, abstract, individualism was more a modern political sell.
Ancient and modern intellectuals seem to think of altruism, universalism, and groupism as superior to or beyond naturalism. But when those virtues and values are correctly explained by naturalism they put natural limits on altruism, universalism, and groupism, which are understood as needing the same homogeneous ethnic groups for altruism to actually work. This also supersedes the communist conceptions of a universal atheistic altruism.
The natural limits on altruism correctly limit the pie in the sky, Utopian, universalist, dreams of religious or political liberalism, and gives a solid ground for the political/cultural solution of the ethnopluralism often written about here. A conservative transformation---not revolution---can bring about an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, perhaps carved out of the constitutional separation of powers and states, and protected by federalism. This is the sociopolitical or political/cultural structure most in harmony with ethnocentric and kin-centered real human nature, and the natural limits of altruism.
Sunday, September 02, 2018
As a typical Western conservative sits and listen to, say, Mozart, I know their mind occasionally strays from the sublime music and they can't help thinking that high Western culture is fading. It's a depressing feeling to have.
But the hard reality is that conservatives (and liberals) are going to have to embrace or at least affirm the biological origin of our social behavior if they are ever going to save Western high or even low culture---Nashville music is fading almost as much as the Boston symphony.
The hard reality is that conserving Western culture means conserving Western people, and Western people seem too depressed to breed or maintain their cultures anymore, as we see reported almost daily, and gleefully, in the demographic statistics of the Big Corrupt Media.
The hard reality is as the people change the culture changes. Western people now see and hear only loud and angry post-modern culture created by loud and angry people who usually do not share their same genetic or cultural traits.
Distinctly different people don't melt together no matter what ideology or religion is preached to them, they compete.
Human nature hasn't changed, we are still kin-centered, gender defined, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.
Western man doesn't easily anger and non-Western people better hope that the calm continues because primitive imperialism and supremacy rises as anger rises.
The only realistic and equitable way I see of conserving not only Western people and their cultures but also non-Western people and their cultures is to develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates from out of our crowded democratic republics or whatever political isms people are now living under. It could even be established legally in the United States by adapting our constitutional separation of powers and states.
I don't believe Western people will fade away.
Saturday, September 01, 2018
It may be shocking to some but it is villainous to define real material life as evil and satanic while defining the complete annihilation of material living as godly, especially if the only way to reach real Godhood is through material evolution.
But that is the way the ascetics and gurus who founded the revealed religions defined life and Godhood, even if their followers tried to lighten things up a bit. They went on to call material life hell on earth, narrowly confining, gloomy, subterranean, in servitude to desire, etc etc.
The way out of this hell---they told their serious followers at least---is to annihilate the desires of material life and the desires of the flesh through various extreme ascetic methods, so that then, minus all material desires, they could dwell in a bliss which they confounded with God.
I assume the gurus knew that heroin is easier than the ascetic way but it hooks your material body to a material drug addiction.
Here is the good news: the way to real Godhood is to channel the evolution of material life toward evolving to Godhood, using science and religion in a great synthesis of knowledge applied to culture.
The old ascetic way has to be religiously turned back on its feet after standing on its head. Not materially evolving is what can bring us real hell.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Being-for-another, as the philosopher's like to call it, or altruism, has had a long history of manipulation, from the ancient ascetics to the cultural Marxists of today.
Even Darwin had problems understanding altruism. Neo-Darwinist's like the great E. O. Wilson cleared things up by explaining that: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals." Individuals in groups work together this way in a co-evolution.
Ascetics did not care at all about material life and actually sought to block material life to reach the god within, therefore they could conveniently call for universalism and egalitarianism because they had no interest in natural material evolution and selection, they saw natural competition as fruitless and only getting in the way of their spiritualism.
Then we had the manipulations of Being-for-another, or altruism, by individuals and groups who promoted universalism and egalitarianism for others for the purpose of weakening the natural ethnocentrism of others so that their own ethnocentric group could prosper---a devious way to operate.
Is all fair in love and war? Not really, if you want to survive and prosper over the long-term.
The biological origin of most of our our social behavior actually ends the intellectual defense of universalism and egalitarianism as well as ending postmodern relativism. As long as we are alive every cell in our body demands survival and reproductive success. This natural activation can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied.
Existing realistic values come from the various social and cultural methods we try (including postmodernism) to biologically and genetically advance ourselves and our related ethnic group, locality and nation. This affirms in general the populist nationalism now trying to rise in the corrupted West, which needs to eventually develop into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions. Ethnostates could even be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.
Whatever peace and harmony is possible between different and competing human groups can be best accomplished in an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, that is the political/cultural structure most in harmony with real human nature, which remains kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.
Thursday, August 30, 2018
Many people, many liberals, are not happy with the idea that we may not be free to be as anarchic and even nihilistic as they think they want to be. But we are freest when we are aware of the degree of free-will we have within our determinism. Unconscious determinism is not bad, consciousness was not the “fall” from the unconscious direction of life. Animals are not bad because they are unaware of their biological determinism. It is not determinism in itself that is backward, in humans it is unawareness of the degree of determinism and free-will we have that is backward.
We have choices in what we do but they are not unlimited choices. The goal is determined but the path is freer. We can control our actions through values and morals which are or are not in harmony with human nature and the natural laws, and also we can have values more deeply in harmony with the activation of life to evolve toward Godhood. That is not exactly what Nietzsche meant when he said "accept your fate." He more or less thought the will to power was anarchic and nihilistic and we should learn to accept that unfreedom of the will.
This defines a partial "free will," not a complete free will---the large rock rolling down the mountain can take different paths, but it is rolling down the mountain in any case.
Wednesday, August 29, 2018
We get pleasure from food and sex but that pleasure was motivated by the deeper need for food which we require to live, and the need of reproduction if life is to continue. Hedonistic desire and pleasure are this way secondary motivations. So also living and reproducing is secondary to the inward activation of life to evolve all the way to the zenith of success in evolution, or Godhood.
"Desire" isn't irrational, it is just not understood as rational. Yes life and consciousness are motivated by desire but desire itself is motivated in the deepest sense by the activation within life to evolve to the zenith of success in material evolution, which is Godhood. So irrationality does not underlie rationality.
And finally in this grand dynamic of life, the activating inward material will or drive, here called Tirips, must work along with the ups and downs and sometimes randomness of outside natural selection and evolution. Science affirms natural selection and evolution while rejecting the inward activation toward Godhood, and religion accepts only a non-material entirely "spiritual" god.
The dynamic of theological materialism is opposite the repulsion of desire of most religious ascetics, or philosophers who consider desire irrational. Desire is not a danger to be blocked as irrational or as a material evil; in the deepest sense desire is a motivation to be channeled toward attaining the zenith of desire, which requires the material evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood.
The long dreamed of great synthesis of the specialties is possible.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Conservative's like to say that history and experience are better guides for politics and life than the abstract conceptions touted by liberals and neoconservatives---then they stop there. But there is a deeper guide even than history and experience in the biological origin of most of our social behavior, which includes and subsumes history, experience, and abstract conceptions. Experience may be superior to reason in guiding us but biology is superior to experience.
This points toward nationalism but a nationalism that includes an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Real human nature is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. And that real human nature points toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Lucky for us, and the wisdom of our Founders, the U. S. Constitution affirms a separation of powers and states which could accommodate an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected also by federalism.
One hopes that both conservatives and liberals will eventually affirm an ethnopluralism of ethnostates as better than any other political or cultural formula to actually bond people together, with fewer civil disruptions and cultural disjunctions. It can and should be done legally without radical revolution. I think it will be done eventually as globalism literally and intellectually falls, and returns to ethnostates, as it always does.
Monday, August 27, 2018
The idea of "agency" in philosophy seems unnecessarily complicated (surprise, surprise). I think the capacity for individualized choice and action in the world needs to be biologized, which will require a bit of courage by philosophers because it is a "politically incorrect" idea.
Connecting "being-for itself and "being-for-others" means affirming the biological origin of most of our social behavior. That is the"renewal of agency" we need. And it addresses the "alienation" that philosophers go on about.
I think the self and the group are best understood in the following quote by the great father of sociobiology Edward O. Wilson: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals."
No one is more individualistic and self-starting than I am, and if I can accept this explanation of agency then any narcissist, extreme libertarian, or person with authority problems can accept it.
There is great room for individual self-expression in the natural preference for group-selection which evolved over great time in human nature and in human behavior. What we need to do, as the great psychometric psychologist Raymond Cattell pointed out, is understand the difference between social and antisocial individualistic behavior, especially with geniuses, which was Nietzsche's concern.
Sunday, August 26, 2018
Neonationalists and neoconservative intellectuals don't quite run away from neo-Darwinist information regarding the biological origin of most of our social behavior, they do a kind of neonationalist shuffle and claim that nationalism is "forbiddingly difficult to define," as Samuel Goldman described it (Modern Age, Summer 2018). Then they step in with that shuffle and argue that a nation is not based on common descent but is "unified around cultural characteristics" of language, religion and shared history (Yoram Hazony). Is it the ghost of Hilter, intellectual cowardice, or a more sinister shell game to protect real or, ironically, ethnocentric motives?
The neoconservative's failed, for a time at least, when the new populism surprised the hell out if them and elected Trump---although Trump has since made them happy regarding his policies in the Middle-East.
Nations are not all that "forbiddingly difficult to define," although it is now virtually forbidden to define them. Throughout human history to this day human nature is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. That behavior bonded people together best for survival and reproductive success and from out of that natural foundation nation's formed.
Nations are naturally ethnocentric and even xenophobic and when they are not they tend to fall, and become feuding multicultural societies which eventually break back into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. So why not head off those cycles and begin to establish, or reestablish, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates? An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could even be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism. No radical revolution is necessary.
It may require a few constitutional amendments to give more power to the states to move toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and it will not be easy at all, but it is far preferable to radical Marxism or Fascism, or the political dissimulations based on flawed definitions of nationalism and human nature which have brought us increasing civil disruptions, or even civil war, within unworkable multicultural (multi-racial/multi-ethnic) societies.