Where are the dystopian novelists to satirize the present blocking of kin-centered, ethnocentric, and group-selecting human nature?

The state coercion written about by the dystopian and Utopian novelists is now seen in the policing of political correctness, which is the new more devious Western version of Marxism, called cultural Marxism. The attack has been not so much an attack on the leftist "human spirit and freedom" suggested by the dystopian novelists, but has been an attack on real human nature, which is essentially 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.

The ironic fact is, overwhelming coercion is not really necessary, and all powerful states are not required when human nature is allowed to be what it actually is. When human nature is not blocked human history shows us that empires fall and decentralize and become thousands of ethnostates, because that is the most natural configuration in harmony with real human nature and with ongoing evolution.

As to the "higher self" it seeks Godhood by way of biological evolution, and the "lower self" forms into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates which create the diversity and variety necessary for real human evolution to take place.

Where are the dystopian novelists to bitterly satirize the present blocking of kin-centered, ethnocentric, and group-selecting human nature? They seem to be eaten up like everyone else by the new coercion of political correctness.

Expanding conservatism to include an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, or deep-conservatism

I would like to see the conservatism of Russell Kirk and George Kennan expanded to include an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which I call deep-conservatism.

Kirk and Kennan were against nation-building while not seeking to replace Soviet communism with Western economic globalism. (see essay by Chilton Williamson Jr. in the May 2017 "Chronicles")

Kirk and Kennan were for preserving diversity and economic independence, but they did not directly expand that wisdom to the deep conservatism of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Even with the ruling civic and political propaganda of cultural Marxism, modern liberalism and global neoconservative, human nature remains as it has always been, kin-centered, ethnocentric and group-selecting.

This naturally points conservatism toward and ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could be harmonized with the conservative constitutional separation of powers and states, at least in the U.S., protected by deeper versions of  federalism and subsidiarity.

Perhaps the universalism inherent in Christian conservatism keeps conservatives from including ethnostates within conservatism---ethnostates may have diverse religions.

I think theological materialism works well with deep-conservatism because traditional religions are maintained but their inward paths to the symbolic God Within are updated and transformed in the outward path of material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood.

Expanding conservatism to include an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, or deep-conservatism, would work harmoniously with this sacred evolutionary mission. Religion, materialism, science and politics could finally come together.

Avoiding Spengler's cycles by affirming real human nature

Basic human nature has not really changed biologically or genetically since hunter-gatherer times, but the ease of survival has changed, and that has much to do with the idiotic cultural changes we see today, such as the cultural Marxism of the academic world, feminism, gay rights, transgenderism, etc., which any honest person will admit have been tearing down Western culture, piece by piece.

The same applies to globalism and all the other rights popping up everywhere, which have had the luxury of denying real human nature because survival has been so easy. Easy survival has not much required the normal territorial protection inherent in men, or the nurturing inherent in women, which is conservative, and so we get people like the truly degenerate Kardashians.

It doesn't bother me to see women gain more power, but I do have a problem when feminism virtually ignores the biological and genetic origin of more than half of our social behavior. Real human nature remains 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.

It's the lies, the hypocrisy, the disharmony, the cultural foolishness of it all that bothers me. But then I always remember human history and how the natural structure, or leash, of real human nature eventually pulls us back to real human nature when tough times come. Why not keep and culturally promote real human nature and the social structures it naturally engenders even when survival is easy? We might then actually avoid Spengler's predicted cycles and spend our time rising in long-term evolution. Can we be that rational? I say yes, because it is both rational and instinctive behavior, Dionysus harmonized with, not fighting, Apollo.

The sacred goal

Schopenhauer thought the will was not designed for purposeless imagination but the intellect was. I disagree with the direction of that valuation. The will (highest instincts) supersedes the definition of the so-called spirit, and activates all life including the intellect and imagination, that is, brain, body, and all the elements of life, including mathematical perception and artistic imagination. The question is why? The material will activates material life to evolve toward supermaterial Godhood, that is the goal.

Schopenhauer was wrong in thinking that the intellect needs to free itself from the will to see objectively. The religious mystics made the same metaphysical error. The intellect is a tool of the will (which I once called the Super-Id) and rides along with the will as the will struggles to harmonize with outside natural evolution in the quest of life to evolve toward Godhood. Human culture then needs to harmonize with that sacred goal, it is even written deeply within human nature, and within the workings of the cosmos.

The good part of the fall of our empire

Like all empires the American empire has grown too big and diverse to function at all. So now we slowly sink, like a big ship with unfixable leaks. The fall can be prolonged by people like Donald Trump, or worse, who demagogue their way to power and make a few cosmetic fixes, but then end up corrupt or corrupted, and the empire remains too big and too diverse to save. There could also be invasions from other nations who kick down an already rotten door, which happened with the Romans.

But we could fall or break down in a healthy way if we would embrace the natural political configuration of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could even be conservatively done by adapting the constitutional separation of powers and states. Ethnostates are naturally homogeneous and therefore are more orderly social structures, because real human nature remains kin-centered, ethnocentric and primarily group-selecting. That would be the sane and rational way to deal with the fall of our empire. But the Soviet Empire, for a recent example, broke into ethnostates without planning to, and we may also be too diverse, too big, and too corrupt to do it the rational way.

Nevertheless true leadership would provide reassurances during the fall that things will be better as we work toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could be planned out and ready to go, protected by a federalism and subsidiarity that could work even in democratic republics.

We need to recover from the great spiritual blockade while retaining religion

Religion and philosophy made la-la-land, spiritual, non-material concepts and ideas real (they even made Ideas Gods) and they made the material world unreal, and we need to recover from that great spiritual blockade.

The "will" (highest instinct) is not inferior to the high intellect, as Schopenhauer thought, and the will is not merely an amoral power drive ruling the intellect, as Nietzsche thought. Schopenhauer thought the will needed to be overcome for the intellect to grasp eternal ideas, not unlike the religious mystics or Plato.

The superbiological will, here defined as will-spirit, spirit-will, or spirit-will-to-Godhood, is the material, not spiritual, drive within life (essentially defining life) activating material life to evolve toward supermaterial Godhood, the zenith of successful survival and reproduction. The intellect is only activated by the will and cannot grasp what the sacred goal is as fully as the will can, although the will does not have merely an intellectual concept of sacred goals as the intellect does.

We can recover from the great spiritual blockade not by killing God and religion as Nietzsche did, and not by making a God of Ideas as Schopenhauer and the old mystics did, we can conservatively retain the old inward concept of the spiritual God as only the first glimpse of real supermaterial Godhood evolved to in the material world.

Lean into the what?

In trying to help Sheryl Sandberg deal with the great grief of losing her husband, her Rabbi told her to "lean into the suck." Try giving that advice to the Israel Defense Forces who like all good warriors must be stoic in victory or in defeat. With the founding of Israel the Jews finally learned that being arrogant in victory and cringing in defeat is dangerous for survival (although they seem to make an exception in endlessly moaning about the Holocaust). And the Rabbi must be a liberal---there is the typical clunky vulgarity of leaning into the suck which resembles the clunky vulgarity of modern poetry. And of course there is the standard sexual reference.

Well, leaning into the suck seems to have helped Sandberg individualistically cope, and I suppose that's good. But her book on the experience will influence millions. The gentleman's code, which was basically stoic, as Philip Mason put it, was a sub-Christian warrior chivalrous code without theology but derived from the ethics of Christianity and was merciful but not bewailing. Western civilization was not built on leaning into the suck, and it falls when it does.

Godhood is a material object, not a spiritual subject

I keep coming back to this object/subject argument:

Gurus and philosophers have been in love with their own minds, missing the reality of the forest outside of their minds for the unreality of the trees inside their minds. Religion and much of philosophy have been based in subjectivism and idealism, their gods and truths are mostly in their minds only.

But rejecting this subjectivism should not lead to "atheism" if we choose the real living object over the lala-land-subject. Godhood and the gods are not the gods of subjectivism and idealism, not the god experienced when all material desires are blocked, and also not the mathematical truth seen in the mind when all material things are left out of the picture.

Godhood and the Gods are material, or more specifically, supermaterial, and evolved to in the material world. Godhood is a material object, not a spiritual subject....But we can retain Plato's cave, Buddha's navel, and Christ's cross in the Twofold Path, if we see their insights and Inward Path goals as preliminary to the Outward Path of material evolution to real Godhood.

So walk out in the forest, if you can find one, and tell the material trees that they are released from their great spiritual blockade....If odd stares bother you do it quietly.

Pat Buchanan, in many ways a hero of mine, is too pessimistic about America

Pat Buchanan, in many ways a hero of mine, is too pessimistic about America. He appears to think it's all over for us, that its too late, that future demographics and global business have doomed us, and we will become a leftist anti-white state.

I have not heard Mr. Buchanan talk about a possible ethnopluralism of ethnostates within the U.S., built upon the constitutional separation of powers and states. Perhaps it's some sort of Catholic bias toward a new Holy Christendom, I don't know.

I think he is missing the political configuration that harmonizes best with real human nature, which he admits is ethnocentric, group-selecting, and nationalist. Perhaps he can't see how that works when you add universal Christianity.

Maybe he thinks an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is not traditional enough. But it is the base of all traditionalism! Of course, it will require much work to bring forward against deep enemies, but it gives optimism at least, and it is based in the reality of human behavior and could work with our conservative Constitution.

A columnist emasculates her son

A recent Time magazine columnist featured a mother emasculating her son in the process of emotionally praising his graduation from college. This is the same magazine that many years ago featured a mostly positive article on sociobiology and the biological origin of much of social behavior. The mag now has a feminist editor who has increased its downward trend toward cultural Marxism, which fewer and fewer people read.

The columnist tells us about the time her "skinny" son sat crying because he lost his school supplies the day before his first day at middle school. Or how he would crawl into her bed and say "let's hold hands." Then she sentimentally recalls how she taught her son to water a plant, write a thank-you note, and iron a shirt. Did she not have even a twinge that she was emasculating her son? Or has her feminism gone so far as to believe that it is only moral to emasculate your sons? Unfortunately she seems to be a typical modern single parent---if she has a husband he does not appear to be much involved with his son, or his wife.

She tells us, and of course her son, that she hopes he will never die for his country. I think of those Spartan mothers who told their sons to come home victorious or come home dead on their shields. And I think of how all failing empires end up hiring mercenaries to protect a population too emasculated to protect themselves. We do it now, hiring super-masculine SEALs etc. The bitter irony is that modern liberal feminists secretly find the mercenaries sexier than their husbands and sons, who they have emasculated.

They could have saved God and Truth by seeing them as material/supermaterial objects

Yes, horses are real but the "species" concept of horses is not "real," species is the secondary unreal definition of the real. Why is that so hard for philosophers to admit?

Ideas may be "timeless" but they are not real. Timeless Ideas are not the most "objective" knowledge of the world we can have. 

The most "objective" thing is the material or supermaterial object, not the Idea of the object.

The thing-in-itself is not an Idea it is a real material or supermaterial object, or objects.

Plato and later Schopenhauer went as far as to say that Ideas exist in reality independent of the "subject," they said ideas are not "concepts" but are part of nature awaiting discovery.

No, the discoveries waiting to be discovered are material and supermaterial objects, with ideas only secondarily defining them.

Sometimes I think the philosophers demoted material objects only for the purpose of trying to save their non-material spiritual view of God and Truth.

They could have saved God and Truth by seeing them as real material/supermaterial objects evolved to in the material world.

Can irresponsible libertarianism be restrained?

I am thinking here of the libertarianism of billionaire philanthropists, globalism, the Big Media, and the academic world.

Aside from the damage done by globalism to the health and sovereignty of nations, we have billionaires like Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg giving millions to their preferred causes, and the money is often tax deductible. They can then shape policy far more than the ordinary citizen can. And the policies they pursue are almost always irresponsibly libertarian, which is at bottom nihilistic, amoral, and superindividualistic, with a leaning toward limousine liberalism. Can't you just hear the always unmodulated voice of Gates, or the pipsqueaking of Zuckerberg as they preach to us?

Then their is the influence of the Big Media directing our culture far more than school or religion. Awhile back they promoted the wisdom of Bob Dylan and now it's people like Kanye West, who the kids quote because nothing else is presented to them. Shakespeare and Burke are out. And this stupidity is backed by the the academic world who have rejected Anglo-American classical culture and replaced it with the nihilism and relativism of libertarianism leaning toward cultural Marxism.

Was this cultural destruction purposefully destructive or just plain stupid? It's both. As I say here often, it is not enough to dismantle the "bureaucratic, managerial, corporatist, and globalist state" as real conservatives want to do (and as we thought President Trump would try to do). But assuming these things can be done, what then? We have to allow real human nature to adjust the American constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Real culture will then return for all groups and not merely for billionaire philanthropists, globalism, the Big Media, and the academic world, who have destroyed Western culture.

The Inward Path of spiritualism is essentially the same, wherever it originated---so what is next? (reblog from September 28, 2016)

Which came first the Hindu Chakra Correspondence Chart or the Kabbalistic Tree of Life? The Tree of life may have come to the Jewish people via the Ancient Egyptians, but the Egyptians might have gotten it via the Indian Vedas or proto-Vedas, at the beginning of the Egyptian dynasties as a result of early invasions from Eurasia, or points further north.

Conservatism, not radical revolution, can be sustained as change takes palace. This is what the great St. Thomas Aquinas did when confronted with the superior philosophy of the Ancient Greeks. This did not turn him away from affirming a more intellectual version of Christianity, which although now fading still lives on after many centuries.

The point here is that the Inward Path of traditional spiritualism is essentially the same whichever place it originated from, that is, the abstract definitions of physical experiences from ascetic disciplines to find the God or Father Within which were not considered a material or physical experience, but in realty are a material and physical peak experience.

This insight on the Inward Path may at first seem to reject Traditionalism, but it does not in seeing these first experiences of God as preliminary and leading to the understanding of the real Godhood reached through material and supermaterial evolution. This is the Twofold Path of theological materialism and the Evolutionary Church which can carry Traditionalism into the future, uniting religion, philosophy and science.

The New Metaphysics

The in-itself thing and its representation are not equal, they are one or the other, and the representation is vastly inferior to the thing-in-itself. This redeems both materialism and religion, but requires seeing Godhood as material or supermaterial and not merely as an Idea, or as Spiritual, or as a mathematical concept. It also requires material evolution to be elevated to the sacred path to Godhood.

What activates this sacred process? Within material life exists the endless activation toward endless survival and reproductive success whose zenith is supermaterial Godhood. In theological materialism this activation is defined as the Spirit-Will or Will-Spirit, including the word "spirit" only to conservatively relate to traditional religion, but the Spirit-Will is entirely material or supermaterial.

"Objectification" is wholly material and related to material evolution, with absolute objectification and truth defined as the material and supermaterial objects called Godhood. It is an endless evolution toward higher and higher Godhoods, with occasional new primal material beginnings, even as other evolutions continue at various levels.

If there is an "essence" or an unchanging thing it seems to be the activation within life toward ever evolving life, here called the material Spirit-Will. This essence is not God it seeks Godhood and is always unfinished.

The Twofold Path in theological materialism, the Involutionary and Evolutionary, connect the traditional inward path of the symbolic experience of the God or Father Within---attained by blocking material desires---with the Outward Path of material evolution toward real Godhood---attained by fulfilling desires in the evolutionary path. We can conservatively retain the traditional inward Mass of Sacrifice along with the evolutionary Mass of Evolution or Joy.

One step forward for ruling globalism, on step back for wannabe nationalism

The main competition today is between ruling globalism and wannabe nationalism. That's what  Brexit, Trump and Le pen are about. And that explains why Russia, Iran, Syria and even North Korea are the big enemies: they refuse to bow to the globalists.

But Putin acts like a nationalist and probably dreams of imperialism (his intellectuals like Dugin do). Iran wants worldwide Islam, and North Korea has the old Communist world utopia in mind, so they aren't real nationalists. President Trump has been openly morphing from a nationalist into a globalist, but giving symbolic nods to try to retain the nationalists who elected him.

To those of us (few) who see populist nationalism as but the first step toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates---in harmony with the constitutional separation of powers and states----these are steps backward. Is this best we can expect? It seems so---but the competition will continue. We do have real human nature on our side which instinctively and rationally seeks nationalism, ethnostates, and localism.

Enough of airy gurus and supercilious philosophers

Since Plato philosophers have exaggerated the importance of the "Idea." Schopenhauer said that the Idea was "even the whole thing in itself, only under the form of representation." This is absurd. It's like saying a person's name is as important as the person.

These thinkers define God and Truth in the same way, as an Idea only, even though they try to cover this by saying that God and truth are real but are spiritual and not material. That still defines God and truth as airy nothing.  It encourages atheists to reject God and religion and philosophers to reject truth and conservatism.

Godhood and truth are smeared at the expense of real material life, which is in reality the only vehicle to evolve to real Godhood: we evolve to Godhood in the material world and Godhood is the supermaterial zenith of material evolution. The tragic joke is that the gurus and philosophers often use ideas and religion for the very purpose of gaining the material power they smear.

We do need religion to ground civilization deep enough for very long term successful survival, reproduction and ongoing evolution, as human history has shown us.  But to do this religion, philosophy, and material life need to be exhumed from the death verdict of these airy gurus and supercilious philosophers.

Happy Easter

There is no real duality between the subject and object

The great metaphysical error began when the spiritual was separated from the material, which caused all the other false dualities. The religious gurus and then Plato saw God and truth as a non-material Idea and not as a living material object, or objects.

The conceptions of "objectivity" and "subjectivity" grew out of this false duality, with objectivity being seen as a non-material thing superior to subjectivity and the subject.

I would rather just take the old practical non-intellectual definition of object and subject, with the object defined as the thing seen and touched, and the subject as the thing examined by an object.

The subject is in the mind of the object and there is no duality here. Things and Godhood are only secondarily represented by ideas, ideas are not God or things.

The object needs to come out from under the shadow of the subject, not as an airy spiritual nothing but as a real material thing.

Godhood and truth are not a non-material Idea, they are a living object, or objects, evolved to in the material and supermaterial world, as described in theological materialism.

Religiously overcoming the negative bias in religion

There is a large negative bias in religion and philosophy right up to the time of Schopenhauer and beyond, where suffering is thought to be more powerful than happiness. This metaphysical error resulted in advocating the total will-less state, or the desireless state, where both happiness and suffering will vanish, and where supposedly the most "objective " knowledge can be found.

Reality is the opposite, but does not reject religion. Human life is only secondarily activated to be successful in survival and reproduction or happy. We are activated from within to materially evolve toward supermaterial Godhood, defined as the zenith of success at the zenith of evolution. The sooner we fully understand our fate, and the sacred goal of life, the sooner we can work with and not against life itself and the sacred goal of Godhood.

We can even conservatively retain the old negative ascetic view of the inward God or Father as the first glimpse of the real Godhood reached through material evolution in the Outward Path. Even science can join religion.

Trump's amazing new level of chutzpah

It's almost unbelievable to see how the corrupt liberal media loves Trump now as he bombs away. The paleoconservatism, nationalism, and populism of his friend Steve Banner---as well as the people who elected Trump---have been backhanded and we return to the global imperialism that ruined America and the West in the first place. Has such an open betrayal of friend and country ever been before? Even Trump's huckster buddies in New York City must be amazed.

But paleoconservatism never carried things deep enough anyway. Paleoconservatives, as well as Trump and his buddies, don't have the balls to see or say that we require an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in America, which can harmonize with the constitutional separation of powers and states. We can trade with the world as long as the world doesn't mess with us. We can protect the whole with an unbeatable military. That is the way paleoconservatism, nationalism, and populism will actually work along with real human nature over the long term.

The Great Old British Aristocracy

I am a patriotic American, I am of Swedish and German ancestry, I much appreciate Edmund Burke, but I am very much against empires in general, and I don't at all condone the condition of the poor during the time of the British feudal aristocracy. But like other Americans I am impressed with the great old British aristocracy. They had the time, the power, and the wealth to develop superior genetic qualities, a superior taste for the best quality clothing, and really great looking homes. These are the elements of the empire that interest me now, even if what is left of the aristocracy is sort of goofy.  American WASPS are goofy now too. 

 

The great old British aristocracy began with the Henry Tudor court. As Charles Spencer pointed out, "at its peak in the late 1870s, 80 percent of the country’s acreage was owned by 7,000 families, principally those of the 431 hereditary members of the House of Lords—the dukes, marquesses, earls, viscounts, and barons of the United Kingdom. " And they all bred together.

"At its height of power, this empire controlled 35.5 million square km of land, which is almost a quarter of the earth’s landmass, and had more than 500 million people under its rule, which is about a quarter of the world’s population at that time." This aristocracy was the upper-class representation of Edmund Burke, who described the social contract as, “a partnership, not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those that are yet to be born. This was the aristocratic code of conduct." What could be more conservative than that?

The first world war was disastrous for the British aristocracy. While one in eight British soldiers perished during the four-year conflict, the ratio was one in five for the nobility. But beginning back in the 1880s, "the export of grain from the Americas, followed by the arrival in Europe of refrigerated meat, halved the agricultural income of the aristocracy in Britain. Then taxation increased at the same time. Death duties were introduced in 1894 at 8 percent. By 1939 these had reached 60 percent. In 1948 they were levied at 75 percent on estates worth more than £1 million." During the years between the World Wars, roughly 230 mansions were destroyed. (I almost said that was worse than losing the aristocrats.)

The WASPS in America copied the British in more than politics. The genetics, the clothing, the great homes of the British aristocrats interested generations of Americans. During the war the upper class British officer was four inches taller than the lower class soldier, and his IQ showed an even greater disparity. And it was not all due to better nutrition or better schooling, it was biological, it was genetic. The most successful dynasties "were those that read the code, accepted its terms, and fused it into their DNA." And we don't need empires to do that.

An age when reality is unreality

It is astounding to see the present power of the enemies of the biological origin of differences in humans: cultural Marxism and feminism come first to mind. Yes, culture is important in human behavior but biology isn't even mentioned.

It is astounding to me how this unreality came to dominate America and the West. It shows that humans are either very stupid or the media and the academic world are very powerful---or both. In Europe it is even illegal to say that there are biological differences between humans!

This means that if we want to bring reality back from the unreality of the West we have to go strongly against the media and the academic world. That is the front to watch to see real change---no movement there, no change.

For a short time it looked like President Trump would go directly against the media and the academic world, but not now. Trump has apparently turned into another person from the Trump who campaigned for president, moving from populist-nationalism back to the global imperialism that ruined the West in the first place (minus some of the evil trade deals)...It's good to see Putin of Russia taken down a bit, he is more imperialist than nationalist and he has always hated the West, but to do so the way Trump did it, by lying to Putin and the world about his political philosophy to get elected was nasty and ignoble---(this assumes he had a discernible political philosophy.)

So what is to be done after being Trumped?

It appears that even President Trump doesn't know what Trump will do next, but for now he has turned directly against the foreign policy that he constantly demagogued about to get elected. The right, that is, both the bourgeois right and the alt-right, were Trumped. So what is to be done?

The far right is like a general who will not retreat in the face of defeat. And the bourgeois right has accommodated and yielded to the resentment of minorities by allowing cultural Marxism to prevail almost as much as the modern liberals. Trump has accommodated and yielded too, and probably became wealthy in doing so.

Nietzsche thought that resentment drove religious and cultural behavior among minorities, especially if they were once enslaved. We see it in the Jewish people and with the American Blacks. The far right has never really understood that a people who were once enslaved are ever after hypersensitive to any kind of dominance or criticism.

Hateful racial smears against Jews and Blacks by the alt-right plays right into the hands of people who in fact largely control the cultural ethos, including the big media. Shouting about creating another imperial one-race empire never works, the rest of the world gangs up on whoever tries. In any case, all empires devolve back to ethnostates.

The reality is that an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the realistic way to deal with all racial and ethnic differences, and it has to be constitutional, legal, and without racial hatred or defamation against any racial group. All races deserve their own ethnostate. Good fences make good neighbors because human nature remains primarily group and ethnic selecting, which is the real source of all altruism.

We don't have to fear the future

Utopia's can be impractical or unrealistic schemes of perfection, but dystopia's can be just as unrealistic in seeing only human misery, oppression and disease. I think we can have continued human evolution without Huxley's "Brave new World" of totalitarianism. Marx and Hitler are not the future if we understand and affirm real human nature and its political implications.

Equality has to be a suspicious concept if not defined as distinctly different groups and states having an equal chance to evolve, ideally with aid from strictly objective international research centers regarding human evolution. Group-selection and ethnic selection remain the central unit of survival and reproductive success, and are deeply contained within real human nature, even if the prevailing cultural Marxism blocks this knowledge. 

Human evolution in the past took place within an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in harmony with real human nature, and can again. Federalism and subsidiarity can protect the whole, in nations and even in democratic republics. If we want to continue evolving toward real Godhood some things have to be preferred to other things, in that sense we have to "discriminate." But that does not require a Brave New World of totalitarianism, it requires an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

As to the wisdom of conservatism, in America we can conservatively retain the constitutional separation of powers and states updated to an ethnopluralism of regions and states, to better harmonize with real human nature, and better provide for our material evolution toward Godhood.

Let's see a few novels on this future, more realistic than the utopian/dystopian novels we have seen so far.