Identity

In “The Politics of Myth,” Robert Ellwood suggests that what we identity as most important tends to define our political philosophy. For example, socioeconomic class, race, religion, the individual, etc. Communists prefer socioeconomic class, fascist race-nation, liberals the individual, and so on.

Group identification (along with individual selection) has just been reaffirmed by one of the greatest living scientists, E. O. Wilson, reversing his prior preference for kin-selection. I think all three, group, individual and kin selection work together, but group selection is the main unit of selection developing the ethics of our various cultures.

Group selection brings us in the direction of older romanticism, as well as conservatism, and turns us somewhat away from the liberal Enlightenment with its affirmation of the autonomous individual. But romanticism and conservatism also affirmed the individual and the hero.

Group selection and romantic conservatism are seen in the religious philosophy of the Theoevolutionary Church where the struggle for survival and evolution to Godhood becomes mythical, almost apocalyptic.  We politically project thousands of small states religiously evolving upward toward Godhood, under the protection of a light federalism---not imperialism--- and guided, voluntarily, by the church.  

But evolution itself is grounded in the science of the Enlightenment, which also fits the character and tone of the TC. This defines a holistic worldview and religion, which we do need in our long evolution to Godhood.