A single world, but with variety

We have only relatively recently reached a “one-world” consciousness, and so to speak of natural divisions in the world into small states or ethnostates threatens that new found one-world consciousness, which we are so rightly proud of.

As Raymond Cattell said, we will have to accept that more sociobiological education is needed, and more emotional maturity, to admit that group-orientation and group-selection is the most basic structure of human nature and human culture, which has been most recently affirmed by E.O. Wilson.

I think America has an advantage here. As the nation continues to drift toward competition among distinct groups, we possess a Constitution which affirms the strength of many small, largely independent, states and regions, protected with a light federalism---if the Constitution is traditionally interpreted. Europe and the rest of the world will have many of these same challenges in the future.

It is clear that there is good reason to have a variety of cultural-genetic approaches, especially when we add to this, as I do, the purpose of it all, the evolution of life to Godhood. To have only one type of human is as dangerous as having only one species of life-saving grain, where one big change can wipe it out. Given these things, which have their base in solid science, as well as religion, imperialism looks sociopathic, and defining only one group or race of people as noble or chosen is what has constantly threatened human life and evolution.

Thinking even further into the future, we will need to understand that evolving into new species will also be necessary if we are to continue our evolution to Godhood, the real divine purpose of life in the cosmos. As time goes on these things will make more sense to people, if we can survive today's world.