Future Political Thoughts Against Bigness, and Pro Evolution

Rand Paul probably comes closest to understanding that bigness in government and business is bad, but he makes the grave philosophical and sociobiological mistake that libertarian's usually make of embracing an almost anarchic individualism over the needs of the group. Pat Buchanan's economic nationalism, which made America wealthy beyond compare, would not appeal to Rand, but we also realistically need to protect America jobs and American ingenuity from foreign and domestic abuse, as well as to protect free commerce between the states---a light federalism can do this.

Whatever this movement is called politically, small-is-beautiful, etc., it eventually needs to voluntarily move toward a realistic ethnopluralism, with independent states and regions free to evolve in their own fashion, which harmonizes with all we have learned in human history about human nature and natural law. Accepting cultural and ethnic variety and differentialism---not the motley multiculturalism which does not work and causes civil strife, and not one-race imperialism---may appeal to the left, ethnic independence should appeal to the right, and the Constitution could affirm it.

To sustain this political movement over time we also need religion, and here the aspiration is to have theological materialism (as seen in the Theovolutionary Church) voluntarily affirming internationally objective sociobiological research centers, aiding in our evolution toward Godhood in the cosmos, the Godhood first seen inwardly as the Father Within.

Politically I suppose Rand Paul may be the best we can do at this time. But it's not enough.