Thursday, February 11, 2016
Let's correctly understand altruism and the ethnopluralism it naturally leads to politically
I think it is true that nature and
natural laws eventually rectify the follies of men. Someone said (Nietzsche?) that mighty empires fall when they begin to have
numberless laws. When traditionalists and conservatives
disparagingly describe the present times as hedonistic “neo-pagan”
times they are being unfair to pagans. Pagans were not lawless and
nihilistic, and they were not individualistic hedonists.
For example, real altruism
within the group was in strong effect in pagan cultures, but not
altruism for the whole world. Real altruism is based in the success of group-selection. The sociobiology of E.O. Wilson has shown that within groups selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals. It seems to me
that regarding altruism classical warriors had a better grasp of human nature even than
traditional priests. Warrior asceticism (or
stoicism) mainly demands group-selection, priest asceticism demands
mainly individual selection, because priests are mainly involved in
reaching the inward God or Father Within, which is an
individual action, whereas warriors deal in the outward survival of the group, which is a mainly a group-selection action. We
can have both, but let's correctly understand altruism and the ethnopluralism it naturally leads to politically. Ayn Rand, the darling of libertarians and neoconservatives, bright as she was, did not understand real altruism, which she attacked. Her hero Nietzsche also did not understand natural altruism.
I think the natural state of man is to
live in regions and states where altruism and harmony
between ethnically related people can more naturally take
place---fewer laws are then required. Ethnopluralism, that is,
regions and states set aside for distinct ethnic cultures requires
fewer laws to keep social harmony. In any case people tend to
naturally divide themselves into ethnic conclaves even in communist
states.
Relating these points to present laws
in the U.S., if the Supreme Court can radically redefine
marriage, religious freedom, and civil rights, then it surely can
affirm the constitutional principle of the separation of
powers and states, which could lead to natural regions and states set
aside for distinct ethnic cultures, where natural altruism could
create far more social harmony than the present attempts to force
together a motley nation of growing and competing ethnic factions.
Radical revolution and the tearing apart of our nation can be
avoided.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment