Will realist conservatives accept the next stage of realism as pointing toward ethnopluralism?

When the cold war ended, realist paleoconservatives managed to be flexible in foreign policy seeing that with the communists threat gone America needed to come home. But neoconservatives were not as flexible and wanted to stay abroad fighting monsters and making the world safe for American globalism. There was also the less mentioned dual loyalty of many leading neoconservatives (U.S./Israel) which kept them meddling in the middle east.

My question is this: will realist conservatives accept the next stage of realism as pointing toward ethnopluralism? Will conservatives be flexible enough to accept a realist domestic policy which calls for the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states being applied to ethnopluralism? The almost intractability of real human nature, with its strong preference for kin and group-selection, suggests the realism of ethnopluralism, that is, regions and states set aside for ethnic cultures, and protected by federalism. Ethnopluralism accommodated by the Constitutional principal of the separation of powers and states appears to be the best way to balance distinctively different (and growing) competing ethnic groups in the U.S (and elsewhere for that matter).

Ethnopluralism may seem to be too much of a change from what we have now, which goes against the realist philosophy, but it can be recalled that another element of realism is to be flexible and change when facts change. Since the time of Darwin the evolutionary sciences have been refining definitions of human nature and it is surprisingly to many conservatives that sociobiology affirms most of the conservative values in being 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 selection.

I suppose it is mainly the conservative reluctance to accept the natural dynamic of evolution, which they wrongly think is contrary to Christian values, that holds them back from seeing the deep realism of ethnopluralism. One hopes they will not follow the neoconservative example of being unwilling to accept the real world.