A note to the billionaires

Classes or castes developed because humans tend to specialize, and there are always few Renaissance men. In early capitalism engineers tended to run the technology departments, and the more philosophical ran the business. Now young engineers of computer technology run their own companies. Most of them are relativistic libertarians, neoconservatives, or liberals.

As the industrial revolution developed many businessmen were economic nationalists, perhaps not always to their liking. Eventually capitalism began to rule governments and became global, and now we have the result of that globalism in America, with the gutting of manufacturing, the loss of millions of jobs, and open borders with aliens pouring in, legally and illegally.

Are the new tech billionaires too young to be wise? I think we now need businessmen who are, or can become, evolutionary realists, or even romantic realists. If a few billionaires could affirm the science of sociobiology, that is, observe the biological origin---perhaps at least 50 percent---of social behavior, that could lead to social actions which could give real meaning to their world views, and actually help humans over the long term.

Evolutionary realism can see the sacred goal of the material evolution to Godhood, as described here in theological materialism, and could see the need for sociobiological research centers. This evolutionary perspective can even be poeticized and dramatized in the arts as a result of the romantic/realist ethos of theological materialism. We could at last join together religion, business, science, art, and ultimately politics. Theological materialism is also conservative, transforming and not rejecting the past.

I always hope a billionaire or two will send a little something to the cause of theology materialism, as presented here and on Twitter, so we can technically-practically get off the ground. We are so far not a non-profit, but we should be. Profit is more your department.

The damage done from cultural Marxism and feminism---and what really defines us

The birth rate in the white Western world has fallen below the replacement level. In the U. S. Donald Trump may be the last chance for whites to have an influential say in government, given the great demographic changes now happening (this may, however, eventually lead to an ethnopluralism of distinct regions.) This change was brought about largely due to the damage done by modern liberalism, cultural Marxism, and feminism, or their propagators.

Human beings created the language but does language define us? Does mathematics define us? Do thoughts define us?

For example, cultural Marxism and feminism, popular in the academic world, and propagandized in the Popular Big Media, have created problems stemming from not understanding real human nature and getting lost in language, mathematics, and thoughts. What great damage has been done from thinking that culture creates all human behavior, demographic damage, totalitarian dictatorships, or training girls to act like boys, and vice versa.

Real human nature remains as it has always been, 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.

The living biological object as a human being is larger than single parts like language, mathematics, or thoughts. The whole activation of the living objects can be defined as the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood. That awkward term Spirit-Will is used to show the retention of the old religious inward spiritual path, which is transformed in the outward path of material evolution to real Godhood.

Why theological materialism for our eventual recovery? Because biological evolution defines us, not merely the false language, mathematics, or thoughts of such things as cultural Marxism or feminism. Even survival and reproductive success does not best define us, as vital as that is. What best defines us it our material evolution to Godhood, and this offers a modern sacred meaning and goal to real material life.

The true beginning of religion

“A people's religion, their faith, creates their culture, and their culture creates their civilization. And when faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, and the people begin to die.'” (Pat Buchanan)

I would add to the above wise statement something that occurs even before religion begins this line of classification: Life, biology, activates a people's religion as a means not only to create a culture that can help the people successfully survive and reproduce, but more than religion or science has yet to acknowledge, life is activated by the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood which seeks to activate life, working within the natural material world, to evolve toward  the zenith of evolution, or Godhood---and that is the true beginning of religion, which was only first symbolized in the traditional religions....A lost Christian faith irretrievable in the West? No, a faith that needs transforming.

The Religious Restoration of Materialism

Past human history often found meaning without facts, and modern history finds facts without meaning. But what is civilized and what is barbaric? Are inequality, competition, human differences, or biology barbaric? Traditional religion more or less said they are.

Is materialism barbaric in general? If the material world evolves, potentially, to Godhood, defined as the zenith of beauty, truth, goodness, and order, then the material world lends itself to attaining the zenith of civilization, which certainly is not barbaric.

Does materialism bring the loss in quality and the gain in quantity, as suggested by Aaron Urbanczyk in his review of Arthur Pontynen's book on cultural renewal (Modern Age, Winter, 2026). Not if “wisdom” is defined as finding meaning in the broadest range of facts, which includes religion, science, and the arts. The modern “mysterium of expertise” of scientists and technocrats arranging knowledge that few understand usually lacks meaning, syntheses, idealism or transcendence.

Is art and aesthetics only a matter of taste? Not if human perceptions, sensations and feelings regarding beauty are directed toward gaining the highest beauty by evolving toward Godhood in the material world of sensations and perceptions.

More controversial, is the science of genetics or even positive eugenics “pathological” thinking? If life is evolving toward Godhood then it is our responsibility, and even our sacred duty, to try to help it along the way.

Is “inner necessity” a barbaric tyranny? Not if the deepest activation of life is to evolve to Godhood.

The secular does not need to destroy religion. The West can regenerate itself with the philosophy of theological materialism, which retains the past experience of the inward ascetic God, but transforms it in the outward path of material evolution to real Godhood.

Re-balancing the tripod after the fall of religion

Protestantism and Catholicism have virtually fallen and only capitalism and democracy remain fighting one another, without balancing the old tripod with moral and religious language. The right defends capitalism and the left defends egalitarian democracy, and they do not balance at all.

So can a another tripod be developed? Another religion? Cultural Marxism? I think “universalism” was the consensus that religion brought to the tripod, and sociobiology lends itself well to universalism because it realistically defines universal human nature.

When human nature is universally affirmed throughout human history as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-grading, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, this suggests Ethnopluralism, regions and states set aside for distinctive ethnic cultures, protected by federalism.

The next tripod of capitalism and representative ethnopluralism could then be balanced and universalized with theological materialism, which could provide the religious/philosophical consensus of the next tripod, with the religious goal of evolving in the material world to supermaterial Godhood. The constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states could even lend itself to ethnopluralism.

How does this compare to the old, long-lasting, Indo-European tripartite of priests, warriors and providers? Ethnopluralism and federalism can provide the group-selection base for warrior protection.

(A response to “The Post-Protestant World,” a review by Patrick Deneen, Modern Age, Winter, 2016)

Voting for Trump is America's long overdo revenge---we have a right to be hopeful, but skeptical

Wall Street and Hollywood have been screwing America for years. Voting for Trump is America's long overdo revenge. But here's a warning: Wall Street and Hollywood are lizards who change color. They are calling Trump now. Some of them have been with Trump all along. Can Trump be held to his paleoconservative foundation? We have a right to be hopeful, but skeptical.

Emerging Theological Materialism

This new/old religious philosophy boldly says that Godhood manifests its qualities of beauty, truth and goodness not through an existing God beyond the material world, but as a Godhood which we evolve toward becoming in the material or supermaterial world. The old idea of God, which was seen or experienced inwardly by ascetics, is retained but transformed. This is how religion can be saved for the future---it has been dying at least since the Enlightenment.

The big change comes in uniting the old false divisions between the material and spiritual, which has existed since even before the Judaic-Christian tradition, for example, in ancient Asia, Scandinavia, and in native America. There has existed a Great Spiritual Blockade in religion, and in philosophy, against our evolution toward real Godhood in the material world. There is no dualism between the spiritual and material, there is only the material and supermaterial. This can actually unite science and religion.

Godhood is not the geometry of the Greeks or the metaphysical complications of the Middle Ages, which were locked in an inward God thought to not be of the natural world. Godhood is a living object, or objects---or can be---at the highest levels of material evolution.

This religious philosophy stays within nature and remains in nature when it defines Godhood as evolved to in the material/supermaterial world, it does not have to escape nature when defining Godhood or the highest truths. Whatever end-times eschatology there is remains within the possibilities of natural evolution.

This religious philosophy does not point toward a God independent from space or time, which is  thought  impossible, and does not consider the material world to be a limitation on attaining Godhood, other than the natural limitations of nature, or our own ignorance, which can be remedied by further evolution.

This religious philosophy is conservative not merely a radical change, it retains the old religion but transforms it.

The status quo, change, and the purpose of the military and the police

If we want liberty and freedom then we don't reject the gun-owning military or the police, because it is they who protect us from the authoritarianism of other gun-owning militaries or local gangs who take away our liberty and freedom. Somehow modern liberalism does not understand this.

The purpose of the military and the police is to protect our liberty and freedom, not to establish liberty and freedom, as our neoconservative/neoliberal-led military tried to do in the middle east, where the conservative status quo is not liberty and freedom.

Where I would differ a bit from some conservatives is in defining the status quo as needing to include the ongoing changes of biological evolution within the status quo, which also needs protecting, because new adaptations need time and protection to know what is an improvement and what is not. 

I find the good old U.S.A. the best place in the world for protecting this kind of status quo and change, if the modern liberals or cultural Marxists are not allowed to rule.

Coming to grips with diversity and finding workable shared principles

It is not only cultural contradictions, as the politically correct both left and right define it, but biological differences which have led to the culture wars we have today. Coming to grips with diversity in America needs to relate to real human nature, and cultural Marxism doesn't affirm any biological origin to cultural behavior.

Honest people admit that human nature is 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. Even though conservatives demand solutions to the real problems of diversity which we now have, they rarely speak of this reality of human nature. It probably involves the fearful consequences of not being political correct.

The fact is, things in America worked smoother when America was mainly Anglo-Saxon, or protestant, or at least Northern European. Even the wild Middle East will work smoother when the religions and ethnic groups are given separate states. When will we be able to admit this? One is not a racist to admit this, one is a realist.

The cultural Marxism prevalent today can never attain consensus within our diversity regarding shared principles in America, because it does not relate to real human nature. This being the situation what can be done? Coming to grips with diversity and finding workable shared principles in America in reality means affirming ethnopluralism, with regions and states set aside for distinct ethnic groups. This could be done with the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states.

There really is no better workable way in our world today than ethnopluralism. Supremacy and imperialism simply don't work in this crowded world. But it means countering the grip of cultural Marxism and the various forms of communist or capitalist imperialism, and the hopeless dream of believing that harmony and peace only come when we all live under the same culture with complete equality in all things.

Godhood and Freedom Reinterpreted

Leo Strauss and others were wrong to think that Christianity and philosophy are antagonist when both have the same Gnostic and abstract non-material view of truth and God. Both believed that the highest truth and God are fundamentally beyond the natural world, something better or higher than the sinful material world. That is, Plato and the religious philosophers agree that the non-material is superior to the material.

Theological Materialism does not make that tragic mistake. Truth and Godhood are seen as material and supermaterial. Material life evolves in the material world to Godhood. The real “sin,” or evolutionary mistake, is failing to evolve toward Godhood in the material world. The real, living, material object comes before the abstract, non-material, definition of the living object.

We can give credit to religion and philosophy for finding the God or Father Within, or truth, but this ascetic Inward Path was a symbolic experience needing to be reinterpreted and expanded to recognition of the Outward Path of material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood. This offers not only a settlement between religion and philosophy but a synthesis between science, religion and political philosophy.

Without a material biological foundation defining human nature in religion, philosophy and political culture, we have developed radical ideas about how free we actually are, which has led to hedonism and ultimately to nihilism. The highest virtues, values, and truths have been thought largely unconnected to biological life which led to unrealistic accounts of human freedom and goals.

It is biology that rightly defines human nature as universal. Human nature universally includes being kin-centered, gender defined, age-grading, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. We are only as free as human nature allows us to be free. Religion, philosophy and political culture have feared real human nature, and tried, unsuccessfully, to curb it.

Real altruism, concern and sacrifice for others, derives not from the idea that the individual is sovereign but from the success of group-selection. Within groups selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals. The pull of theses two things is central to the social success of human beings but also to the problems of human nature.

It is more difficult to attain the Christian and Greek ideas of freedom by way of morally curbing human nature than it is to affirm real human nature and real human passions, which naturally leads to group-selection, and altruism, not individual hedonism, mainly because the group has always been more successful than the individual alone. Ethnopluralism this way becomes the way to synthesize universal human nature and human culture.

Freedom not only needs a moral foundation, as the Greeks and Christians believed, freedom needs a biological foundation, which then can lead to a realistic religious and political foundation. This means not coercion into one authoritarian state but separate powers and states designed for distinct ethnic cultures, harmonizing not only with real universal human nature, but with the real evolution of material life to Godhood.

Freedom Misunderstood Leads to Chaos

“Freedom” has been vital in the West but it has also been seriously misunderstood in regard to real human nature. The Enlightenment, which our Founders were fond of, concentrated on individual freedom or liberty. And the ancient Greeks, who our Founders were also fond of, sought to constrain vice and folly with virtues which were not always connected to real human nature.

The deepest and real constraints on human nature come from the “constraints” of biology. There is a strong biological component to basic human nature which is mainly denied in the modern world, but was also denied in the ancient world. Freedom without external constraints does not change the internal constraints of human nature and biology, even in the free West.

Real human nature is not evil. Human beings are “constrained” by a biologically determined human nature which includes 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. These are traditional values. Modern liberalism has needed authoritarianism and coercion to implement the increasing number of “rights” which go against real human nature.

Freedom and virtue have to relate to the biological direction of evolving life, which becomes more of an affirmation than a free choice. Individuals are not really free to do anything they want, even before constraints are put on them by social institutions. Civilized laws need to harmonize with or affirm real human nature, not impede human nature---impeding human nature does not work well in any case.

Even rational judgment which the Greeks liked so much cannot really move beyond the constraints of human nature, although it has often been tried. The highest point of ourselves is not “reason” but is the material/supermaterial Spirit-Will within life, which activates life to evolve toward Godhood, and reason may or may not understand this teleological direction or end-goal.

It is through such sciences as sociobiology more than through moral reasoning that we can understand whatever freedom we actually have, which means an understanding of the choices we may have within the constraints of determinism. Freedom and virtue relate to understanding the choices we may have within the constraints of determinism. When we have “self control” what are we really controlling? We don't govern the passions so much as we affirm determined elements of human nature, which really can't be escaped, and why would we want to escape them?

Politics can pay attention not only to freedom within determinism but to the direction of freedom, which is also largely determined. This brings religion forward as a foundation for politics, because the end of politics is conditioned by the goals of evolving life, which is Godhood.

And this is how ethnopluralism enters the philosophy of theological materialism, as the best way to reach the goals of both politics and religion, while living in a crowded world of competing ethnic cultures, who are basically governed by a human nature designed for survival and reproductive success, but more deeply seeking success in evolving toward Godhood.

The commitment to higher civilization

Our civilized security is not inevitable. Much of the rest of the world does not live under the civilized conditions of the West. We take the West so much for granted that our individual rights and our civilized institutions can slowly slip away barely without notice, although we sense that something is wrong.

Some people even welcome the abandonment of our civilization, believing in the ideology (fantasy) of universal equality and global homogeneity. Or some believe in the opposite supremacy of one people over all others, which requires a totalitarian government and leads to the violent loss of all freedoms. Both the far left socialist/communists and far right fascist/supremacists promote this sort of totalitarian fantasy. But some prefer an effete modern liberalism (cultural Marxism) which destroys the West a bit slower.

Some people, often academics, buy into the ideology that all values are relative, and so the best we can do is accept our fate and live as authentically as we can. Or some people say all we can do is love one another within the ruins.

I want to save Western civilization by affirming real human nature as defined by the biological sciences, and by including real future evolution within the Western tradition. This is the character, tone, and guiding belief behind the philosophy of theological materialism and ethnopluralism, that is, holding to Western civilization, defending it, while transforming it. This is deep conservatism. This kind of defense of the West requires reason and real belief.

We are evolving in the competitive and often devious world toward the Godhood first hinted at by traditional religions, the Godhood now seen as material or supermaterial, and reached through evolution. To best accomplish this noble and sacred mission we need to form ourselves, all of us, into smaller ethnic regions, states, and ethnic cultures which follow the Western constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states, strongly protected by the rule of conservative Western law.

How theological materialism is conservative and evolutionary

Biological, historical, and metaphysical law need not be antagonistic. Life can be defined not merely as living biology but as living biology evolving toward Godhood.

Political principles can be established that honor both religion and evolutionary standards. The particular or historical need not contrast with the metaphysical, both can be synthesized in theological materialism.

The metaphysical world is an approximation of the phenomenal world, not the other way around. The fatal argument for conservatism is to argue against evolutionary circumstances which in reality take us to real Godhood.

Humans find themselves with the establishments they have developed, but also, more fundamentally, from the execution of biological evolution, where the patterns of evolution seek survival and reproductive success in various cultures.

But far more than that, life seeks to evolve to Godhood, the God first seen or experienced and then symbolized in the Inward Paths of traditional religion, which can be retained but transformed.

It is from this deep conservative perspective that the ethnopluralism hypothesis grows, which can be conservatively accommodated by the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states, where the primary unit of group-selection and all ethnic preferences can be harmonized, including both the laws of nature and religion in political philosophy.

Perhaps the war between Russell Kirk (paleoconservative), Leo Strauss (neoconservative), and Edward Wilson (sociobiologist) can end?

Trump successfully covers up his great delegate mistake

Trump is right about the rigged delegate game, but I don't think he planned it that way. I don't think Trump understood the delegate game and he is covering a great public embarrassment. He says he purposefully did not court delegates because it is not right, or not fair. Do we really think the great deal maker would not have wined and dined delegates if he had thought of it, or had competent staff around him?

I suppose this defines the making of a politician. Well, Trump seems to remain the better choice, and he may actually change the rigged delegate game, or maybe even slow the globalism that is destroying us.

What happened to country music?

I am not a historian of the antebellum South or of country music but I imagine a southern mansion in the evening on a big plantation (no, I don't condone slavery), ruled benevolently by a real southern gentlemen, listening after dinner to live chamber music from Europe, but then as the evening progresses, and as the bourbon flows, a country fiddler perhaps from Appalachia starts playing an old American-Irish-Scottish tune with everyone loudly joining in. That is the sort of traditional agreement between the low and high arts that I imagine at the traditional beginning of country music.

Now we have the exact opposite of the values of a country gentleman, we have swaggering country singers full of obvious arrogance, glorifying drunkenness and promiscuity, with barely disguised imitations of the black rappers who now set the pop trends.

What happened? The controlled Big Media happened, promoting constant attacks against traditional American culture, using movies, television, and every other form of popular expression to sell their decadence. The southern gentleman and traditional culture are now everywhere depicted as nothing but evil.

There is still a small contingent of traditional country and bluegrass music but they are not the ones making money, and they are not the ones featured in the Las Vegas orgies masquerading as country music award shows. I would like to see a list of the producers and promoters---really defilers---of country music, I'll bet they are originally from New York or Los Angeles.

I would like to see American country music come back, but this time also infused with old Irish and Scottish instruments, flutes, tambourines, even an occasional refined bagpipe---wouldn't the urban dudes like that? But then, I would also like to see a return to the unfinished classical music tradition, which atonal "music" and other decadent trends have been corrupting for way too long.

Circling the cave where the economic secret lies

I wonder if the various ways proposed to fix inequality in the world can be correlated with the levels of intelligence, courage and compassion of the people who suggest the ways? I think it may line up in the following way, from the least to the most intelligent, courageous and compassionate:

Progressive leaders believe that all people of the world have the same average intelligence, and the way to fix inequality is to have Big Government create programs that create equality.

Paleoconservatives believe Big Government destroys economic production, with such things as the Fed policy of dropping interest rates to zero, causing the rich to put their money in the stock market, which then only widens inequality, therefore the conservatives want to help the middle and lower classes by greatly reducing the size of Big Government.

A few professors, such as Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, have shown that global inequality can be explained by national IQ's, that is, differences in intelligence are based on small genetic differences between populations, which relates to global inequality of conditions, so it will be virtually impossible to equalize differences. Lynn and Vanhanen propose such things as improving the quality of nutrition for pregnant women and infants, because IQ is also related to early nutrition.

And finally we have one or two people, like psychologist Raymond Cattell, who would initiate programs for improving the genetic qualities of people, poor and rich.

Why does it take courage to suggest these things? Because the political correctness of cultural Marxism that now rules the academic world and the big media virtually crucifies or ruins the career any person who mentions the diversity of intelligence.

Cattell's suggestions, which I think ultimately took the most courage, intelligence and compassion, have been buried even deeper than Lynn and Vanhannen's. And the paleoconservatives have been buried by the neoconservatives, who agree with most of the suggestions of the progressives, and they show the least intelligence, courage or compassion for the people, although deviousness and double-dealing requires a kind of intelligence.

How Hillary Clinton is a complete phony

Watching the morning news talk shows I was struck again with how completely phony Hillary Clinton is, beginning with the actual stupidity of her modern liberalism, which she and her womanizing husband imbibed during the cultural Marxism of the weed-smoking 1960's, to the phony feminism Hillary attempts to represent which actually denies real human nature, to the savage neoconservative/neoliberal foreign policy she promotes which in reality bullies ( isn't she against nasty bullies?) the whole world into becoming slaves to the Wall Street bankers, under the disguise of offering the world equality and democracy.

Do stupid presidential candidates come from stupid people, or from clever Big Media manipulators of the people? Stupid people fall for such manipulations. Not only would Donald Trump make a less dangerous president than Hillary, your local garbage collector would make a better president---and  I'm not exaggerating. I can only think that if Hillary becomes president a hard rain is going to fall, but it ain't going to be inspired by the imitation folk songs of Bob Dylan, it will come from a people desperate to save themselves from certain decline and fall.

What Is Art?

Can we reserve the definition of art to the affirmation of the sacred? That seems to define the greatest art as seen in religious tradition and in the heroic art of human history.

You will notice that defining what is sacred leaves open cultural differences, although the sacred is basically the affirmation of a saint, a high hero, or a nation. And “affirmation” includes many styles and periods.

The past hundred years of a few snotty intellectuals declaring that garbage or balloon dogs are art has been a farce, powerful yes, but a farce played on us all.

Let's say to hell with them---but watch out for the gender-free bathrooms because they may steal the urinals.

From here we can define high and low art as affirming the sacred in their own ways, from folk songs (even rock songs) to sacred masses and high art museum pieces. The greatest periods in human history defined art this way, and this can move art into the future.

Can we harmonize the enigmas of human nature in our religious and social philosophy?

Modern definitions of human nature have been mainly seen as abstract ideas with little resemblance to life. Why has that happened? The central dynamic of successful survival and reproduction tell lies or manipulates the truth, consciously and unconsciously, in seeking success in survival and reproduction.

It is not that we need to release an unconscious mind that does not calculate, we have to understand better both the unconscious and conscious mind, as well as the primary drives of life and human nature.

One of the biggest lies takes place, which again is done in the interest of attaining success, when we deny that there even is a human nature, claiming that human behavior is determined by culture and the environment.

Philosophy and psychology have been mainly dissociated from biology, again, so as to consciously or unconsciously manipulate or even deny the basic drives of life and human nature, in the blind drive toward success.

Where has this behavior gotten us? It has brought us to the present political and cultural nihilism and disillusionment with modern life, seen throughout the western world.

Can we harmonize these enigmas of human nature in our religious and social philosophy? The same passions animate us that have always animated us, and they need to be honestly proclaimed and seen within our identities and values. The real activating drives of human life will take us both backward and forward.

The social/cultural structures most in harmony with real human nature, which developed many thousands of years ago, remain 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. This has not changed.

But more than recognizing and affirming real human nature in political life, we need to recognize the deepest activation of life and human nature, which I have defined here as the Super-Id or the material Spirit-Will-To-Godhood that moves life ever toward Godhood in material evolution, with starts and stops along the natural way.

In other words, affirming real human nature does not reject religion as has been feared. And ascetically denying human nature does not bring us toward real Godhood, it brings us only to the inward symbolic experience of Godhood featured in traditional religions, which we keep but transform in our outward material evolution toward Godhood.

When this identity and these values are harmonized with human nature, we see that religion and political philosophy can bring forward new/yet/old structures, such as the separations of regions and states in ethnopluralism, with religion, philosophy, and science aiding not only in our daily lives but aiding in the evolution of all life toward Godhood.

Is there a realistic way out of the disillusionment and nihilism of modern life?

With “singularity” (machines as smart as humans) and transhumanism we have had the devaluing of nature rather than its exaltation, which has led to this hypertrophied belief in machines. Really? You would rather have machines run things? That could lead toward death rather than life.

This escape from reality really began long ago with the Asian Vedas, and Greek Plato, who featured a philosophy of abstract ideas mainly unconnected to living objects. Religion and politics tend to go in that direction. (see theological materialism).

To be fair, singularity and transhumanism could be seen as the response to the present political and cultural nihilism and disillusionment of modern life. But that is looking at machines positively. Looked at negatively it looks more like intelligent machines are serving highly intelligent nerdish creators of the machines. What would Stalin or Mao have done with such intelligent machines? (Hitler would probably not have liked them much.)

The disillusionment and nihilism of modern life has also led to the rise of nationalist's like Donald Trump in the U.S., the Le Pen's in France, and so on. Libertarians and modern liberals endorse the individual, the conservatives endorse the group, but then modern liberals endorse the idea of Big Government taking care of all of us from cradle to grave, and conservatives affirm the individual capitalist. This gets confusing.

Society or the individual, which is it? It's both, or we can have both, as common sense and as the sociobiological sciences have been telling us: in real life selfishness beats altruism within groups, but altruistic groups beat selfish groups. This is the real origin of altruism. Political correctness (or cultural Marxism) denies this common sense and often smears group-selection with the charge of “racism.” But here is more deviousness: it is usually bonded groups seeking power who define group-selection as racist. Human beings are something aren't they?

Is there a realistic way out of the disillusionment and nihilism of modern life? I think there is. New Politics will one day endorse group-selection as the primary unit of selection by endorsing not racism but ethnopluralism. States and regions will go back to what they were in the first place, ethnostates, where a variety of ethnic cultures, and localism, can flourish, if protected by some kind of federalism. Machines will aid human beings, not rule them. This will reflect reality, assuming we can survive until then. 

How do we recover beauty, nature and the reverence for religion?

It was a shock to the Rousseauian primatologists and anthropologists to discover that Chimpanzees hunted live monkey meat, it greatly disturbed their fond idea that the primitive world was nonviolent and harmonious until modern human cultural came on the scene. Even today sociobiologist's have not made much of a dent in the cultural Marxism which controls the academic world.

The art world too has held back the movement toward realism, being infected by the same cultural Marxism. Art went insane over the last hundred years of modernism and postmodernism and became full of triviality, ugliness and ironic political propaganda, since they were allowed nothing to believe in.

The religious world lost its connection with nature long ago with the non-materialism of the religious founders, who pursued the experience of the God Within by first blocking or overcoming all the natural material drives of life. Plato and many philosophers did the same thing pursuing abstract pure reason.

How do we recover beauty, nature and the reverence for religion? By seeing and understanding that nature evolves toward the beauty and reverence of Godhood, aided by religion, art, science, and culture. This means the ascetic Inward Path to the God Within is adjusted or transformed (not rejected) in the Outward Path of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood.

In theological materialism, religion pursues beauty and nature in evolution. Nature moves toward Godhood by way of evolution. And religion, art, science, and culture can be an aid in this great mission bringing the unification and harmony that many of us now lack, but want.

The suicidal form of altruism

If we spent $35 billion dollars on aid to disadvantaged students in the U.S. and another $35 billion on aid to gifted education in the U.S., that would about equal what our government and philanthropic organizations spend on aid overseas. Then there is such things as the supposed military aid we give to Middle Eastern monarchies and dictatorships to help them establish the blessings of democracy. And this aid is also seen in the open borders Europe has offered to millions of immigrants, who are now overwhelming Europe.

This is really suicidal altruism exploited by those who benefit from the weakening of America and the West. You know who they are, global big business, defense contractors, powerful lobbies, liberal politicians, the Big Media, and unassimilated minority groups. Some people, for example, naive college students, suburban soccer moms, and even universally-centered Christians actually believe in this kind of suicidal altruism, which has been indoctrinated by the cultural Marxist and the other venal exploiters of political correctness. Even supposedly really bright people like Bill Gates sends billions overseas in this sort of displaced altruism.

I know this sounds very cynical about human nature, but altruism really is not defined as the sort of suicidal behavior promoted by the exploiters of altruism, whether they are naive or not. Altruism arose within human nature genetically and culturally as the most successful way for various ethnic groups to successfully survive against competing groups. As the sociobiologists say, selfishness beats altruism within groups, but altruistic groups beat selfish groups. This remains basic human nature today.

And it is not only politically oriented groups that have promoted this damaging form of altruism, religion also promoted an impossible form of universal altruism by preaching that real human nature is “evil,” long before the cultural Marxists did so. Only strictly ascetics monks can attain such non-materialism by basically blocking all the forces of life and all the forces of human nature within themselves so as to experience the God Within, which should be seen as only a small secondary part of religion (see theological materialism).

We do really need to ask the question, who benefits from the hypertrophied form of altruism taken to these suicidal heights?

I think the neocons and liberals believe they can defeat any rising monster

The people obviously want economic and political nationalism, but the neoconservatives and modern liberals---who now more or less have the same agenda---really don't care about the populist base. Is that not an interesting take on democracy?

The neocons and liberals are more clever and devious than the Soviets were over the Russians. The Big Media is united against nationalism, so those paranoids who claimed that we have a controlled media were right.

“Rule or ruin” as Justin Raimondo put it is their way. Do the nationalists and populists have that kind of wild dedication? No, they are not monsters. But monsters awaken monsters, don't they? Perhaps it's chutzpah, but I think the neocons and liberals believe they can defeat any rising monster.

What is next for the West?

A few traditional Christian conservatives have been powerful in their objections to the decline of the West. I think of Pat Buchanan and Srdja Trifkovic who have been warning us about the actual mandate of Islam being war (jihad) against believers and the establishment of Sharia law over everything, and also warned us about how cultural Marxism has actually welcomed the decline of the West, like some perverted cuckold. Christianity is never blamed, only the Other is blamed. Why pile on with more criticism of Christianity and Western culture?

Here is why: the weakness of traditional religions, which include Christianity, is the foundation of non-material spiritualism. Friedrich Nietzsche saw this as a major cause of the decline of the West and he rejected religion in favor of power-for-the-sake-of-power. Science as well as the philosophical followers of Nietzsche also rejected religion, and welcomed cultural Marxism, gross consumerism for the sake of consumerism, or the empty abstractions of science. This did not save the West, it led to the relatively of values and nihilism which now cannot protect the West from decline and fall.

So what is next? Human nature always finds its way back to human nature, legally or illegally, conservatively or radically. In political philosophy this I think will lead toward the natural separations of ethnopluralism, with ethnic regions and states rising from the decline of imperialism. And I believe theological materialism will be the next stage of religion, retaining the past inward religion, but transforming it by affirming the outside material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood. This can at least remove the dead end of spiritual non-materialism, which has left the West unable to defend itself.

The elites have banished fundamental human nature, can it be revived?

James Kalb, one of our better conservative writers, arrives at the idea that the only hope we have for saving America is to be allowed to gradually change back and recover some of the vital things we have lost. (Chronicles, Feb 2016). But will global capitalism, open immigration, the Big Media, and the liberal intellectuals---who continue to indoctrinate us with unchecked immigration, hyper-consumerism, cultural Marxism, secularism and universalism---allow the necessary changes?

Modern bogus definitions of “freedom and equality” are all that we are allowed to believe in, and nothing else. All the things that in reality define a nation have been banned: language, ethnicity, religion, manners, customs, localism, all are banned.

Fundamental human nature has been banished. Think of that! The elites have banished being kin-centered, gender-defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection! Can all these natural things be recovered?

Human nature always rises again, one way or another, but conservative change is the healthiest way to change, radical revolution almost never makes things better. This is perhaps the most important idea of conservatism. We need to keep the best of the past as we change. And doing nothing is not a healthy option.

The old option on the far right of the supremacy and imperialism of one group over all others, or on the far left of a massive big government socialism, do not relate to real human nature or to our overcrowded world, which never accedes to such overbearing dominance.

I believe that the American constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states can accommodate the very natural separations of ethnopluralism, that is, regions and states set aside for ethnic cultures, at least voluntarily. Anything less than that will not restore our nation in harmony with real human nature. If this requires some small amendment to our Constitution, than so be it, it is better than decline and fall, or radical revolution.

How life has more meaning than modern philosophy or science claims

Those who suggest that life cannot have objective meaning, or that life can only have relative values, do so by rejecting the unfree activation of life itself. We may be free to choose but it is always choice within the realities of determined elements which define life.

Life has real objective meaning in that biology activates life to do real living things, which we are not legitimately free to reject. To reject the meaning of the real activation of life and biology is to virtually accept death as meaning.

We can even go further in finding determined meaning in life when we affirm the objective reality of  goals in biological evolution, or a teleology of biological evolution, that moves---with starts and stops---toward the zenith of higher evolution, which defines Godhood. This of course is rarely accepted by modern philosophy or science (or even religion) but I think it defines the ultimate or highest determined meaning of life, biology and evolution. This theological materialism gives a vital religious foundation to the meaning of life.

Conservatives need to stop trying to separate themselves from ethnocentrism

Conservatives need to stop trying to define ethnocentrism as racial supremacy or imperialism, it is a tactic they use to deal with racialists who do define ethnocentrism that way, and it, of course, is a way to avoid the career destruction of affirming ethnocentrism. Modern liberals do the same thing.

I consider myself a deep conservative, I love my country, I support the U. S. constitutional principle of the separation of powers, regions, and states, and I do not see the third stage of Hegel's dialectic as leading to a universal union where diversity and variety are lost in a great assimilation.

Human nature remains first and foremost ethnocentric, which is the original origin of altruism. Altruism has been stretched way beyond human nature by religious spiritualism and political abstractions. In real altruism, selfishness might beat altruism within groups, but altruistic groups beat selfish groups every time in successful survival.

Then individualism comes along, preached by libertarians and many conservatives, which becomes a divide and conquer tactic to attain power for people who organize in groups, which are usually ethnocentric.

We need to define real “universalism” as the national or international separation of powers, regions and states with ethnopluralism, where real human nature can flourish in natural ethnostates. The separation of powers and states in the Constitution could accommodate ethnopluralism. That is what conservatives should be working on if they wish to save the West.

Natural selection also has an activator

Evolutionary scientists are sure that natural selection does not really have a mover, or as I call it an activator. Traits are “naturally selected” over many generations of choice based on what is successful in survival and reproduction with no individual agency. But I don't limit evolution to that alone, and I do see a teleological “agency” that works along with the generational choices made in natural selection, which I call the material Spirit-Will-To-Godhood---a term that some find unwieldy but which I require so that the old idea of “spirituality” can be included as being material, or supermaterial. Life is evolving toward Godhood this way, with many starts and stops along the way, gently, perhaps, guided by the Spirit-Will within, along with the outside cruder elements of natural  evolution. I expect that this will be affirmed one day by science.

Will we contradict Spengler?

Our nation now seems doomed to decayed cities, terrible schools, slums, gangs, high taxes, radicalized minorities, demagogues, pornography, homosexuality, petty oligarchs, fast-food, strip malls... I could go on... All of this decline was instigated by the culturally Marxist dreams (or schemes) of the Big Media, the academic world, many businessmen, and most of our venal politicians...So is it all over for America?

One doesn't like to think of ones ancestors as having been fools, not so much for what they did personally, but for policies they allowed. Our ancestors foolishly believed that all religions and philosophies, all ethnic groups, all people, black, brown, beige, yellow, red, or white could assimilate and become as the model Northern Europeans who founded and developed America. But real human nature doesn't work that way.

As I have often written here before, distinct characteristics set people apart, as the solid evolutionary sciences have been telling us for many years, and it is overdo time to acknowledge our unassimilable differences. Assimilation has deep cultural, biological, and psychological components. The real antidote to most of the world's problems is not globalism, centralization, counter-revolution, cultural imperialism, military intervention, or massive immigration, the real antidote is devolution, separation, and moving from the big to the small.

I don't believe we should give up on the United States even if we seem to be moving toward that great decline and fall which Oswald Spengler claimed was inevitable. We still have means, even legal means, to save the good old U. S. A. by paying attention to the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and states which could accommodate the saving grace of ethnopluralism.

Those who supported, and now support, massive immigration, cultural imperialism, and globalism, are recognizable enemies of world peace and order. This is not advocating isolationism, we can deal with one another, but not through the forced assimilation of people and cultures which cannot be assimilated. Devolution and separation with an ethnopluralism of regions and states is the most sane, rational, and even emotionally satisfying long-term solution to our problems. I think we have good reason to contradict Spengler. Europe, Russia, China would do well to do the same, because they are facing the same human problems. Healthy people will not go down without a fight.