Friday, July 21, 2017

The Roots of Deep Conservatism


(An ongoing comparison to Russell Kirk's "The Roots of the American Order")

There is Godhood which life evolves to in the material and supermaterial world, as described in theological materialism.
This evolutionary Godhood is the source and end-goal of morality and values for humans and nations as best we can discern it.
Life can create long-term order inwardly and outwardly by affirming this evolutionary worldview.

We are designed by human nature to live in communities of kin and ethnic groups which can then bring the deepest order from a homogeneity of genes and culture.
Order involves different classes and hierarchies, which naturally develop, living within the same ethnostates, where each class is treated with the same justice.
Good political models have been monarchy, republic, or aristocracy, which help to create healthy long-lasting order in society.
The traditions of the people are followed as having developed naturally over time from who the people are genetically and culturally, even as those traditions are refined and reformed as we evolve.
When the ethnicity and traditions of a people are corrupted, neglected, or rejected, the people and the order decay, as history has shown time and again.

All people are subject to the law, powerful and unpowerful alike.
Laws develop from the laws of nature and from human nature, which includes the biological origin of much of our social behavior.

The American Constitution was a written way to preserve unwritten law that was inherited from Britain.
The Tenth Amendment protects states and regions---which eventually will become ethnostates---from each other and from corrupting influence by Big Government.

Thursday, July 20, 2017

Why journalism standards self-destructed


"In the 19th century, power meant control of the means of production; today, power lies in control of the means of communication." (Patrick Buchanan)

The deep origin of the change in the standards of journalism was the postmodernism taught in our colleges and universities since the 1960's, which taught a relativity of values, where only cultural power, not right or wrong, determined morality and cultural standards---not unlike Marxism. Editors and reporters absorbed this cultural ethos.

This also allowed other special interests, who were not at all relativistic about their values, to exploit the lack of standards of the Media.

And so we arrive at the take-down of President Trump by a Media which no-longer keeps its own opinions out of the story---and its opinions are always leftist or anarchist.

What can be done? Journalist Michael Goodwin suggests ( Imprimis, June 2017) that we actually support alternative media, which is at least a start at slowing the speeding decline of our culture due largely to the Media.

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Real human nature always rises against willful misinterpretations


Back in the 1970's the great sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson clarified Darwin's insight that human nature is in fact biologically and genetically kin-centered and ethnocentric, but that this did not mean that some races are superior and others inferior. Wilson was ignored, although he shook things up a bit for a time---water was poured over his head at a public meeting, etc.

One of the most successful propaganda campaigns ever was the campaign by the Big Media and the academic world to define "racism" as one race thinking itself superior to other races and discriminating accordingly. Even conservatives bought into this definition.

This willful misinterpretation was mainly the attempt by some races or ethnic groups to attain power by proposing a false definition of human nature. This attack on racism was actually a nefarious example of racism at work.

The Big Media and the academic world and those who used it to gain power were just too strong for Wilson to overcome, and so the lie prevailed that human nature is not ethnocentric and that we are all the same and only different due to social conditioning. It was really a brilliant deception.

But as Soviet communism fell, which also perpetuated (at gun point) this same lie of people being all the same and made different only by social conditioning, the Soviet Union broke apart into, guess what? Natural ethnostates.

This ethnocentric/populist/nationalist breakup of empires has been increasingly happening across the world---as well it might, since it reflects real human nature. But the Big Media and the academic world and those who use it to gain power remain strong. So the lie that human nature is not ethnocentric and that we are all the same continues, although it is weakening.

Even so, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates carved out of big, overgrown, artificial, sovereign borders is coming. Real human nature always rises, even if it has been on a leash for awhile.

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

The real foundation of human culture


Definitions of the "will" are varied from the idea that "virtue" is an instrument of the will (Schopenhauer), the will is amoral (Nietzsche), immoral (Buddha, Christ), sexual (Freud), or does not exist (science).

I call it the "spirit-will' (to include religion) though it is an entirely material activation. The spirit-will is the basic, primordial, activation of life toward survival and reproductive success, and perhaps exists in every cell of the body.

But more than that, this spirit-will has the end-goal of Godhood, which is a living object, or objects, evolved to in the material and supermaterial world. This Godhood also defines the highest success in survival and reproduction, and defines the highest beauty, truth, goodness and power.

This sacred description acknowledges that the will is not evil, satanic, or nonexistent, but is the most sacred element of life, after Godhood, and is the real foundation of human culture.

Monday, July 17, 2017

"...power lies in control of the means of communication"


"In the 19th century, power meant control of the means of production; today, power lies in control of the means of communication."  Patrick Buchanan

If we can survive the civil disruptions and wars there is real hope in the instinctive rise of real human nature


Communism/socialism used to define globalism, now the globalists are plutocratic neo-liberals and the Republican Party.

We thought President Trump would be a nationalist/populist but apart from a few token America First moves Trump's nationalism seems to have been a demagogic con, and Trump has increasingly joined the forces of globalism.

To many in the Alt right Russia's leader Putin looked like the nationalist they prefer. They seem to have missed the imperialism beneath Putin's nationalism, or they actually affirm imperialism as there intellectual hero Dugin does (and Bannon?).

So nothing much has changed the downward trajectory of America and the West, which the Big Media, academia, the plutocratic neo-liberals, and the Republican Party have been greatly encouraging. Things are even getting worse. There is not much left of traditional American culture.

But if we can survive the the civil disruptions and wars, there is real hope in the instinctive rise of real human nature and the natural separations of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Although there will never be perfection, kin-centered and ethnocentric human nature always rises out of the decadence of imperialism and creates real culture again.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

A moral imperative for theological materialism


Godhood is the "moral imperative," but Godhood is evolved to in the material and supermaterial world, so Godhood is not a spiritual imperative.

This moral imperative exists in the very essence of life, perhaps in every cell of the body as a primordial activation, which can be named the will or spirit-will as long as it is understood as an entirely material activation.

At this stage in our evolution we do not know what the end-goal of Godhood will be like, but we can rationally and instinctively project that it will be the highest truth, beauty, goodness, and power, and also the highest success in survival and reproduction. Power is not always included in this trinity due perhaps to religious bias and the great spiritual blockade against the material world and all it desires.

The spirit-will knows its determined end-goal but the evolutionary path is not fixed. Morals, ethnics, values, rationality, and culture form out of this moral imperative---which we have not always been aware of.

Conservative tradition need not be rejected, but the inward path to the god-within needs to include the outward path of material evolution to real Godhood. Conservative politics, democratic republics, and federalism can adapt to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, more in harmony with real kin-centered and ethnocentric human nature, as we all evolve toward Godhood.

Saturday, July 15, 2017

Back to the real living object


Many of the sociopolitical "isms" are cold and even mathematical conceptions that turn out to be far removed from real living people and real human nature.

This has applied to such central isms as fascism, Marxism, capitalism, libertarianism, and feminism, which are often dominated by cold conceptions (ideologies) often removed from reality or from real human nature.

For example, such concepts as "efficiency" and "freedom" are removed from the reality of the natural creations of human nature. Efficiency becomes engorged with bureaucracy, and freedom becomes a license to do anything, falsely free of the determined aspects of human nature.

Even conservatives say they reject cold inhuman ideologies but then create an ideology out of conservatism, most of it based in non-material definitions of God and religion.

I use the phrase "back to the real living object" relating to these disconnections to the real material world, and I don't become trapped in philosophical games defining object and subject.

I don't reject religion or conservatism but affirm a Godhood reached through material and supermaterial evolution. And I promote a political ethos based in real human nature which is basically kin-centered and ethnocentric.

Cold conceptions and definitions unrelated to human nature or human behavior are relegated to a secondary position where they belong. We need math and we need technology, but not as religion or political philosophy.

Friday, July 14, 2017

Which Way Will America Go?


It was what Mitch Landrieu praised as the "bubbling cauldron of many cultures" which doomed America. Can we face that?

This upside-down "philosophy" marched through our public educational institutions and as Mark Brennan put it, "brain-washed the hordes."(Chronicles, July 2017)

Will heroic and brilliant leadership bring us out of this cultural mess? Not at first. We will probably first have to contend with powerful instincts of basic human nature.

Human nature is mainly kin-centered and ethnocentric, and so things could first go far right, far left, or toward an openly (it is now covered) undemocratic, military-controlled capitalism.

Holding on to our democratic republic will not be easy in the face of these powerful simple passions, and that's where heroic and brilliant leadership will eventually make a difference.

That bubbling cauldron of ethnic groups may almost naturally split into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates to create survival-order out of chaos.

Then a heroic leadership may be able to conservatively adapt our constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected internally and externally by our traditional federalism.

That's the hope, which seems realistic and possible.

Thursday, July 13, 2017

How religion and science together can develop the highest culture in human history


Religious intellectuals say that God is the ultimate object of the human intellect, but they go on to make the ideas of the intellect the ultimate object. Then concepts and definitions become Gods.

Our colleges and universities do the same thing but they choose to worship the ideas and definitions of Marxist/Machiavellian/Relativity rather than living people.

There is of course a place for ideas and definitions, but real living objects are more important.

Godhood is a living object, or objects, which we evolve to in the material and supermaterial world, and Godhood is not merely a definition or idea.  Godhood is not even the inward bliss of ascetics who have managed to block all material desires.

Religion has virtually blocked science and science has blocked religion. Religion needs to return to the real material world and include the sacred evolution of material life to supermaterial Godhood. And science needs to affirm a sacred goal to material evolution, which it can aid.

Then religion and science together can get on with developing the highest culture in human history.

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Toward a republic we can keep


As Ben Franklin was leaving the Constitutional Convention he was asked what sort of a government the delegates had created and he famously said, "it's a republic, if you can keep it." Well, we couldn't keep it. The great pyramid of unelected people (GPUPS?) with the Big Media at its apex have destroyed America.

Many of us---conservatives, populists/nationalists, and even the Alt-right---thought President Trump might be able to stop or at least slow the sinking of America, but that hope is gone, due not only to the nefarious GPUPS but to Trump's fast and loose values and morals honed over a life-time in thoroughly decadent New York City.

So what's next? I suppose the far right and far left will eventually reject democratic means, and will quote the classical philosophers who predicted this consequence of democracy. The military will more likely eventually step in, also rejecting democratic means to create order.

And "order" is the important element here, because the disorder that sunk America was bought about mainly because we ignorantly allowed to form here a motley population of competing ethnic groups with competing cultures who manipulated democracy for their own ends, which tore apart the democratic republic.

Why? Because in seeking success in survival and reproduction, human nature remains deeply kin-centered and ethnocentric, and our cultures work relatively smoothly only as long as the culture remains homogeneous. We have seen the changing of American culture in the decline, decadence, and overcoming of the WASPS who founded it.

The cause of the disorder can reveal the solution, but the means will be debated. I, for one, affirm legally and gradually adapting the American constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in accord with real human nature. That will be a republic we can keep.

Any change more radical than that away from American traditions has less chance of long-term success...But first, "A hard rain is gonna fall."

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

Saving Godhood and religion by turning them downside up


Truth doesn't conquer all, the people who tell the truth do, although the truth sometimes takes time to conquer. Beautiful ideas, beautiful mathematics, beautiful words are important, and we need them, but they are not Gods. Godhood is evolved to in the material and supermaterail world.

Godhood is not a mere idea, concept, sacred word, or sacred equation, and Godhood is not the blissful experience of God felt by ascetics who have blocked all material desires. These things have wrongly become Gods. And Godhood is not a non-material spirit. Godhood is a highest evolved  living object, or objects, which ideas only define.

The ancient religious ideas, experiences, and definitions can remain, if understood as having been the first religious hints of Godhood from the Inward Paths of traditional religions. But it is the Outward Path of material evolution that leads to real Godhood which now needs to be included in religion---and science. This is a conservative undertaking.

This philosophy isn't anti-intellectual, it is anti-ignorance, and pro-life. This perspective saves Godhood and religion---and science---by turning Godhood and religion downside up. Present ancient religions have been only the beginning of religion, assuming we survive.

If Georges Dumezil was right about the tripartite division of societal functions reflected in old Indo-European social organization, ideology and mythology, then it seems to suggest that societal functions need to be led by people who have their feet and their ideals on the ground, yet looking up. Whether we are led by priests, warriors, kings, or peasants, they can save religion, Godhood, and most importantly the people, by turning religion downside up.

Monday, July 10, 2017

Unburying and redefining both the will and the spirit and bringing the lost structure back to the modern superstructure of culture


Schopenhauer thought that music was a "copy of the will itself" as the will seeks satisfaction from desire, finds pleasure, and then goes back to striving again for satisfaction, endlessly. But music also showed intervals of escape from that striving of the will, which Schopenhauer thought most important---as did Buddha and Christ.

Nietzsche adapted Schopenhauer's will and called his will "the will to power," which was a power-drive for the sake of power, and was the structure beneath the superstructure of culture. Freud then adapted both Schopenhauer and Nietzsche and said the will was the sex drive.

The earlier version of the will in religion was the non-material spirit, which at least had a sacred end-goal. Science rejected the idea of a spirit or a will and called it "the ghost in the machine."

Not included in these past views of the will---here called the Spirit-Will although it is material in every cell of the body---is the sacred material/supermaterial end-goal of the will, and that end-goal is Godhood, reached through endless successful (and sometimes unsuccessful) material and supermaterial evolution, as seen in the philosophy of theological materialism.

This unburies and redefines both the will and the spirit, which can bring the lost structure back to the modern superstructure of culture.

Sunday, July 09, 2017

Totalitarians of any sort need to see the old wisdom of the separation of powers and states


Totalitarian systems like Islam, communism, fascism, etc---and now increasingly including Western- liberal-democratic-cultural Marxism---and all expecting total acceptance, do not harmonize with real human nature, which remains kin-centered and ethnocentric, and should be leading to the separation of powers and states, and even to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

So the totalitarian temptation is a false and dangerous temptation that soon destroys the private and social health of a people, like drugs or candy, only worse. Short-term thinkers and impatient youth, and even some Christian perspectives, are prone to totalitarianism, which looks simple and efficient but is like cutting off the hands to allow the feet. Totalitarians of any sort need to see the old wisdom of the separation of powers and states.

Will they? Or are these natural cycles which imperfect man must always repeat? I tend to agree with Wilmot Robertson's politically incorrect challenge ("The Ethnostate"1992) to Spengler's cyclic view of history, where Robertson suggested that we could halt and reverse the decline of America by transforming the socially destructive aspects of ethnic or race competitions, which destroy nations and empires, into developing socially constructive ethnostates.  I continue to believe this will be done in the future.

Saturday, July 08, 2017

The return to human nature in conservatism


The always excellent James Kalb recently wrote about "returning to type" (Chronicles), which I would rather call the return to human nature. But conservatives (I consider myself a conservative) have had problems absorbing the science of sociobiology, so the conservative return to type has had problems.

Traditional conservatism has retained values and morals that relate to the sociobiological view of human nature, or vice versa, but has remained almost hostile to Darwin and the Neo-Darwinism of sociobiology and the biological origin of much of our social behavior, when they should have added it.

What perhaps stopped them or blocked them was what I call the Great Spiritual Blockade as well as the materialism or philosophical naturalism of science. The traditional God was non-material and reaching Godhood involved blocking the desires of the flesh, best accomplished in monasteries or on mountain tops. So religion and conservatism faded.

In our time almost all art, literature, philosophy, even religion have rejected or denied the deepest elements of human nature (deep conservatism), some more than others. Kinship and ethnic identity have clashed with the universalism of religion (and the cultural form of Marxism), which blocked the values of kinship and ethnic identity in both religion and in secular culture, and our people have absorbed it, since it is all they see in the Media and is all they are taught in school.

Even the smallest change in human nature, in our DNA structure---for example, in our immune system---took hundreds of thousands of years (now we have genetic engineering which is more rapid). But still we all 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. Rational and instinctive channeling of human nature and human drives, or education in general, need to move in this direction.

And religion needs to move there too, while retaining all the elements of real human nature inherent in conservatism. In theological materialism Godhood is seen as evolved to in the material and supermaterial world. This brings religion and cultural life back to nature, and back to real human nature, synthesized with science. Politically it suggest an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which conservatives can adapt to the constitutional separation of powers and states.

I believe we will eventually go there, if we can survive.

Friday, July 07, 2017

Heaven is an evolutionary meritocracy


Contrary to the concerns of many conservatives (see "Hell Is A Meritocracy," page 13, Chronicles July 2017), meritocracies do not require big culturally Marxist or fascist states any more than the private ownership of the means of production (capitalism) does.

It took awhile for IQ tests to be accepted and it will take awhile for the science of genetics to be accepted. Who wants radical change? Conservatism changes more slowly. And the change can certainly be voluntary.

The people will choose to have children without genetic diseases, and later will more positively choose to have, say, more intelligent children. That is humane. There need be no Orwellian widening of the gap between classes, genetic science will become cheaper for everyone.

Intelligence can and does rise in any class. New varieties of intelligence and creativity are welcome in ongoing evolution. The intelligent top want the bottom to improve. But this does not call for a Marxist or fascist state when an ethnopluralism of ethnostates will do nicely---an ethnopluralism of ethnostates can be conservatively adapted by the constitutional separation of powers and states in the U. S. We all rise together protecting variety over long-term evolution.

The technocratic meritocracy we have today recognizes IQ from sterile tests and then feeds the chosen into culturally Marxist universities which do not believe in the biological or genetic origin of much of our social behavior. That is an oxymoron meritocracy to say the least and it should not represent meritocracies.

As to religion, which is perhaps the bottom line of conservative objections to meritocracies: when real Godhood is understood as evolved to in the material and supermaterial world (see theological materialism) then religion and conservatism can be on the side of meritocracies. Heaven is an evolutionary meritocracy.

Thursday, July 06, 2017

Populist/nationalists or expert/specialists?


What have the experts and specialists brought us politically? A world that is a dangerous mess. The populist/nationalists didn't create this mess, the "progressive" experts and specialists did, and the postmodern relativity of values did this to us.

Sports, etc, have become a virtual religion. Why? Postmodernism has taught us that all values are relative, football is as important as religion or philosophy, the only value is in becoming an expert in anything, as Chilton Williamson recently pointed out in Chronicles.

But we don't need to be an expert to harmonize with conservative tradition, we just need to harmonize with real human nature, and that human nature is certainly not solely created by social conditioning, as our postmodern experts and specialists have taught us, like their Marxist mentors.

And 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 successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Yes, experts and specialists can be of service, but only after our final values are holistically determined.

I have no doubt that if we had listened to the populist/nationalists (say, Pat Buchanan, in spite of his faults) we would not be in the political mess we are today, which was advocated by experts and specialists, the same ones who now hate our president because he isn't an expert.

Wednesday, July 05, 2017

Stop this train


"Stop this train
I want to get off and go home again..." John Mayer

Mayer's song about himself, of course, and show biz ends by saying"...I'll never stop this train." The song could relate to the massive federal government which some of us want to see go home again to the states. That move is actually legally backed by the constitutional separation of powers and states. If we cannot go home again we may soon get operators who want to run the train as dictatorial Marxists or fascists.

But we will probably go the way of the Roman Empire which could not find its way back to a Republic and eventually, after much pain, broke apart into ethnostates. First we will probably fall apart in ethnic conflicts---wouldn't it be good if we could do this rationally and not by civil war? But an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is actually good because it will be a natural return to real kin-centered and ethnocentric human nature.

Tuesday, July 04, 2017

We can keep religion but end the Great Spiritual Blockade


How can it be possible that the highest religious traditions are suicidal?! This is the goal of the deepest ascetic discipline, an end to all willing, an end to all material desire in the pursuit of the plateau of the sublime, where the attachment to life falls away! The originating Vedas, Buddha, Christ, the philosopher Schopenhauer and many others advocated just that as the goal of at least serious religious life.

That Great Spiritual Blockade is not seen in theological materialism, which retains religion and Godhood but removes the suicidal goals which in any case do not lead to real Godhood but lead only to the blissful feeling of no pain or suffering when all willing and all desires cease, like a death in life, which is a phrase actually used by some gurus!

We reach Godhood by affirming material life and desires, Godhood is not reached by committing suicide. Godhood is reached by refining and reforming the drives of life with continuing knowledge of material and supermaterial evolution toward real Godhood. We can keep religion but end the Great Spiritual Blockade, which should make real conservatives happy.

Monday, July 03, 2017

What new religion conservatively retains and removes of old religion


Contrary to idealists from Plato to Schopenhauer, it is not mainly a non-material Idea which does not change that best defines the "universal," and it was disingenuous of Schopenhauer to try to contrast concepts with Ideas, claiming that concepts are abstract but Ideas are part of the fabric of nature.

Religion needs to return to real life and the essential elements of life. It is the very much material Will-to-Godhood, perhaps within every cell of the body, that best defines the universal, which has been with the world from the beginning of every cosmos.

We can retain Godhood and religion but not the God which is in reality the nothingness of an Idea. This perspective of Schopenhauer and the religious gurus leads to the renunciation of the will-to-life, as Schopenhauer advocated, so as to experience the non-material Idea as God.

Contrary to idealists from Plato to Schopenhauer, there is a Godhood beyond the Idea of Godhood, which can be reached through material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. And this is not the mere experience of the Idea of godhood, which even humans can reach with ascetic discipline. It is the evolution of real life beyond the present species all the way to real Godhood. This is what new religion conservatively retains and removes of old religion.

Sunday, July 02, 2017

A realism and a neo-romanticism that both religion and science can believe in


Quantum physics is not spiritual, even if we cannot perfectly understand it, and the same thing can be applied to Godhood, which is evolved to in the material world. Energy isn't spiritual either, it is based in the material, as all things are.

The origin of life isn't spiritual, it begins at the lowest stages of life and then evolves in the material world to the highest stages of evolved life, which is Godhood.

It is evolving life that is probably eternal, with many starts and stops along the way, and then if life is supremely successful life can, and has, evolved to Godhood.

Why did the spiritual invade the material? I suppose for wish-fulfillment. James Tate called this invasion a definition of romanticism.

The great gurus found that if material desires were blocked with much discipline it would also block all pain, and they equated that blissful state with Godhood, which was a great limitation of real Godhood.

Since about the Enlightenment science hasn't believed there is a spiritual or a Godhood. But that was mainly because they thought of God as spiritual, since all the gurus defined God that way.

Science can be brought in from the cold when Godhood is seen as material or supermaterial and is understood as that which we can evolve to in the material world.

That is a realism and a neo-romanticism which both religion and science can believe in.

Saturday, July 01, 2017

Moving toward theological materialism


I disagree with Schopenhauer that artistic, ascetic, or philosophical genius work at their best when they are "will-less" or independent of the will, and that this is where true objectivity comes from.

This also Buddha and Christ and their countless followers believed. In another related way, legions of scientific thinkers reject any idea of a will and see only random selection taking place with no sacred end-goal.

Both religion and science deny any sacred material activation within life: science sees only random outside selection pressures, and religion sees only a non-material spiritual end-goal.

At least religion was right about the sacred goal, but was mistaken in defining the goal as non-material and spiritual, or as the result of blocking the will.

On the contrary, the will or the Spirit-Will (although completely material) exists as an activation within perhaps every cell of the body to evolve to the highest success in survival and reproduction, which ultimately can lead to Godhood.

The inward activation of the will works with whatever outside environment of natural selection it finds itself living within. And now humans are even moving beyond an almost ageless unconscious natural selection toward conscious genetic engineering, although they have no religious end-goal.


Friday, June 30, 2017

Worse than talking about Mika's face lift Trump has not done what he said he was going to do to get elected


So the "Morning Joe" television gabble about face lifts etc. shows us that we have a barbarian or at least a vulgarian in the White House. I don't think the people who voted for Trump would mind that much if Trump did what he said he was going to do to get elected. But Trump has been a bit of a demagogue.

But worse than appealing to the emotions and prejudices of people to get elected, Trump has been swayed (a barbarian would not have been swayed) by the greatest influence dealers in Washington, the Wall Street lobby, the fossil fuel lobby, and the Israeli and Saudi lobbyists.

All this needed to be curbed if we are to save ourselves. We needed a leader more like Pat Buchanan who was strong enough but also smart enough not to be swayed by the corrupt global elite---I suppose we could have lived with his barbarian disbelief in the cultural importance of biological evolution.

We no longer defend our borders, we no longer procreate, we live only for immediate pleasures, and so any talk of our leaders being barbarians or vulgarisms, or of trying to refine them, pales with the constant successful push by the postmodern global elite to create and control "one-world" by destroying diversity and individual nations.

Thursday, June 29, 2017

Can we protect the democratic republic as the nation falls into the postmodern swamp?


Men with good intentions but not much patience may not be able to protect the democratic republic as the nation falls into the postmodern swamp. They will think that patience only makes things worse, and they will be almost right.

When the leftists are rioting in the streets and shutting down the ability to object to the dying of your culture and your people, the impatient instinct wants to riot against the rioters. Is that what will happen?

Standing up for legality and a constitutional means of fighting back will be difficult to support while in the middle of a cultural or literal war zone. The tendency is to move toward a radicalism that tears down the good with the bad, and that is where conservatives hold the line against radicalism.

But conservatism will conserve nothing if we can't find conservatives with real power and leadership. I believe if conservatives want to capture one of the strong concerns of the rising younger people on the right, who are the impatient ones, then conservatives will need to deepen conservatism by including (re-including?) the biological origin of much of our social behavior, and that includes the preference for kin and ethnic group, which has been suppressed by postmodernism.

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Redefining altruism in the natural order of conservatism


In the natural order, human nature is primarily kin and group-centered (ethnocentric ) and to demand otherwise goes against the natural order. Yes we have to care about the wider world but that caring exists at the farther end of the natural order of altruism. The way Christ's commandment that we should love our neighbor as ourselves can be defined as within the natural order is if it is defined as loving our real neighbor. The Catholic principle of subsidiarity---a central authority should perform only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level, Wikipedia---has to take into account this sociobiological definition of human nature.

The wise constitutional separation of powers and states in the U. S. is harmonious with altruism in the natural order. But to deepen our commitment to acting within the natural order, those powers and states need to, gradually, become ethnostates within an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Subsidiarity and solidarity need to work within the parameters of real human nature which 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.

When Catholics and other religions miss this natural sociobiological view of altruism they tend to make big mistakes. Real conservatism, deep conservatism, needs to include Darwin, who was in effect ejected from conservatism by William Buckley and others, and soon conservatism degenerated into neoconservatism, which was/is almost as far outside the natural order as Marxism.

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Avoiding authoritarian healing



Authoritarians seems to rise when basic national and cultural health is seen as greatly suffering and the powers that be are doing nothing about it or are even encouraging the destruction. The authoritarian and his fellow travelers see this happening and decide to do something about it, that is, the authoritarian says he knows what the nation and culture need and he does not want to merely give the people what think they need, as demagogues might do.

The authoritarian thinks that the powers that be are not mending the dying culture but making it worse. But why would people want to make the culture worse rather than better? The perpetuaters of the destruction often gain personal power for themselves or their groups by destroying or nearly destroying everyone else. The authoritarian usually thinks that democracy is too slow and is too easily manipulated or exploited, and so no improvements are happening with democracy.

This is why in times of great disorder deep conservatism falls back on tradition, that is, on the return, or at least the partial return, to what has worked in the past to make a civilization relatively healthy. Traditions last long because they are based in real human nature. In every human culture ever studied, human nature included, among other things, kin-selection preferences, incest taboos, marriage, hierarchy, division of labor, gender differentiation, localism, ethnocentrism, and even xenophobia. If a culture proposes to not include these things, the culture does not last long and will always, eventually, return to these things.  Most of these values also happen to be at the core of conservatism and tradition, whereas many of these traits are missing in, say, communism and post-modernism.

So if the authoritarian---or the advocate of democratic republics for that matter---are politically and culturally healthy they will not say they are going to "make it new" but say that they will "make it better." Change is best made within conservative traditions that follow basic human nature, which is conservative.

As I say here often, the least we should do is reaffirm our original democratic republic, where ultimate power rests in citizens who are entitled to vote to elect representatives to wield that power, whereas in direct democracies, which we have drifted into, people vote on policy directly. Democratic republics are probably as close as we can come in the modern world to aristocracies, that is, rule by the best, ideally chosen from merit. 

Then we can work on creating an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in America, more in line with real kin-centered and ethnocentric human nature, which the Founders didn't anticipate, not foreseeing the now violent competitions between distinctly different ethnic groups within the nation. All this can be done conservatively and legally by affirming, but adapting, the constitutional separation of powers and states.

Otherwise democracy will fade simply because it no longer works, and the natural need for order which is required to live healthy lives could choose authoritarian undemocratic Marxism, or fascism.

Monday, June 26, 2017

Using postmodernism to dismantle postmodernism


While reading a Jon Cassidy review in the June 2017 "Chronicles" (Scandalous Education) it occurred to me that those who oppose postmodernism, critical theory and cultural Marxism, which now dominate our universities, can use the same phony philosophy against them.

Agreeing with the postmodernists, for the sake of the argument, that whites or white males oppressed other groups, this has changed and now whites (and Asians?) are being oppressed by the postmodernists. Whites are blocked in humanities departments, but also remember the recent campus lectures forcefully stopped through rioting?

The just and rational way to deal with these oppressions of one group by another is to agree that culture is a superstructure created not by evil oppressors, as Marx said, but by the natural biological origin of most of our social behavior, which seeks survival and reproductive success for various distinctively different groups, including minorities, gays, females, and yes even whites.

You solve this competitive problem not by trying to force human nature to be what it is not, as the Marxism of postmodernism does in demanding absolute equality, but by allowing each group its own region, state and locality where it can pursue its own distinctive superstructure of culture. This can bring whatever real harmony is possible given human nature.

Conservatives in the U. S. can be assuaged by accomplishing this through the adaptation of the constitutional separation of powers and states.

Sunday, June 25, 2017

A slightly optimistic view of the future


I suppose it's rational to say that people and governments aren't rational. We can't seem to change or even improve Big Government programs, say, health care, until the programs fall apart because we can't borrow any more money to run them.

The same goes for most actions to change Big Government, say, giving power back to the states as the constitution originally intended.

And the deepest improvement, of gradually, constitutionally, inclining the states toward being ethnostates, to harmonize with kin-centered and ethnocentric real human nature, is also not happening as it rationally could, and this most likely will not happen until the nation nearly falls apart with civil and ethnic strife.

This does not seem like an optimistic view of human behavior, but it is if you stretch the definition a bit and see that human history has always moved from natural ethnostates and ethnopluralism to big empires which naturally fall apart and then move back to ethnostates.

The drawback to this fatalist view is that it can cause people to wait for the inevitable and do nothing. But a new structure needs to be mostly built and in place when the old structure falls, so continuing work is needed.

That doesn't quite satisfy, but it's realistic.

Saturday, June 24, 2017

Here is a fictional excerpt from Trollope on the Big newspaper of his day


Big Media Gods of today? Here is a fictional excerpt from Trollope on the Big newspaper of his day. 

"The Warden" by Anthony Trollope,1855 from chapter 14 Mount Olympus

..."He next thought of the newspapers.  The case had been taken up by more than one; and he was well aware that the keynote had been sounded by
The Jupiter...  
 Who has not heard of Mount Olympus,--that high abode of all the powersof type, that favoured seat of the great goddess Pica, that wondroushabitation of gods and devils, from whence, with ceaseless hum ofsteam and never-ending flow of Castalian ink, issue forth fiftythousand nightly edicts for the governance of a subject nation?
Velvet and gilding do not make a throne, nor gold and jewels a
sceptre.  It is a throne because the most exalted one sits there,--and
a sceptre because the most mighty one wields it.  So it is with Mount
Olympus.  Should a stranger make his way thither at dull noonday, or
during the sleepy hours of the silent afternoon, he would find no
acknowledged temple of power and beauty, no fitting fane for the
great Thunderer, no proud façades and pillared roofs to support
the dignity of this greatest of earthly potentates.  To the
outward and uninitiated eye, Mount Olympus is a somewhat humble
spot,--undistinguished, unadorned,--nay, almost mean.  It stands
alone, as it were, in a mighty city, close to the densest throng
of men, but partaking neither of the noise nor the crowd; a small
secluded, dreary spot, tenanted, one would say, by quite unambitious
people at the easiest rents.  "Is this Mount Olympus?" asks the
unbelieving stranger.  "Is it from these small, dark, dingy buildings
that those infallible laws proceed which cabinets are called upon to
obey; by which bishops are to be guided, lords and commons controlled,
judges instructed in law, generals in strategy, admirals in naval
tactics, and orange-women in the management of their barrows?"
"Yes, my friend--from these walls.  From here issue the only known
infallible bulls for the guidance of British souls and bodies.
This little court is the Vatican of England.  Here reigns a
pope, self-nominated, self-consecrated,--ay, and much stranger
too,--self-believing!--a pope whom, if you cannot obey him, I would
advise you to disobey as silently as possible; a pope hitherto afraid
of no Luther; a pope who manages his own inquisition, who punishes
unbelievers as no most skilful inquisitor of Spain ever dreamt of
doing;--one who can excommunicate thoroughly, fearfully, radically;
put you beyond the pale of men's charity; make you odious to your
dearest friends, and turn you into a monster to be pointed at by the
finger!"  Oh heavens! and this is Mount Olympus!

It is a fact amazing to ordinary mortals that _The Jupiter_ is never
wrong.  With what endless care, with what unsparing labour, do we not
strive to get together for our great national council the men most
fitting to compose it.  And how we fail! Parliament is always wrong:
look at _The Jupiter_, and see how futile are their meetings, how vain
their council, how needless all their trouble!  With what pride do we
regard our chief ministers, the great servants of state, the oligarchs
of the nation on whose wisdom we lean, to whom we look for guidance in
our difficulties!  But what are they to the writers of _The Jupiter_?
They hold council together and with anxious thought painfully
elaborate their country's good; but when all is done, _The Jupiter_
declares that all is naught.  Why should we look to Lord John
Russell;--why should we regard Palmerston and Gladstone, when Tom
Towers without a struggle can put us right?  Look at our generals,
what faults they make; at our admirals, how inactive they are.  What
money, honesty, and science can do, is done; and yet how badly are our
troops brought together, fed, conveyed, clothed, armed, and managed.
The most excellent of our good men do their best to man our ships,
with the assistance of all possible external appliances; but in vain.
All, all is wrong--alas! alas!  Tom Towers, and he alone, knows all
about it.  Why, oh why, ye earthly ministers, why have ye not followed
more closely this heaven-sent messenger that is among us?

Were it not well for us in our ignorance that we confided all things
to _The Jupiter_?  Would it not be wise in us to abandon useless
talking, idle thinking, and profitless labour?  Away with majorities
in the House of Commons, with verdicts from judicial bench given after
much delay, with doubtful laws, and the fallible attempts of humanity!
Does not _The Jupiter_, coming forth daily with fifty thousand
impressions full of unerring decision on every mortal subject, set all
matters sufficiently at rest?  Is not Tom Towers here, able to guide
us and willing?

Yes indeed, able and willing to guide all men in all things, so
long as he is obeyed as autocrat should be obeyed,--with undoubting
submission: only let not ungrateful ministers seek other colleagues
than those whom Tom Towers may approve; let church and state, law and
physic, commerce and agriculture, the arts of war, and the arts of
peace, all listen and obey, and all will be made perfect.  Has not Tom
Towers an all-seeing eye?  From the diggings of Australia to those of
California, right round the habitable globe, does he not know, watch,
and chronicle the doings of everyone?  From a bishopric in New Zealand
to an unfortunate director of a North-west passage, is he not the only
fit judge of capability?  From the sewers of London to the Central
Railway of India,--from the palaces of St Petersburg to the cabins of
Connaught, nothing can escape him.  Britons have but to read, to obey,
and be blessed.  None but the fools doubt the wisdom of _The Jupiter_;
none but the mad dispute its facts.

No established religion has ever been without its unbelievers, even
in the country where it is the most firmly fixed; no creed has been
without scoffers; no church has so prospered as to free itself
entirely from dissent.  There are those who doubt _The Jupiter_!
They live and breathe the upper air, walking here unscathed, though
scorned,--men, born of British mothers and nursed on English milk, who
scruple not to say that Mount Olympus has its price, that Tom Towers
can be bought for gold!

Such is Mount Olympus, the mouthpiece of all the wisdom of this great
country.  It may probably be said that no place in this 19th century
is more worthy of notice.  No treasury mandate armed with the
signatures of all the government has half the power of one of those
broad sheets, which fly forth from hence so abundantly, armed with no
signature at all.

Some great man, some mighty peer,--we'll say a noble duke,--retires to
rest feared and honoured by all his countrymen,--fearless himself; if
not a good man, at any rate a mighty man,--too mighty to care much
what men may say about his want of virtue.  He rises in the morning
degraded, mean, and miserable; an object of men's scorn, anxious only
to retire as quickly as may be to some German obscurity, some unseen
Italian privacy, or indeed, anywhere out of sight.  What has made this
awful change? what has so afflicted him?  An article has appeared in
_The Jupiter_; some fifty lines of a narrow column have destroyed all
his grace's equanimity, and banished him for ever from the world.
No man knows who wrote the bitter words; the clubs talk confusedly of
the matter, whispering to each other this and that name; while Tom
Towers walks quietly along Pall Mall, with his coat buttoned close
against the east wind, as though he were a mortal man, and not a god
dispensing thunderbolts from Mount Olympus..."

The default political unit is ethnostates, not empire


I think it was Chronicles magazine which suggested that the default political unit is empire. I disagree. The default political unit is ethnostates or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, perhaps with some sort of federalism keeping the peace.

Historians debate about this, but when real human nature is included in the debate, which includes the biological origin of much of our social behavior, then ethnostates and ethnopluralism can be seen as the natural default political unit.

Human nature remains kin-centered, ethnocentric, and locally grounded, and these traits evolved within human nature even before we became humans and remain with us today, even if this definition is buried. As E.O. Wilson said, it's as if we are on a leash of human nature which always pulls us back to what we really are.

This perspective on history is mainly denied, or not even mentioned, especially since the battles with fascism of WWII, after which real human nature was buried by the politically correctness of a relativistic cultural Marxism and amoral global capitalism, who opposed one another but not on empire---and both were against the viability of ethnostates.

And so whether historians agree or not, this is where the decadent empires of today are headed, one way or another. I say we should be prepared to welcome it.  In the U. S. we can even conservatively adapt the constitutionally separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Friday, June 23, 2017

Economists won, Darwin lost


Modern culture brought us Darwin and laissez-faire economics, but Darwin was ejected from the culture, especially following WWII. Darwin might have been somewhere in the DNA of modern economics (see "A Faith Misplaced," Chronicles June 2017) but contrary to that review, Darwin was quickly buried by libertarian economists--that is, the notion of there being a biological origin to social behavior was made taboo.

Global libertarian economists were co-opted by amoral global capitalists. Real conservatism, deep conservatism, which included Darwin, was ejected from conservatism by William Buckley and others, and soon conservatism degenerated into neoconservatism, which was also co-opted by the global capitalists. This led to the decadence, degeneration, and corruption of Western culture which we see today.

We wait for economists to again include Darwin and the biological origin of much of our social behavior. This might instinctively and logically lead to examining the ethnopluralism hypothesis and the development of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could be conservatively adapted by the American constitutional separation of powers and states---and real human nature could be affirmed.

This could not only bring economics and Darwin back together, and it might even harmonize science and religion (once the material evolution to Godhood is affirmed)...I can't be alone in seeing this perspective as conservatism in action, can I?  If so than the radical far right or far left will inherit it, and conservatism will suffer.

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Which future will we choose?


Whether or not the Russians interfered in our last presidential election, the fact that this can be done with cyber technology certainly undermines faith in democratic systems, which have enough problems working anyway. 

The least we should do is reaffirm our original democratic republic, where ultimate power rests in citizens who are entitled to vote to elect representatives to wield that power, whereas in direct democracies, which we have drifted into, people vote on policy directly. Democratic republics are probably as close as we can come in the modern world to aristocracies, that is, rule by the best, ideally chosen from merit. 
  
After we restore the democratic republic that our Founders preferred, we can work on creating an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in America, more in line with real ethnocentric human nature, which the Founders didn't anticipate, not foreseeing the now violent competitions between distinctly different ethnic groups within the nation. All this can be done conservatively and legally by affirming, but adapting, the constitutional separation of powers and states.
   
Otherwise democracy will fade simply because it no longer works, and the natural need for order which is required to live healthy lives could choose an undemocratic Marxism or fascism. Which future will we choose?

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Distinctly different models of beauty


"Beauty" can be defined as the best model of the particular species or subspecies, beauty is not "universal," not equal, and not noncompetitive. It's the "idea" of beauty among philosophers that takes off on its own away from the realm of reality.

Like most of modern culture our beauty contests are drunk with the unreality of equality, universalism, and non-competition, based on the false utopian idea that we are all the same.

Beneath the charade of people and groups demanding equality is the truth that groups are really demanding not equality but superiority. And here is the politically incorrect news: it reflects basic human nature to seek superiority not equality. But this reality does not call for a politics and culture of supremacy with one group lording it over another, if anything it calls for the natural separations of ethnopluralism.

When blacks hold beauty contests for blacks-only they are following the natural track of seeking the best real models of beauty for their specific ethnic group, or subspecies. This would be courageous and refreshing if blacks allowed the subspecies of whites to do the same thing without negatively calling them "racist."

"Multiculturalism" was the ridiculous attempt to get distinctly different ethnic groups to live in the same space under the Utopian universal ideas of cultural Marxism. And so we now have such things as absurd beauty contests between apples and oranges. This has clearly not worked as our cities increasingly erupt with racially motivated disruptions.

The challenge is to find a way to allow real beauty to be defined relating to distinctly different models of beauty. This is where developing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates comes in, which in the U.S. could be conservatively developed from the foundation of the constitutional separation of powers and states.

If there is anything universal it is the inside activation of life to evolve toward Godhood in the material world, working along with outside evolutionary selection---and evolution works best with variety.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

It is not enough for conservatives to say that our social problems may not have political solutions


Many if not most of our social and cultural problems come from the biological origin of much of our social behavior, whether the left or the right controls government, so it is not enough for traditional conservatives to say that our social problems may not have only political solutions without mentioning the biological differences between people, ethnic groups, or races.

Conservative religion alone will not save us if that religion denies the importance of biological differences in our social behavior. I think conservatism is held back by the universalism of its religious values, which amounts to an ideology, yes ideology, as potent as any ideological Marxist heaven. The belief in the spiritual, not material, advance of life toward non-material Godhood dampens deep thought regarding real material life and evolution. The foundation of religion, which is vital, also needs to adapt to the reality of a Godhood reached through material evolution, which then can concentrate the mind on the biological origin of much of our social behavior and its problems.

It is understandable why the conservatives don't talk about biological and genetic differences leading to social problems because they know they will be crucified by the cultural Marxism that now controls our culture, which believes that there is no biological basis to human nature, and indeed does not even think there is a biological and genetic human nature, because all behavior is culturally created.

This is why I think the real conservative solution to the fall of the American republic (which is supposed to be more aristocratic than democratic) is to adapt the wise constitutional separation of powers and states toward developing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates within America. This would finally address the fact that human nature remains 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 successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Monday, June 19, 2017

The main problem with leadership today


I think it was a Marine defense leader who said that morality is the main source of real leadership decisions. "Style" comes in as how you present your moral decisions.

Demagogues seem to be all style and no morality seeking selfish power by simulating morality.

Religion, culture, education traditionally helped develop the morality with which leaders would later make decisions. But we have been dominated by postmodernism in our cultural institutions which teach a relativity of all values.

We now have libertarian capitalists and non-judgmental progressive liberals, and both have no real morality other than believing in a a relativity of values, therefore they are not real moral leaders.

And so we have the great mess of modern Western culture. The moral relativity of so-called high-culture elites is copied by the moral relativity of pop culture, and then promoted by a powerful and corrupt Media, which has its own selfish agenda.

This decay may doom us, but in any case it needs to change if the West is to rise again.

Sunday, June 18, 2017

Watching misfits and freaks march by on their way to shutting down a major freeway


Watching misfits and freaks march by on their way to shutting down a major freeway in response to a policeman being acquitted by a jury for shooting and killing a black man, I recalled Chilton Williamson's estimate that 50 percent of the American population who make up the Democratic Party are represented by those freaks and misfits. 50 percent! I suppose that would include the limousine liberals who were brainwashed in elite colleges to talk like modern liberals but actually live conservatively.

How did we get into this big mess? It was the result of the Big Media, the Academic world, and Big Government liberals who propagandized and brainwashed the public, after they had marched through all of our social institutions. But of course it was the few chosen elite who led this march who benefited most, not the freaks, misfits, or the rest of the healthier population.

The temptation of course is to mount a radical undemocratic counter revolution to take back our institutions by force, but if we are conservatives we see the longer-term wisdom of using only legal and constitutional means of change.

But we do need a new approach within conservatism, a deeper conservatism, based on adapting the constitutional separation of powers and states to include an ethnopluralism of regions and ethnostates. The nation will most likely break apart into this natural configuration in any case, either chaotically or rationally, since real human nature supports it, and real human nature always historically leads to traditional kin-centered, and yes, ethnocentric states and regions reforming out of decayed empires...I don't believe there is a better way to save America.

Saturday, June 17, 2017

We do not meditate or pray our way to Godhood


I am unable to use either the realist or nominalist arguments in ontology or epistemology, they are all mixed up together, half right and half wrong.

Godhood, truth, beauty, goodness, do exist outside of the mind, they do not exist in the mind only, but they are not spirituals or universals.

We do not meditate or pray our way to Godhood, which is only a blissful experience in the mind only, we evolve in the outside material world to supermaterial Godhood, if we are lucky.

Godhood, truth, beauty, goodness are the attributes and attainments of living things evolved to in the real outside material world---objects are far more important than the definitions of objects.

This is also the way we can bring religion and science together, that is, under the philosophical naturalism as seen in theological materialism, although we do not yet admit this because naturalists are also lost in mere words regarding truth and Godhood, but less so than theologians or philosophers.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

The way of real conservatism in the future


Conservatives are too liberal in what they center on conserving. Living people need to be conserved if we wish to conserve the cultures people create.

Both conservatives and liberals center on conserving cultural ideas more than people, even though conservatives claim to be against ideology.

The ideology of multiculturalism has jammed together different people with different cultures in the same space and told them all to get along by following the same politically correct multicultural ideology. This has increasingly led to social disruptions.

It has been politically incorrect on the left and the right to even speak of conserving specific people or specific ethnic groups who in fact create specific cultures.

Is there a way out of this political mess, which has been good (in the short term) for a few specific people and groups at the expense of everyone else?

Conservatives have the political tool in the constitutional separation of powers and states, which has been increasingly losing to the growth of Big Government and globalist control.

The constitutional separation of powers and states needs not only to be fought for but legally expanded toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates within the regions and states of America, balanced by federalism and subsidiary.

That is the way to actually conserve people and therefore conserve the cultures people create.

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

The real "progress" of humanity?


Conservatives are right in saying that modern culture has virtually lost traditional spirituality, but they have not transformed religion to bring it back. Let's face it, traditionalism is largely against evolution, and that needs to be transformed.

People tend to go with the age they are living in and don't much think about where they are going religiously or philosophically. Solve the problem of the great goal of life and values and morals will follow.

The great ideals need not uproot the instincts as the ascetics do, but harmonize the instincts, specifically the instinct within every cell of the body to evolve in the material world to the highest beauty, goodness and truth, which defines Godhood.

The real "progress" of humanity? Our material evolution to supermaterial Godhood, which has been blocked by the traditional view of  the Idea of spiritual non-material God, found or experienced by renouncing materialism and evolution.

The way to bring back religion is by affirming the material evolution to supermaterial Godhood, which has been lost in the delusions of religion and philosophy, as well as being rejected by science.

Can we do this? The future of life (at least in out corner of the universe) may depend on it.

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Theological materialism restores religion in society and stops the false duality between spiritualism and materialism


Humans have expended much energy throughout history trying to reconcile and mingle religion with civil society, when they are flatly irreconcilable based on the basic call for non-materialism of all the religious founders.

Religion and society created this problem for itself based on a great metaphysical error. The great spiritual blockade against materialism blocked the only means to attain Godhood by way of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood.

As a consequence of this false metaphysical duality, religion has clearly been losing to cultural Marxism, unrestrained capitalism, atheism, post modernism, etc. Islam dealt with this metaphysical duality by creating a militant, material, warrior spiritualism, which is contradictory to say the least.

Theological materialism restores religion in society and stops the false duality between spiritualism and materialism by affirming that the only means to attain Godhood is by way of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood.

But the philosophy of conservative is so true and natural that we need to conservatively include the old non-material Inward Path first experience of God, but transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to real Godhood.

There is not the two cities of God and man, which was Augustine's way of trying to reconcile materialism and spiritualism, there is only the "philosophical naturalism” of theological materialism, with the difference being that philosophical naturalism is generally irreligious, and theological materialism is certainly religious in seeing Godhood as the goal of evolution and of man, first mirrored in the Father-Within of traditional religion.

Monday, June 12, 2017

Rule by money-power has not always been the history of Indo-European people


Rule by money-power has not always been the history of Indo-European people, where a three-tiered structure usually ruled, with priests or warriors on top and producers (money power ) always last, and traditionally at least, never ruling. As wikipedia puts it, over time " offshoots of the Proto-Indo-Europeans had reached far and wide across Eurasia, including Anatolia (Hittites), the Aegean (the ancestors of Mycenaean Greece), Western Europe (Corded Ware culture), the edges of Central Asia (Yamna culture), and southern Siberia (Afanasevo culture)."  All more or less maintained that tripartite ruling structure.

Rule by money-power really got going in the Industrial Age, and they have now made a real mess of things, virtually destroying Western moral culture, even as they helped advance medical knowledge and other technology which has greatly lengthened lives, especially in the Western world. Occasional attempts have been made to stop money-power. One could say, without otherwise approving of them, that the fascists in Italy and Germany before WWII took on the globalist money-power, and we might even say that the Islamic terrorists are religious warriors trying to take down the money-power. But now a globalist, neoconservative, money-power rules and seem too strong to stop.

So what will happen? Western religion as we now have it seems unlikely to become a ruling force, and that leaves the military, which is now also corrupted by money-power. But that could change as civil disorder increases. We could at least hope that a Western warrior elite would eventually see the vital importance of religious guidance. But it would need to be a transformed religion, one that included the evolutionary sciences, with the material understanding of a supermaterial Godhood reached only through material evolution. Then if we conservatives wanted it, democratic republics could become an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, balanced by federalism and subsidiarity, in line with real human nature, and workable in the real overcrowded world.

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Real conservatives will keep the best of the past while allowing and helping material evolution to transform us


Synthesizing reaction and revolution we get conservatism. Change is reality, but so is retaining the best of the past. That is the way the real reality of evolution works.
The human body and brain evolved by retaining the fish, reptilian and mammalian brain. That is conservatism in action.

So when conservatives reject or ignore an ethnopluralism of ethnostates as the culmination of modern conservatism they are being reactionary. Revolutionaries reject this also in the name of attacking the traditional ethnocentrism of real human nature.

Human beings are wholly animal and to say we are not is to demean nature, which religion has often done in the name of being against materialism. But we are not permanently human and will, or can, evolve beyond the human while retaining much of what is human. Real conservatives will keep the best of the past while allowing and helping material evolution to transform us.

This is the conservative path to real Godhood, which is evolved to in the material world.

Saturday, June 10, 2017

Some challenges in developing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates


It is the affirmation of the sociobiological view of human nature that leads almost naturally to seeing the good sense in developing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. That is, as often repeated in this blog, human nature remains gender different, age-graded, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, religion-making, group-selecting, and other typically traditional traits. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but culture is always eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature.

There are of course challenges in developing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates within the U.S., but the constitutional separation of powers and states, created by our Founders, can lend itself well to ethnostates, perhaps with a few amendments---I doubt if the Founders thought our nation would be multicultural and multiracial. One of the challenges will be the ethnic enclaves that have developed within large cities, which are distinctly different ethnically and racially from the majority living outside the enclaves, brought on by the failed experiment of multicultural cities. Multicultural cities didn't fail because of evil racists, they failed because they did not reflect the human nature mentioned above. Ethnostates would have worked better. We always fall back on trusted kinship and ethnic groups in any case no matter what the philosophers tell us.

Migration of minority ethnic groups to ethnostates better reflecting their own group would be the first choice. Incentives could be offered, but this wouldn't be as difficult as it may sound since people do prefer to live with their own kind. The second choice would be to devolve power to the ethnic enclaves within cities, making them ethnostates with great autonomy. Federalism and subsidiary could protect the whole, inside and outside, independence would be affirmed... But we need to be open to new ideas in dealing with the challenges of developing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Perhaps it is time, as someone wisely said, to let the ethnic differences which have torn us apart, put us back together again.

Friday, June 09, 2017

Allow sociobiology in the humanities


Science can define Godhood and science needs to be brought into the humanities, specifically the science of sociobiology, the study of the biological origin of much of social behavior, which includes religion, art, politics, ect..

The humanities don't have the last word on defining human nature. Sociobiology has looked deeply into human nature, at least as deeply as the theologians or the poets ever did. Sociobiology deserves a seat at the cool kids table.

Abstract ideas in the humanities have drifted far away from human nature to the point of denying that there is a human nature. To the postmodernists all is relative---of course not including that statement---all is environmentally malleable, genetics and biology are conveniently overlooked, the humanities have become a cultural form of Marxism.

How does science define Godhood as the base of the humanities? Life materially evolves to supermaterial Godhood, and science along with the humanities can be a great help in that sacred mission. Dying religion can be revived, the humanities can be rescued from deterioration.

Thursday, June 08, 2017

More on the conservative/sociobiological fusion


The fusion of nature (tradition, precedent) and nurture (reason) in sociobiology, may be a clearer  way to view the fusion of libertarianism and conservatism. The twin studies were an ingenious way to tell the difference between nature and nurture by studying twins separated at birth living in different environments. Our social behavior is far more genetically determined than both the left and right have thought.

Conservatism and sociobiology have suggested to me that the realistic way to find unity within divisions is by upgrading the constitutional separation of powers and states envisioned by our wise Founders to include an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where real human nature can flourish. We remain kin-centered, ethnocentric, marriage-making, gender-defined, and other traditional norms, which can be fused with the reason of sciences such as sociobiology. 

The philosophy of the left looks selfish and short-sighted in comparison.