Friday, February 17, 2017
Why don't conservatives affirm the deep-conservatism of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates?
According to "Modern Age," the essential conservative journal, conservatism reforms what is bent or broken in tradition while preserving what is valuable in tradition. Conservatism is against one-size-fits-all ideologies and for independent centers of power and local control.
I believe conservatism needs to deepen itself to include the reform of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which harmonizes with real traditions derived from real human nature, which remains largely kin-centered and ethnocentric.
Conservatism is against all ideologies of universalism and points out the contradiction of postmodernism in its belief that all ideas and values are relative, with the exception of the idea just stated. But then conservatism goes on to affirm the universalism of Christianity.
This universalism of Christianity---which promotes the idea that we are all equal under God---is really not much concerned with human differences but is concerned with experiencing the universal Father Within, and it is this which seems to be behind conservatives ignoring or rejecting an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.
An ethnopluralism of ethnostates is a reform within the conservative tradition, which affirms independent centers of power and local control based on real human nature, which remains largely kin-centered and ethnocentric and not universally the same.
Ethnic groups naturally compete, since group-selection remains the primary unit of human selection, as it has been throughout human history. Traditional conservatism needs to see how real human nature can naturally be more harmonious in ethnostates.
The constitutional separation of powers and states in America could conservatively accommodate regions and states gradually moving toward being the ethnostates they tend to be anyway, with perhaps only a few amendments to the constitution.
Whatever peace is humanly possible becomes more possible when independent centers of power and local control are based on real human nature, which remains largely kin-centered and ethnocentric, leading instinctively and logically toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.