People before places or ideas

Traditional conservatives talk about the two visions of America as being between those who believe in "places" (Jeffersonians) and those who believe in "ideas (Hamiltonians)" and how modern liberals and neoconservatives talk only of abstract ideas, whereas places come before ideas.

But people come before places or ideas in defining a nation. Places and ideas are important but it is the people who essentially make a nation and culture what it is. Does it really have to be said that a European will create a culture different from a Chinese who will create a culture different than an African, irregardless of where they live or what ideas they may have? 

How did such common sense become politically incorrect?

This mainly stems from the liberal, and even conservative, blockade of knowledge of the biological or genetic origin of most of our social behavior, which does not fit their abstract "ideas" about the malleability of human nature and culture.

This misplaced hierarchy of values also explains why the saving political solution, of adapting the already existing constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, continues to be left out of discussions regarding the solution to our growing civil disruptions.

Given real human nature, which remains naturally kin-centered, ethnocentric, and xenophobic, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is how whatever real harmony between human beings is possibly. Our elites don't think this way, globalism has made them too rich to want to see this reality. But that may change out of necessity.

Similarities and differences with Zoroastrian Asha

Theological materialism believes in a world of evolution, which some have called “flux.” Like Indian Vedic Hinduism, Zoroastrianism is very old and was very influential in other old religions, and Zoroastrian's called this world of flux “Asha,” which defines how the real world works. Zoroastrian's seek to live in accordance with asha or how the world works according to their best knowledge, which leaves them more open to science and new knowledge.

There is the “idea” of existence in theological materialism and the projected Theoevolutionary Church (TC) but actual existence is central. Existence changes through material, not spiritual, evolution. Truth defines even the changes, yet truth itself is not existence, it is only the idea of existence.

But outward material evolution and natural selection are also activated from within to evolve toward Godhood (the zenith of successful survival and reproduction) by an inward activation called here the spirit or will or spirit-will, which is also material.

TC seeks to live in accordance with the evolution of material existence, which is our essential asha or flux. The core of material evolution also leaves us very open to science and change. It is evolution that leads to real Godhood...and that Zoroastrian's probably wouldn't define as the way to Godhood any more than Traditionalists do, but new knowledge of asha says it is true.

Even so, the Inward Paths of traditional religions need not be rejected, they are retained in the Twofold Path and seen as the first human glimpses or understandings of God, now superseded by the Outward Path of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. And that is living in accordance with new knowledge of asha or evolution.

It's the genes, stupid

Real conservatives, paleoconservatives, rightly blame the Frankfurt School for the anti-white racism of postmodernism and modern liberalism, but it is essentially human nature that is kin-centered and ethnocentric, which leads to xenophobia, but virtually no conservative will mention it. Why is that? I think it might be the universalist way of defining human beings in Christianity---we are all equal under God---which keeps conservatives from mentioning the genetic origin of most our social behavior, including racism. Of course Marxism says the same thing minus the religious references.

The people who originated the Frankfurt School, refugees to America from Germany in the 1930's, in fact led to one ethnic group competing with another by way of ideology. This led to postmodernism and modern liberalism, which has led to the so-called "anarchists" we now see rioting almost every day in the streets. And they are not really anarchists, as paleoconservative Chilton Williamson recently pointed out, it is an anti-white fascism on the left.

But conservatives, including Williamson and Pat Buchanan, who are otherwise the best we have, continue to blame our racial problems on the "dividers" born of the Frankfurt School rather than "blaming" ethnocentric human nature. Calling real human nature evil will not make it go away, and we can't make it go away short of thousands of years of changing the genetic pool.

This is where the political philosophy of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates needs to enter the political world. The Constitutional separation of powers and states in the USA could even be legally adapted to this realism. But both liberals and conservatives condemn this solution, so I suppose it will be awhile before we see conservatives put a sign up saying: It's the genes, stupid.

Is there a way out of the complicated corruption of our culture?

To add to the Big Media corruption mentioned here yesterday, it is looking like Russia really did corrupt social media like Facebook and Twitter with political propaganda. And so we have to include Russia in the older corruption of the Big Media by Saudi Arabia and Israel, which has been going on for years. But the old exploiting media probably doesn't mind seeing the tech companies taken down a bit, even though they are both leftist, because the new tech companies have been destroying the old media.

Add to this the influence of Russia on the Alt-Right in the West, which one would suppose would be patriotic but has been influenced by Putin and the Russian philosopher Dugin into hating the West and promoting Russia becoming an imperial power again. Then of course we have our own neoconservatives who are not really conservative and have been corrupting real conservatism for years with their bias toward wars that do not benefit America but do benefit Israel, Saudi Arabia, and various global corporations (at least in the short term.)

It's hard to tell anymore who really stands for America and the American people. But we do know that these corrupting forces are tearing America apart. How will America be put back together again, or can it be put together again?

If we are honest and a little courageous we admit that real human nature works best living in a natural ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with real kin-centric and ethnocentric human nature. So the best future choice I see for America is to separate all the warring factions and the big destructive monopolies by adapting the already existing Constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. I do think this will gradually and legally become a future movement, if not for rational reasons then from common sense.

One of the main things that made America great is now destroying us

Like many people I still ease into the day with my coffee watching television news, even though I usually head off to the shower muttering something like "F...... idiots." The printed word---although it is not much better---comes later when I am more awake.

The owners of the Big Media monopolies, which now include Big Internet monopolies, don't have a problem at all with fake, biased, and unethical news. And more people cutting cable TV has so far not stopped the Big Media monopolies from destroying our culture.

I see little being done to stop the Big Media monopolies, which only proves the corrupt power of the Big Media, who can, and often do, destroy any Senator, Congressmen, businessman, or artist who seriously takes them on.

One of the main things that made America great has been our freedom, including our Media freedom, but it is now the very thing that is destroying us. The Big Media really is a plotting and scheming cabal. 

But rather than taking away freedom of the press in order to stop the corruption of the Big Media we really do have to break up the Big Media monopolies.  If we don't we will one day see a dictatorship succumbing to the totalitarian temptation and taking away our freedom, which might even be welcomed by an embittered people.

Real religion seeking real Godhood by way of real material evolution

We evolve in the material world to supermaterial Godhood. Old nature can join evolutionized religion, not as the Deism of the Enlightenment which was really atheistic, and not as religion taken over by political ideology, but as real religion seeking real Godhood by way of real material evolution.

I would say the Enlightenment was 50 percent right in affirming science, and traditional religion was 50 percent right in affirming religion, but the Enlightenment was 50 percent wrong in smearing religion, and religion was 50 percent wrong in smearing science.

It is true that attempts were made to synthesizes these things. The Enlightenment affirmed Deism with God defined as nature, and religion tried bringing more rationalism into religion, but they really didn't like each other much, and that dislike grew worse as science advanced and religion faded.

Theological materialism retains religion and Godhood but religion and Godhood are reformed by evolutionized religion, philosophy and politics, which is different from the Teilhard de Chardin project to evolutionize religion while retaining an entirely non-material, spiritual, trinitarian God.

We don't look to experience merely the symbolic God Within the human brain or heart, as traditional religion has done---although this is retained in the Inward Path---the Twofold Path seeks to save religion not destroy religion.

Taking a knee for reality?

It will sound ridiculous, I know---and it is of course politically incorrect---but it would be more realistic if when the America flag is presented black athletes were taking a knee for having their own ethnostate within the USA---that would bring real equality. A few black nationalists still promote that, don't they? And of course real equality would allow whites to have their own ethnostate too. But rather than this the Big Media and the academic world are ignorantly, or purposely, pushing civil war between distinctly different ethnic groups, not equality.

What would realistically define "equality" would be an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could actually be accommodated by the Constitutional separation of powers and states in the USA. The cultural Marxism now taught (really brainwashed) in our schools and constantly promoted by the corrupt Big Media will never bring "equality." The equality promoted by modern liberalism has nothing to do with real human nature, which remains as it has always been, kin-centered, ethnocentric, and yes even xenophobic. When will we take a knee for that reality? Or do we prefer civil war?

Can exoteric and esoteric wars be stopped or at least managed?

With the importance of science acknowledged, which traditionalists only grudgingly support if at all, I suppose the old Hindu myth of a Lord Maitreya or World Teacher arriving every two thousand years to found a new updated religion is too much to swallow.

But can exoteric and esoteric wars be stopped or at least managed, that is, conventional religious and political wars, as well as the underground esoteric wars between so-called black and white adepts? (see Kerry Bolton's latest book)

Human nature being what it is we probably cannot stop competitive wars, but it seems to me that wars can be managed with rejuvenated religions and politically philosophies that finally take into account basic kin-centered and ethnic-affirming real human nature, without resorting to hopeless idealism.

The Twofold Path of theological materialism, the Involutionary and Evolutionary, and the projected Theoevolutionary Church, written about here, as well as the ethnopluralism hypothesis projecting an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected in their evolutionary independence by forms of federalism, are my suggestions, my offering, (my mission) for trying to manage exoteric and esoteric wars.

The Inward Path retains the traditional, symbolic, ascetic (material) experience of the God Within, while the Outward Path reanimates it by affirming the material evolution of life to real supermaterial Godhood. And the the ethnopluralism hypothesis conservatively protects kin and ethnic-centered real human nature and the human traditions that derive from it, with an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

I know of no better worldview offered to manage exoteric and esoteric wars without resorting to hopeless idealism. This is religion, philosophy, science and culture ultimately brought together to affirm the gradual material evolution of competitive life toward real Godhood.

We can keep God and religion, but we need to reform the religious terms

To go once more unto the breach, or into the weeds: life can only manifest from the material world, which is not "dark" and is not a duality or a spiritual trinity.

What looks like a "trinity" is the inside material forces working within the individual material life form, and the evolutionary forces outside of individual life forms. But I see the essential material activation of life as coming from within material life.

That activating drive of the spirit-will within life is not spiritual but is material, and there is not a duality here either. What does look more like a duality is the outside forces of evolution that effect the individual life forms.

For example, the sun helps engender life where it can, but the sun itself is non-dual. The sun like all life is influenced by outside electromagnetic and gravitational forces itself, but the inward drive of the sun is not spiritual and is never separate from its material form (and the less-evolved sun is not God as the ancients hoped but almost the opposite of evolved Godhood.)

So why "life?" What defines life? Life seeks or is activated toward ultimate success in survival and reproduction, which ends up being Godhood. Life seeks Godhood, that defines life essentially.

It is the inward spirit-will, which is material and is never separate from its host, that makes life "life," as life contends with the evolutionary forces of outside life.

All the religions say that life seeks a non-material spiritual end, which they define as a non-material God---they captured the seeking and the end right but they got the substance and the means of attaining Godhood wrong.

We can keep God and religion, but we need to reform the religious terms.

Why the doctrines of multiculturalism and globalism are clearly not working

This will sound quite cynical, and of course politically incorrect, but I think what successfully motivates people is not so much doctrines or theories but the composition or makeup of the people in the groups who affirm the doctrines.

Whether the doctrine is religious, philosophical, occult, or whatever, the chances of the doctrines successfully motivating the people are much better when the group itself is in harmony with real human nature.

This means that the natural human preferences of kin and ethnic selection, and the success of group-selection over individual selection, are what bonds the group best even more than the doctrines or theories of the group.

Before someone jumps in here with the charge of bigotry or racism, the superiority or inferiority of the groups have little to do with their bonding success. I am describing real human nature here and not the fantasies of, say, cultural Marxism or modern liberalism.

Think of the various successful religious, philosophical and political groups in human history, even the supposedly "international" groups, and they will, at least at first, have been of the same kin or ethnic group, and they often fell apart or were corrupted when the original composition of the people in the group changed.

This is the foundation behind the political philosophy of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. If you want a win-win motivational reality, your doctrines will include having groups, states, and regions composed of homogeneous kin and ethnic groups. (In the U.S. the Constitutional separation of powers and states could be legally adapted to this.)

This is mainly why the doctrines of multiculturalism and globalism are clearly not bonding people together and are leading increasingly to civil disruptions and even civil war.

Can we face this reality, will we be allowed to face this reality, or must we all fall apart first?

The arrogant and dangerous fools at the Emmy Awards last night

Somehow America has got to do something about the arrogant and dangerous fools we saw at the Emmy Awards last night. It's the gloating and condescending arrogance that's so hard to take, and delivered by beautiful people---although now we are seeing more Star Wars freaks.

Hollywood has been exploiting and corrupting beautiful people for years, especially blonds. They come innocently, one after the other, from places like the Midwest, and they end up playing prostitutes and proudly giving the finger to the world. Now all the mean girls are blonds. What's with that?

Hollywood promotes everything that has nothing whatever to do with real human nature, but unlike the ugly nerdy professors who promote the same garbage, the Hollywood zoo does it with beauty and emotional effectiveness. The one hopeful sign is that people have been tuning out television and movies and turning to alternative Internet sites.

I wish somehow another show-business could rise alongside the declining Hollywood zoo, but build it in the Midwest, and make it a rule that any producer found abusing actresses would be neutered. Let's see films that affirm real human nature which is---according to science and common sense---genetically and culturally conservative and traditional.

The deepest way to counter the false reality

I suppose the counter-reality began way back when the religious world of spiritual ideas and symbolism took over the material world of real objects. This was probably the rough beginning of the Utopian idea that if you change the environment you can change humanity.

This counter-reality continued later with the Enlightenment in thinking that reason and philosophy could make humanity infinitely malleable. Later the sciences found that there was a genetic base to human behavior, so we can't blame the Enlightenment entirely for modern liberalism.

That early unfinished Enlightenment led to the Jacobin-Masonic-induced French Revolution and the continuing idea that if you change the environment you can change people into anything you like. (see Kerry Bolton's latest book on the history occult groups).

Modern liberalism followed from this counter-reality which denied almost completely any genetic involvement in human behavior. Nazism with its ideas on genetic supremacy did not help the countering of the false reality.

But enlightened science carried on, as it does, and has now clearly affirmed the biological and genetic origin of most of our social behavior (see E. O. Wilson's work in sociobiology). But the pull of effete religion and modern liberalism---and an elite who mostly benefit from it----still block this reality.

The counter-reality runs as deep as the spiritual religions, which need to become material/supermaterial religions to aid in the evolution of material life toward real supermaterial Godhood, which involves first the genes and then the environment. I am not against religion and tradition, I consider myself a conservative, but the return and reform of religion from imaginary ideas to real living objects is the deepest way to counter the false reality.

Where Buchanan and Bannon get it wrong

Pat Buchanan at least gives some credence to the ethnic origin of much of our culture, but both Buchanan and Steve Bannon are mistaken when they define the far right as merely a bunch of clowns. The far right are wrong when they speak of racial supremacy, but they are right when they speak of the biological or genetic origin of much of our social behavior.

Economic nationalism alone will not make America great again unless we also pay attention to the solid sociobiological sciences which have been empirically showing us for years that human nature remains kin-centered, ethnocentric, group-selecting, and different from one another. If we try to ignore our differences with false ideas of universalism and egalitarianism we eventually and naturally have civil unrest or even civil war between competing ethnic groups.

The real political problem is to figure out how to harmonize distinctly different and competing ethnic groups in our crowded world, and this is where the philosophy of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates comes in. Revolution is not necessary in the United States, the constitutional separation of powers and states can be legally adapted to ethnostates. Economic nationalism and federalism can then protect the whole. But economic nationalism alone will fall without the provision of  ethnostates, where real human nature can be what it actually is.

Think outside the box to reform the box

Revolutionaries usually have no interest in the box or in reforming the box, they think they can think better than thousands of generations of people who created the traditional boxes.

I think the overused term "think outside the box" was incomplete and should be "think outside the box to reform the box."

Most of our traditions were established before the Darwinian evolution was discovered, and conservatives have been rightly wary of Darwin being used by revolutionaries. But the neo-Darwinism of the science of sociobiology has found human nature and the biological origin of most of our social behavior to mainly follow the traditional ways of human nature.

As defined here often, the science of sociobiology has found human nature to be 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. Darwin thought outside the box but his findings can reform the box.

The reality of evolution, sociobiology, and tradition, point toward the political/cultural solution of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. It is a conservative transformation---not revolution---that is coming, eventually, which will bring about an ethnopluralism with different ethnic groups politically and culturally conducting themselves the way they want to in their own states, even within our Democratic Republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to the constitutional separation of powers and states.

Why should big media monopolies be exempt from monopoly laws?

"The real enemy is the salons of the chattering classes and in the nation's newsrooms." Justin Raimondo

Honesty is only an act put on by the Big Media, politicians, and statesmen, who make the late actor Marlon Brando look like an amateur. They want a global world with no borders which they can control, and they do not care how many people they have to ruin or kill to get it. That is the cold reality. The old code of the gentleman, or Christian virtues, are considered naive---only the military hangs on to a few of those old codes.

Can anything be be done about the big media monopolies?  Can names and affiliations be be named? Can the finagling lawyers be useful for a change?

As Carl Gibson of "Reader Supported News" put it a few years ago: "...There's an easy fix that doesn't involve new legislation or Constitutional amendments: make the government do its job...We have antitrust laws already in place that broke up colossal monopolies like the kind Standard Oil had in its heyday. Why should big media monopolies be exempt from those laws?...By breaking up big media companies into smaller entities that are forced to compete with each other, we'll end up with fairer, more accurate coverage, and a more informed voting public. And, chances are good that a more informed public will undo past mistakes of voting for politicians who sold them out..."

And why not break up the new Social Media monopolies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter, who  were corrupted once they attained power---or they have been lying about being an alternative to the Big Media.

The unspoken benefit the Big Media receives from covering these demoralizing disasters

Yes, there is life-saving heroism in the disaster coverage by the Big Media of hurricanes, September 11th, etc, which is good, but the 24-hour disaster coverage is mostly demoralizing to the nation.

The unspoken benefit the Big Media receives from covering these demoralizing disasters is to establish a nurturing, feminine (pre-feminist), giving, ethos in the people, who can then better accept the global ideologies, the erasing of all borders and nations, and the destruction of all the bonds of real human nature, which the Big Media incessantly promotes.

Contrary to the standard lie, the Big Media are not so much giving the people what the people want as they are giving the people what the Media wants.

Freedom of the press has been almost thoroughly corrupted in the West and will have to be reformed. But if freedom of the press is one day destroyed rather than reformed---which is not desired although many people will welcome it---it will be mainly due to the great lies, corruption, and subversion by the Big Media.

Closing down the carnival of nerd intellectual con men

First the Romans then the Christians conquered or mediated the folkways of the pagan West. Many of the mediations were good, but some were not. The Romans brought the reason of the Greeks, and the Christians toned down the violence, which was good. But these things hypertrophied into supposedly rational fantasies of universal egalitarianism, and a spiritual heaven which rejected all materialism, at least for the priests.

Now we have the carnival of nerd intellectual con men in academia, mainly in the humanities, who have beguiled the people with global ideologies that seek to erase all borders and nations, and all the bonds of real human nature. Why do we allow these nerd con-men men to rule us?...Well, I suppose all of the rubes weren't conned, they were the ones who voted for Trump---(who now seems to have been conned by the neoconservatives.

What we need is a cultural superstructure which relates to the natural structure of real human nature, that is, the real human nature of being kin-centered, ethnocentric, and even xenophobic, among other traditional things, which in the past had led to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, before the Romans, Christians and nerd intellectuals changed the superstructure into utopian fantasies with little or no resemblance to real human nature.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates, written about here almost every day, is the superstructure of culture needed to rise over the structure of real human nature. Conservatives need not fear, our real constitutional separation of powers and states can be adapted to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and to real economic nationalism, in harmony with real human nature. But it probably means closing down the carnival of nerd intellectuals.

After the vampires have destroyed us

"The liberal media loves the neocons"

The epigraph by Aaron Wolf of "Chronicles" says it all. But I'll add a few thoughts.

The liberal Big Media is bad enough but the neoconservatives are worse because they lie about their ideology and motives, which are much the same as the liberals.

Beneath the words and noise of both is the desire to dechristianize the West and culturally and biologically destroy Euro-Americans, or at least enslave them. They have almost succeeded as Euro-Americans are now dying faster than being born and becoming a minority.

The only positive thought I have on this is that after the vampires have destroyed the corrupt empire we will have the chance to begin again, this time with a real constitutional separation of powers and states, adapting our constitution to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and real economic nationalism, in harmony with real human nature. The vampires may then have their own cave to shit in.

Back to the natural instincts

"Instincts" have become a dirty word for modern liberals mainly because natural instincts come from the biological and genetic origin of most of our social behavior. Modern liberals embrace universal egalitarian fantasies with little or no connection to the natural instincts or to human nature.

The flower children of the 1960's did not go back to the natural instincts, they embraced opposing egalitarian fantasies with no connection to the natural instincts or to real human nature. The Baby Boomers still hold these positions today (and still smoke weed on the weekends).

Allan Carlson quoted the phrase by Burke, "wisdom without reflection." That could define the natural genetic instincts. Burke said the French Revolution was " a spectacle of politicians to gratify the schemes of visionary politicians." Modern liberalism follows the fantasies of the French Revolution, not the wisdom of sociobiology. The schemes of the cultural Marxists today are at least as bad.

Even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, took hundreds of thousands of years (now we have genetic engineering which is more rapid) And our natural instincts still 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.

If we want to get back to the instinctive channeling of natural instincts and back to real human nature, our education needs to move back to (really forward to) the wisdom of the political/cultural solution of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where different ethnic cultures and groups can politically and culturally conduct themselves the way they want to, according to their natural instincts, in their own states within our Democratic Republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to the constitutional separation of powers and states, which already exists but is not followed.

Seeking to define essential life

Speaking of human life: an inward material Spirit-Will helps activate/develop the material body, and activates/develops the material mind, which develops/creates words and cultural actions, and this vitally interacts with the natural world and the various outside changes to the mind and body of natural selection in evolution. Life is essentially deterministic in seeking to evolve toward Godhood as the zenith of successful evolution and natural selection, and this defines the actions of essential life. This suggests that the right or healthy human action is to become in harmony, individually and culturally, with the materially-activated Spirit-Will and the evolution of life toward Godhood. This is examined in the philosophy of theological materialism which reforms but does not reject both the standard scientific and religious perspectives regarding life and the direction of life.

The Big Media and the educational system have made us stupid and suicidal regarding immigration and DACA

When you can brainwash a damaging counter  feeling of "deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering," which defines compassion, that has to be considered wildly successful brainwashing by the Big Media and the educational system.

Many Americans want to let "Dreamer" immigrants, mainly from Latin America, eventually permanently into America to live, where they will reproduce at a far higher number than American citizens, who are now dying faster than being born. A Latin American people will create a Latin America culture, as they are doing in Californians and Texas. Our Euro-Amercan culture will become a Latin American culture.

In every human culture ever studied, human nature included, among other things, kin-selection preferences, localism, and ethnocentrism. If culture proposes to not include these things, the culture does not last long and it will always return to these things. These traits of real human nature also happen to be at the core of conservatism and tradition, whereas many of these traits are missing in, say, communism, post-modernism, and modern liberalism.

Our immigration policy is a serious thing to conservatives because they know, or should know, that when the people change the culture changes. It is that simple.

I have heard people seriously say  "So what if American culture changes with immigration, what's so great about America?"...and then they recite the standard liberal list of things wrong with America. Have the Big Media and the educational system made us that stupid and suicidal? Yes they have, and that is power.

What is missing and needs to be included in Conservatism

By not much appreciating science, traditionalism has not seemed to notice that the science of sociobiology, which has deeply examined the biological origin of much of our social behavior, and has largely upheld the traditional view of human nature, finding 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 successful selection.

In defining a nation, modern conservatives have mainly left out the importance of ethnic unity, which has made the modern right schizophrenic. They uphold the importance of unity and order but not the order and unity that comes in a traditional nation from ethnic homogeneity. The Right supports progressive ideas on individualism and multiculturalism even as they support a tradition which was skeptical of these things, seeing in them the will to power of both revolutionary ideas and self-centered capitalism. ( Claude Polin writes well of the schizophrenic Right in the September 2017 "Chronicles")

I call myself a conservative rather than a traditionalist because the conservatives seem to better understand the need for change within tradition (Burke certainty did). Conservatives need to affirm and adapt the legal constitutional separation of powers and states in the U.S. to include traditional ethnostates, that is, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Otherwise the U.S. will split apart in civil war no matter how much we talk about getting along together.

This seems to be the direction the corrupt empires of today are going, although it is considered politically incorrect to say it. Neoconservatives in the U.S are still trying to hold on to the empire by sabotaging the conservative instincts of President Trump, with increasing success.  But real human nature always returns, which the father of sociobiology, E.O.Wilson, compared to being on a genetic leash.

Was the demographic destruction of the West ignorant or deliberate?

The demographic destruction of the West since the 1960's was mostly deliberate, as cultural Marxism began to be successful as a weapon to destroy Western people and Western culture through immigration policies, Big Media propaganda, and a corrupt academic world.

Those who objected to the West committing suicide were called racist and bigots and not allowed on T.V., but they were largely right. Now only a few Eastern European countries. eg, Poland and Hungary, refuse to commit immigration suicide. But England and Germany are committing suicide, and they could have Islamic Sharia law before too long. The U.S. is being encouraged to commit suicide too and is being ever more successful at doing it.

The only hope I see is if Western people can manage to establish an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, avoiding war between distinctly different groups and cultures who will not or cannot assimilate. That will admit the reality of human nature which remains kin-centered and ethnocentric, among other traditional things. The constitutional separation of powers and states in the U.S. could adapt to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Those who have been successfully promoting the suicide of the West will then find themselves in their own ethnostates, if they are lucky.

Tradition and conservatism do not escape universalism when applied to Christianity

The Left has of course used universalism to try to ruin Western culture by demanding universal equality in virtually all areas. This is why I think tradition and conservatism have to be based in the biology of real human nature.

In the hierarchy of values of real human nature, universalism comes last behind kin, ethnic group, city, state, region, and nation. Universalism applies when the larger world threatens the life of human beings who are normally concerned with local happenings.

But in many religions and ideologies universalism comes first, which has given them problems in selling universalism, because altruism (selflessness) was mainly evolved in human nature for local concerns, for kin and ethnic group. Even force has not worked to change human nature over the long term.

The prevailing cultural Marxism has been tearing down Western culture by demanding universal equality based on the relativity of all values. But it is the biological base of tradition and conservatism more than the universalism of Christianity that can best defend the West against the false values.

So conservatives and traditionalists will need to understand and affirm the science of sociobiology, especially the work of E.O.Wilson, if they want to save Western culture from cultural Marxism. It is from this biological base of human nature that conservatives will be able to adapt the constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, at last bringing human values in harmony with real human nature, and avert civil war.