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.