Wednesday, February 28, 2018
If we ask why are one out of twenty films and television shows so bad and missing talented writers, directors and actors, I think it more or less has to do with the producers preferring to help kin and ethnic group become rich and influential over more talented people. When you add the mix of distinctively different cultures and ethnic groups all competing in America and the West it becomes difficult to define "excellence" anymore. And postmodernism in the academic world steps in and teaches all college grads that, in any case, all things are relative, including truth.
Multiculturalism has led to the decline of American culture. Excellence used to be defined as "the best that has been thought and said in human history," but that was when the culture was homogeneous and mainly Northern European. That was before globalism, before mass immigration, when America was more of a republic than an empire, when we had economic and populist nationalism.
The fact is, preferring to hire your kin and ethnic group is completely natural and a big part of real human nature. That reality points not toward multiculturalism, which creates only chaos, but toward the political/cultural solution of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where different ethnic groups can politically and culturally conduct themselves according to who they actually are, in their own states or regions within our Democratic Republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to the constitutional separation of powers and states.
This long-term solution to the wreckage of our culture is only beginning along the horizon.
Tuesday, February 27, 2018
More on the error of opposites:
"Divine" truth and human ignorance are not opposites any more than the "spiritual" is opposite the material. Both sides are on a continuum of material life evolving in nature from the material to the supermaterial.
Why the insistence on separation and opposites by religious mystics? Is it their way of competing in the material world to hobble the material world? Nietzsche thought so. We don't need to reject God as Nietzsche did, we just have to correctly define Godhood.
What the mystics are doing is blocking the very thing they claim to love most: Godhood. We won't gain Godhood by blocking material evolution.
It is not the quality of thinking that determines mans status in the cosmos, it is the level of evolution of his whole material body and mind. We transcend not by transcending flesh and mind (which is not really what mystics are doing even if they think they are) we transcend by way of material evolution---slower but true.
Joining religion and science could speed things up.
Monday, February 26, 2018
There is no real duality between the spiritual and the material because there is only the material and supermaterial. This duality is a metaphysical mistake that blocks or at least slows down the material from evolving to the supermaterial.
There are thousands or millions of degrees of intelligence between Godhood and man but both are materially connected and related through material evolution.
Religion has been the connection between Godhood and man, but science needs to be in included since science can be a great aid in helping us to evolve toward Godhood. There need not be a false duality here.
The foundation of life is only superficially dual between the inward material activation of life and the outside natural material environment, they are one dynamic thing.
Evolution is the struggle or adaptation between life and the outside environment of life, with the goal of life to evolve toward the most possible success in life, which is Godhood.
When the ultimate goal is not known, evolution is slowed or blocked, although life evolves even if it is ignorant of its own evolution.
Sunday, February 25, 2018
The Internet is like a Two-Headed Dragon with one head as the greatest library-of-everything in the history of humanity, and the other head as the greatest filthy swamp of lies, crime, and pornography in the history of humanity.
As a thought experiment, think of the United States and China as dealing with the Two-Headed Dragon from different sides of "freedom" yet on the same eventual swing toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which I think will inevitably happen in both countries. Why? Because 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. China and the United States are not ethnically uniform and fierce competition between distinctly different groups and regions will happen, as happened in the Soviet Union.
By any traditional definition of destruction, the Two-Headed Dragon and the Big Media have been destroying American culture and the American people, even as great new technology is developing, and if we don't want totalitarian fascism on the left or the right to put up a great firewall of censorship, as China has done, then rather than either the Two-Headed Dragon, or totalitarian censorship, I would prefer to apply our energy toward legally adapting and transforming our constitutional separation of powers, states, and regions into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.
If one ethnostate wants to set up another Sodom and Gomorrah they could do so, but other ethnostates could set up firewalls of censorship that would, for the most part, protect them from the filth---at least while they wait for the degenerate state to inevitably fall. The main job of federalism would be to protect the independence of the ethnostates from each other and from foreign powers.
Do you have a better idea that relates to real human nature?
Saturday, February 24, 2018
We can think of life and evolution as the continual activation of life from within (Tirips), offset by continual evolutionary natural selection from without.
Natural selection from without continually checks and balances the inward activation of life, which defines evolution. Both inward and outward forces are needed. Neither are evil.
Furthermore the inward activation of life is entirely material and seeks to activate life to successfully evolve all the way to material or supermaterial Godhood, as life makes its way within the natural selection of the environment it finds itself living in.
Mystics tend to think of the inward forces as spiritual and non-material and think of outside material forces as demiurgic or demonic. That is mistaken.
Mystics are in metaphysical error when they remove themselves from the evolutionary natural forces which lead life toward real Godhood. And science is in error when it ignores the sacred goal of the inward activation.
Friday, February 23, 2018
The spiritual blockades the material in mysticism. Natural material elements are defined as demiurgic. This is a bias against the real world.
The symbolism of the upside down tree of the mystics shows the acorn or spirit as superior to the branches and leaves, turning natural evolution upside down.
So modern man naturally rejects this mysticism and loses religion.
When Godhood is seen as material, or more precisely supermaterial, and only evolved to in the material world, then the ridiculous upside down tree can be turned back on its feet, perhaps not to symbolize the material evolution to Godhood, but to rescue religion and the tree from negative symbolism.
The ultimate stage of knowledge isn't higher "knowledge;" that idea shows bias toward the mind over the body leading to the bias of spiritual religion over material religion.
The "hierarchy" doesn't put the spiritual on top leading downward to the intellect and last to the material body, Godhood isn't "intangible," Godhood is material and evolved to in the material world.
Godhood is not merely a thought, idea, understanding, or mystical experience in the mind, Godhood is a material/supermaterial object, or objects, evolved to in the material world.
We best soon get on with helping evolution along toward Godhood, rather than blocking it.
Thursday, February 22, 2018
"In 1776, America set off to unleash human potential by combining market economics, the rule of law, and equality of opportunity...and only 241 years later converted our original villages and prairies into $96 trillion of wealth." Warren Buffet (Time, Jan. 15 2018)
So what happened?
The genius of America worked well until all those good things were corrupted, one after the other. Market economies became global and greedy, not national, the rule of law was weakened by the steady drift toward cultural Marxism, and equal opportunity was corrupted by mass immigration and the growth of minorities who would not or could not assimilate into the mainly Northern European ethos which developed market economics, the rule of law, and equality of opportunity.
And the same thing happened in Europe at an even faster pace. The West has been descending into a chaos of ethnic conflicts.
The big question is will we fall for the totalitarian temptation and use force to create order between unassimilating people? We don't have to do that.
We can adapt the great constitutional separation of powers and states, which we already have in America (although that too has been corrupted) toward establishing an ethnopluralism of regions and states, in harmony with real human nature, which remains kin-centered and ethnocentric.
We can do this legally, without revolution, and without negatively claiming the supremacy of one group over another. We can return to the economic nationalism that made our country great, and we can allow our people to live as harmonious as is realistically possible living in their own ethnostates, protected by the rule of law, with a federalism designed mainly for protection.
How likely will we affirm this realism before we descend into chaotic civil war ending in totalitarian force on the left or the right? The flat fact is our people have been brainwashed by cultural Marxism. So can we be optimistic?
Life itself is optimistic in every cell of the body which reaches to live, survive, and prosper. I think we will get there, one way or another, because it is real and natural behavior for human beings.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Speculating here that it is true that when a sun or star dies the surrounding solar system dies, but there are many stars and suns in the universe and no one star upon which all depend.
And I don't see Godhood as a human heart upon which all the cells and organs of the body depend, I see many hearts, various levels of Godhood, evolved to in the material and supermaterial world.
There is interaction between the forces in the universe but no one God upon which all the others depend. There are many central centers of powers within the centers of many galaxies, and the galaxies may even be somehow connected electromagnetically, but no one center upon which all the others depend.
This suggests a great variety of forces interacting and evolving in the cosmos, with Gods always, but not often, evolving at different levels of material and supermaterial evolution. But it is an endless evolving, with many starts and stops along the way. There seems to be no one cosmic beginning or ending, only endless evolution and devolution.
Is that more polytheism than theism? In any case, it is not spiritualism---which can be more easily abstractly fantasized. More realistically we have "only" material and supermaterial evolution. Many centers are better than one center for vital evolutionary variety. Why isn't that enough?
Tuesday, February 20, 2018
It is actually cruel to demand that distinctly different people are all the same and that they must all get along together in the same location
Can't we all get along? The answer is, no, distinctly different people do not get along well together, which is why separate nations and states developed. The one place we are the same is in sharing the same kin-centeredness and ethnocentrism, among the other traditional traits, like localism and gender-differences.
So why then have religious leaders, middlemen, and managers since the dawn of human history tried to make us all get along no matter how different we are from one another? The cynical truth is that the middlemen gain power, at least short-term, from the attempt, even though it has been mainly universalist-globalist-Marxist--pseudo-liberal-neoconservative flim-flam.
It is actually cruel to demand that distinctly different people are all the same and that they must all get along together in the same location, and then when they naturally don't get along to use force to try to create order---but only for a short time.
"Behavioral norms" do not mainly derive from ideology and are not religiously/politically pulled out of the abstract air. Our social behavior mainly comes from the biological origin of our social behavior, which is deeply kin-centered and ethnocentric, among the other traditional traits.
We can best solve our differences and create order the way we have always done, by forming separate nations and states, which work best as smaller ethnostates. That's the natural way---though not perfect---for us to all get along, while creating distinct cultures that are harmonious with what we actually are.
So who is stopping this? Look to who benefits most from globalism and open borders, no matter how much suffering it causes the rest of us.
Monday, February 19, 2018
The Dutch and Anglo-Saxons who founded and developed America had no idea of the future power of the Big Media, how could they have foreseen film, television, and the internet?
The morals and culture of the aristocrats set the cultural pattern for centuries, which the lower classes and especially the middle class tried to copy. Then it was the middle class who set the moral tone for the lower classes. Now, mainly due to the Big Media, it is the morals and culture (or often lack of them) of the lower classes and minorities that dominate popular culture. Any honest assessment of popular culture would admit this.
And again, this was mainly due to the power and influence of the Big Media. Anglo-Saxon controlled corporations paid little attention to the takeover of the media, at least not at first, not seeing its influential power, and by the time they realized the power of the Big Media, white Western culture had been made the enemy.
That's where we are today. The Big Media celebrates fame, money, drug-taking rock stars, foul mouthed actresses, sexually rampaging black athletes, and cultural Marxism, and the Big Media ridicules or even hates traditional Western morals and culture.
In any case, the Western world and Western people will not recover until the present Big Media monopolies, and whoever owns and controls them, are seriously challenged and curbed.
It's a fact that as the people and the media change the culture changes.
Sunday, February 18, 2018
Postmodernism was almost right about the will-to-power (via Nietzsche). They should have more accurately defined the will to power as the drive to survival and reproductive success, and defined it as deeply determined within human nature, not relative.
Liberals like to say that conservatives are " trapped in the 1950's." Conservatives, like everyone else, are really "trapped" in human nature, but why put that negative spin on human nature, why call it "trapped"?
Because lies and hypocrisy are often part of the drive to survival and reproductive success, even if it is usually a short-term and ignorant part of human nature. "Life" gives the lie to a relativity of truth.
If you are alive you are biologically determined, and not to be a Marxist, a modern liberal, or a postmodernist. We are all biologically determined 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. That looks a lot like the conservatism of 1950's---and looks nothing like the prevailing cultural Marxism.
1950's conservatism needs only to be updated, by adapting the constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, to reflect and advance what humans really are determined to be and become. That's not a "relative" truth, it is the truth of the real living object and not merely the airy nothing of intellectual abstractions...I would also add that I hope we are helped along by an evolutionary religious philosophy (see theological materialism).
Saturday, February 17, 2018
To Marxian fascists on the left (also modern liberals) and Randian libertarians on the right (?) (also neoconservatives) who believe we have complete freedom to create any Utopia we can think of, I reply that I have the freedom to say: grow up, or if I'm not feeling tolerant: go to hell.
Sociobiology isn't merely "deterministic," as its enemies like to call it, but there is a loop between biology and culture initiated by biology. We follow the determination of our genes which can adapt to whatever environment we are living in. Our cells take internal and external signals, analyze them, and then decide if a gene product is needed. "Gene expression" is the regulation of the process of a heritable trait in an individual carrying the gene or genes that determine it.
In every human culture ever studied real human nature in general included, among other things, kin-selection preferences, incest taboos, marriage, hierarchy, division of labor, gender differentiation, localism, group-selection, even ethnocentrism and xenophobia. If a culture proposes to not include these things (which by the way resemble traditional conservative values) the culture does not last long and it will always return to these things because they are largely biologically determined.
We have freedom within several determined paths. We don't have to freedom to grow wings and fly like a bird (although transhumanism might want to try) but we do have the freedom to invent supersonic airplanes (assuming we are genetically/culturally smart enough). We can't create unworkable Randian or Marxist Utopias but we can create a workable ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with what we really are---assuming we can survive the Marxist and Randian false ideas of freedom.
Friday, February 16, 2018
Starting with those most responsible first: 1. the Big Media, 2. Big Business, 3. the politicians, 4. the academic world...Who these people actually are is for some other list.
Politicians won't go against the "political correctness" of the Media because the Media can destroy them if they do. Big business cares mainly about making money and any improvements they make are ultimately based on making money. Religion has been almost useless having been destroyed by the Big Media and the academic world. Parents alone have not offset the cultural power and degenerate influence of the Big Media and the educational system.
That is a lot of strong forces against having a healthy America. But life is instinctively resilient and optimistic no-matter what the cultural trends are doing or not doing. Basic human nature will return, as it always has. As E.O. Wilson said: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals."
We all remain essentially 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 into cultures that harmonize with real human nature will move in this basically conservative direction, because that is what we always return to when too large empires fall.
Thursday, February 15, 2018
If we define evil as profoundly immoral and malevolent then is the Big Media evil or just stupid? Well, they aren't stupid so.....
The Big Media became wealthy creating, promoting, and featuring T.V. shows, movies, and computer games that celebrate gross violence, hedonism, immorality, even as they also create, promote, and feature cultural Marxism, anti-bullying campaigns, transgenderism, etc, as taught in our schools.
Then the Big Media cashes in on the advertising dollars that come from endlessly promoting and featuring the chaotic results of the school shootings and the violent schizophrenic culture which they helped to create in the first place.
The Big Media and the academic world would prefer to ban all guns other than those owned by the leftist fascists---not rightists. The middle right and modern liberals just want to be libertarian and free to make money or worship and play as they please. The far right wants control of the guns by way of fascism on the right. Which way will we go?
I think the longest term solution to our violent schizophrenic culture is to eventually be separated along the lines of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in accord legally with our constitutional separation of powers and states. That is the traditional way to maintain a natural social order in harmony with real human nature, and far less prone to violent schizophrenic cultures. I suppose things will have to continue to get far worse before that becomes a solution.
Wednesday, February 14, 2018
Genes and culture developed to bond people much like a family, the real forces of human social behavior work along the same lines as pre-existing biological forces in a sort of feedback loop between biology and culture. Then the natural environment affects the way genes and culture express themselves.
Cultures also change because natural instinctive desires for success in survival and reproduction cause men to manipulate cultures in the attempt to advance themselves and their own groups. And so different religions and philosophies and cultures change and evolve.
The best religions and philosophies contained the most harmony with real human nature, that is, they affirmed, and bonded, the natural human behavior of being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. That was and is the base of conservatism.
Religions, philosophies and cultures can operate for a time with behavior and beliefs that go against nature and human nature, but religions, philosophies and cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological/genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and then humans work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.
Paganism contained many elements that bonded natural human behavior and real human nature, as defined above, but as we learned more about real nature and real human nature, religions, philosophies and cultures changed. The "revealed religions" and philosophies, such as Christianity and Hinduism, retained many of the bonds of past pagan religions even as they changed them.
Theological materialism is more or less placed in the ancient/modern worldview of philosophical naturalism, with the difference being that philosophical naturalism is generally irreligious, and theological materialism is religious in seeing Godhood as the goal of material evolution, first mirrored in the Father-Within of traditional religion, which is retained but transformed. (See more extensive reflections on theological materialism here)
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
Conservative Mark Brennan speculates (Chronicles, Feb 2018) that a way to deal with the destructive debt of our great country (3.65 trillion dollars in 2007) might be to tax the top 20 percent who own roughly 83 trillion dollars in aggregate wealth, which is about 85 percent of the wealth of the nation. Fed outlays are over 3 trillion dollars a year, which would be about 4 percent of the wealth of the 20 percent. So Brennan suggests taxing the top 20 percent that 4 percent spent by the Fed, with no deductions.
That is the kind of conservative thinking that Wilhelm Ropke might have liked, who said "The market is only one section of society. It is a very important section, it is true, but still one whose existence is justifiable and possible only because it is part of a larger whole which concerns not economics but philosophy, history, and theology."
It is hard to think of libertarians as conservative because they promote an extreme laissez-faire political philosophy advocating only minimal state intervention in the lives of citizens. Alas, that is the political philosophy of the new tech billionaires, and it also is the position of the corrupt neoconservatives. Economic nationalism is more conservative because economic nationalism emphasizes "domestic control of the economy, labor, and capital formation, even if this requires the imposition of tariffs and other restrictions on the movement of labor, goods and capital. In many cases, economic nationalists oppose globalization or at least question the benefits of unrestricted free trade." (Wikipedia)
Burke rightly said that political change should be gradual, but the economic solutions suggested above look revolutionary. 21 trillion in debt (now more) will probably soon force the government to change its current 75,000 page tax code, which was virtually written by the almost criminal lobbyists who do not care about our country. The obscenely wealthy will fight those changes, and they usually get what they want. But a few of the top 20 percent, for example Warren Buffet, says that he should be taxed more than his own beleaguered office help, who are now taxed more than he is.
Monday, February 12, 2018
We begin with materialism and evolve toward supermaterial Godhood. Spiritualism isn't necessary in defining Godhood.
Why do we need the "first cause" from which all spiritualism finds its best proof? Because human beings anthropomorphically see life as beginning and ending? As above, so below? No.
The more probable view is to see no beginning and no ending, and the cosmos as always evolving and devolving and not needing a first cause.
The "invisible" is not more real than the visible, it is just less evolved materially. Technical instruments continue to reveal what was invisible in the past.
Contrary to the mystics, those parts of nature closest to a "beginning" are the lowest parts of creation and do not bask in the glow of God. Beginning parts must materially evolve to the higher stages of life, and eventually can evolve to supermaterial Godhood, which is the furthest away from the beginnings.
So Godhood need not be lost in accepting the reality of materialism and naturalism. The material phenomenal cosmos is all there is---even the activation within life to evolve toward Godhood is material.
In theological materialism the Twofold Path conservatively retains the old so-called invisible God or Father Within in the Inward Path, but it is transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to real Godhood.
Sunday, February 11, 2018
The #MeToo movement is throwing the gentlemen out with the harassers and forcing modern lovemaking out with the slob
The predicable reaction has been swift, corporate men have stopped traveling with women and stopped mentoring junior women. But the feminist police are already on it trying to create corporate laws that enforce one size fits all.
One of several things the feminists and leftists don't realize is that their subversion of real gender and ethnic differences is probably more decisive in the fall of nations than political challenges---Gramsci would see the #MeToo movement as the next stage in undermining and subverting the West.
The feminists are even trying to invade the Special Forces, the last able bodied men in the country, demanding that men and women are equal in fighting prowess---if only women weren't discriminated against by the patriarchy.
Western women have had more freedom than any women in the world, but they have abused their freedom. I don't want to see women treated unfairly or abused, but I can see the Islamic fundamentalists watching this self-destruction of the West with amusement and declaring that they will inherit the West---as their smiling women serve them strong coffee and give birth to many children.
Saturday, February 10, 2018
I think not secession but ethnostates within the union was, and remains, the natural way to go. Lincoln and Davis were both right and both wrong. We need the union to protect ourselves should other outside powers attack us, but the union needs to relate to real human nature.
Ethnostates or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates relates best to real human nature, which remains as it has always been throughout human history: kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection (or ethnic selection) as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.
An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could even be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism. It may require a few constitutional amendments to give more power to the states.
As to the slavery of the South it was wrong on many levels, but it was naturally falling away with new technically advanced machines for the cotton plantations. In any case, force is not the best long-term way to integrate different ethnic groups, who do not really assimilate, as we see in our prison communities. The military now brags about its integration of races but virtually uses force to do it, rejecting or destroying anyone who doesn't go along with it.
The Ancient Greeks had a better, more natural, way of forming a federation of state militias when the Greek federation was threatened by outside forces. Sure there was competition between the states, and some states were better fighters than others, but what's wrong with that? The competition improved all groups.
Friday, February 09, 2018
Some of the synonyms for crime are lawbreaking, misconduct, illegality, villainy, crookedness, malfeasance. Postmodernism has been an intellectual and political crime against human society, but postmodernists claim that those who defend natural human relationships and real human nature are bigoted and racist!. What a scam! What con men!
The cultural criminals who have corrupted are culture are mainly the academic world and the Big Media. At least since the 1960's they have propagandized and brainwashed the public into accepting, for the most part, cultural Marxism, which has turned real human nature and natural human relationships upside down, calling evil good and good evil, like some underground, satanic, upside-down, plot.
Real human nature and natural human relationships are kin-centered, ethnocentric, and even xenophobic, and there is not a damn thing wrong with that! How can we understand or culturally define right and wrong if we corrupt the definition of human nature and natural human relationships?!
The real forces of human social behavior work along the same lines as pre-existing biological forces in a sort of feedback loop between biology and culture, suggesting that the political/cultural structure of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the social structure most in harmony with real human nature and natural human relationships, which remain kin-centered, ethnocentric, and even xenophobic, among other traditional things.
So we now have to struggle against these almost satanic odds, first to see if a way already exists---as conservatives do---and if not, to forge a way back to real human nature and natural human relationships. It turns out that our Founding Fathers set up a constitutional separation of powers and states which can be gradually and legally adapted to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates and the return to real human nature and natural human relationships. But the cultural criminals obviously need to be stopped.
Wednesday, February 07, 2018
The cliches of modern liberalism reveal ignorance and just plain lies about human nature, which means the modern liberal worldview advances such things, listed here by Chilton Williamson Jr. (Chronicles, Feb 2018) as "...the present welfare state (in which almost half the population pay no taxes and unwed mothers are married to the government), the sexual revolution, women’s liberation, gay marriage, transgenderism and the abolition of the two sexes and the invention of several new ones, the erasure of national borders, the melding and unification of national cultures, the globalization of the economy, absolute freedom of immigration and migration, forcible secularization and the persecution of Christians, and the replacement of learning and traditional education by insane propaganda ginned up in the advanced kindergartens that are dignified today by the name of universities." That is a shocking and twisted worldview.
The biological or genetic origin of human nature actually strongly suggests affirming most of the very things that modern liberals consider politically incorrect, or even define as evil. Human nature has been affirmed throughout human history to this day as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. This strongly suggests that the best political configuration for humans beings to live within, given who we are, is an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism and modern liberalism, but culture is eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and humans then can work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.
Lucky for us our Founding Fathers, who were probably a bit too enamored with the universalism of their time, also created a constitutional separation of powers and states which can be adapted to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates---if we can overcome the ignorance and lies of modern liberalism.
Tuesday, February 06, 2018
The ethnostate option: independent religious communities and antitrust policies would not stop the civil disruptions mainly caused by natural ethnic competition
Although the five Big Tech companies, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon, may be more left/libertarian than the liberalism of old Big Media, they all campaigned with Hillary Clinton, and they all censor conservatives---even as Big Tech tolerates and profits from gross pornography which can be easily seen by our children.
We could apply antitrust policies that really do break these huge corporations up, which are owned by many of the same cabal, but they are so powerful and rich that they can probably control antitrust policies. John Seiler Jr. of "Chronicles" (Feb 2018) also writes about the Benedict option, suggested by Rod Dreher, which takes inspiration from the option used by St. Benedict who after the fall of Rome built monasteries around which civilization could be maintained and hopefully later rebuilt.
I think a deeper more long lasting solution could be called the ethnostate option that would gradually separate us not into religious communities but ethnic communities, which could then ban whatever media they wanted to yet still follow the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states. That would be more in line with real human nature, which remains kin-selecting, marriage-making, hierarchical, with a division of labor, gender differentiation, localism, ethnocentrism, and even xenophobia (group-selection trumps individual selection)---and all those basic traits are mainly genetic traits developed over many thousand years.
Independent religious communities and antitrust policies would not stop the civil disruptions mainly caused by natural ethnic competition: the ethnostate option would.
Monday, February 05, 2018
The big metaphysical error comes from thinking that the perfect state gives birth to the imperfect state
The big metaphysical error comes from thinking that the perfect state gives birth to the imperfect state. If the so-called perfect state is thought of as non-material and spiritual then the material is seen as not good (even evil) and imperfect.
But when Godhood is seen as existing on the evolutionary material continuum leading to the supermaterial, as I believe, then the world evolves from an imperfect state to a verging-on-perfect state---verging-on-perfect because material life and Godhood never stop evolving (and sometimes devolving.)
"Timelessness" and "infinity" are also seen as another human invention: without material life living in time there is no related connection to time or infinity and they become as non-material-nothing as a non-material god.
The real relationship to Godhood, life, and human life (or our being an "image" of God) is the material and supermaterial connection, no invention of a spiritual or non-material connection is necessary to explain our connection to Godhood when Godhood is understood as material/supermaterial as we are and wish to be.
Saturday, February 03, 2018
If as I do you like the Occam's razor idea, or the principle of parsimony, where the simplest, less complicated definition is usually the best definition, and if you also don't mind using the method of cutting the Gordian knot to solve insoluble problems, then you won't be too surprised when I largely bypass the Aristotelian, Neo-Platonic, Augustinian, Thomistic and Rationalist proofs of God, as well as the Eastern thinkers (Vedic thinkers) who defined God in much the same way, that is, God as completely non-material and spiritual.
We don't have to reject the complicated definitions of an entirely spiritual God, but we can see them as over-complicated preliminary attempts to define the real Godhood reached only through the material evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood. The old involutionary path with its spiritual definition of God is transformed in the evolutionary path of material life evolving to supermaterial Godhood, as seen in the Twofold Path of theological materialism.
The old theology caused a Great Spiritual Blockade against life evolving to real Godhood. Modern science and modern culture largely rejected God and religion. I believe theological materialism can bring them back, along with a deep bonding and sacred purpose now missing in modern culture.
Friday, February 02, 2018
Non-college educated rednecks have a better grasp of reality than college-educated limousine liberals
Modern liberals think they know reality when they don't, which is why whenever they open their mouths they seem so condescendingly arrogant. Rednecks of course aren't perfect, they resent the wealthy a little too much.
This is a serious problem because modern libels marched through the institutions, as the communist Antonio Gramsci told them to do, and now they control the academic world, the Big Media, and a large part of the business world. They are the ones who want open borders with open immigration for everyone, and they are the ones who promote general cultural Marxism mixed with hedonism and immorality for popular culture, which is destroying America and the West.
It's too late to save old America, the growing mix of ethnic groups and cultures won't assimilate and naturally will aggressively or even violently compete. If we talk of taking the country back it wont be the same country we take back. The biological traits of the people create the culture more than the culture creates the people.
I believe that saving America (and the West) will mean legally adapting the constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and protecting the whole with a decentralized federalism. Not a revolution but a constitutional, legal, conservative, separation of regions and states into ethnostates---already partially existing---where real human nature, which remains kin-centered and ethnocentric, can live in relative harmony.
Of course this will not be easy but it will be better than letting the nation descend into another open civil war---which is already unofficially happening---that could then lead to totalitarianism on the left or the right, or just chaos.
Thursday, February 01, 2018
The problem with religious cosmogonies is that they turn the origin of the cosmos and life upside down. They begin with a highest God from whose androgynous non-material Being the cosmos is created, which is considered a great falling away from the highest to the lowest.
I believe it happens the other way around. The lowest primal point of existence creates the beginning cosmos which then must evolve, if it can, to the highest existence, which is where real Godhood can exist.
That great metaphysical error has created many atheists, and devalued the world, life in the world, religion, and material evolution to real Godhood. It need not have.
The cosmos did not come from a non-material, spiritual, androgynous being, which was a metaphysical conception existing only in the minds of men who mainly dropped out of the material world to create such non-life conceptions. Godhood is a real and valid goal, but Godhood must be materially evolved to from the material to the supermaterial.