Laura Ingraham and that snooty skinny little high school kid

That snooty skinny little high school kid who was taught by our asinine educational system to be an idiot spouting culturally Marxist conditioning has forced the brave Laura Ingraham off her Fox show for a week (more?) because she had the guts to say the non-criminal population should keep their guns, and she mentioned something about his college acceptance problems.

Laura has more courage than all the conservative commentators combined, with the exception of Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter, and Laura has more balls than the corrupt and craven businesses who pulled their advertising from her show. She will be missed.

Who, or what, are the parents of these little phonies? Any rationally and instinctively healthy father (if he has a father in his home, which seems doubtful) would tell him to sit down and shut his mouth until he knows what the hell he is talking about.

Since the degenerate 1960's the worship of youth goes on fired by a traitorous Media into rebellions which they profit from.

The equitable way to deal with the biological power game

Politics may be a subsidiarity of culture, as someone said, but culture is a subsidiarity of the people, the ethnic groups, who create the cultures, but even deeper than that the people who create the cultures are the subsidiarity of their biological or genetic traits.

Human nature is a combination of nature and nurture, biology plus the environment that people find themselves living in and adapting to. But it is our biological/genetic drives toward successful survival and reproduction that activate the creation of the cultures and the adaptations we make from the environment.

Why is this not taught in our school system? Why is this blocked in the Media? Why is this considered the "politically incorrect" way to define history?

It is blocked due to the very traits of human nature just mentioned. This biological power game is played, consciously or unconscionably, by people and groups who corrupt these traits in others so they may selfishly gain biological and genetic power.

The ethical or just way to deal with who we actually are is to create an ethnopluralism of ethnostates where human nature can be what it actually is. This can and should be done legally, for example, by adapting the already existing constitutional separation of powers and states.

Look to who benefits most (at least in the short term) from the lies about human nature that are blocking the equitable way to deal with the biological power game, and causing much unnecessary suffering.

Conservatism has been like a tragic hero blind to the weakness that is destroying it

I always hesitate to be critical of religious conservatives because they are some of the best conservatives we have, especially those who work at journals like the "American Conservative" and "Chronicles." Religious traditions line up very closely with the real sociobiological view of man 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.

The problem comes from believing that crime and disorder in the world come from "fallen human nature," and that the sense of right and wrong are built into the "incarnate soul," and that the human will is "depraved." The sense of right and wrong was built into the genes. Human morality derived from the altruism of group-selection which gradually developed because it was more successful than individual selfishness in survival and reproduction. Crime and disorder in human beings comes from a combination of biology and culture.

Yes, we can have social conditioning against real human nature, as in the Soviet Union, and now with cultural Marxism in the West, but that doesn't last long and humans always return to the values and morality seen in traditional religion and affirmed by the science of sociobiology.

We need religion to conserve and sacralize our traditions, but we also need futuristic religion related to the material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood in the natural world. Our religious values and morality need to come from theological materialism not spiritualism. If you tell me that "Satan" made me say these things you not only insult me but you hurt the conservative cause. Conservatism has been like a tragic hero blind to the weakness that is destroying it.

Trade is important but survival is more important, and trading should reflect that hierarchy of values

Greed rules, but to say that less abstractly, greedy people rule. And so American global capitalism has been taking apart industrial jobs in America and destroying lower and middle-class workers, as they cash in on the rise to power of China. They have even sold to China the right to make the steel which our defense industry depends upon.

That looks like traitorism to me, that is, betraying the obligation one has to the survival of ones country.

So the trade off for real conservatives has been to have President Trump throw us the crumbs of putting tariffs on Chinese products, as he promised, and in return we have to put up with Trump's sordid behavior.

But the global capitalist's who control almost every institution in America, from banking to the Media, are now out to destroy President Trump for trying to get in the way of their global greed.  They may succeed.

It seems to me that greed will not go away until---you guessed it---the present empire of global greed  falls, or at least is tamed.

Trade is important, it helped make America great, but survival is more important, and trading should reflect that hierarchy of values.

Hollywood and New York show-business disguises the selfish will to power behind the cultural lies they promote

The only "smart" people in Hollywood (more devious than smart) are the producers who are virtual geniuses at disguising their pathological selfish wills to power behind the cultural lies they promote. They merely use actresses and actors as fronts or as cannon fodder to advance their own agendas.

Pretty girls and boys come from places like Iowa or Minnesota to Hollywood or New York. Some have realized that they can trade on their beauty even without having talent, and they are quickly seduced, raped, or at least exploited, as they gradually learn to use (abuse) their beauty to sell modern liberalism (cultural Marxism) in movies or television for fame and fortune.

The "intellectuals" and writers of Hollywood are more like hair-splitting lawyers or argumentative rabbis with a sort of malevolent sense of humor. They know that the rancorous liberalism they espouse mainly helps themselves or their tribe and they really give a shit less about what happens to the actors and actresses they exploit, or the country they corrupt.

Now the latest trend is to have actresses finally objecting to their rapes at the hands of pig producers. But some actresses even uglify themselves, like Emma Watson, in honor of "women's rights," at least until the next magazine cover where they will again pose themselves like high-priced call girls, seeming to miss the irony of it all.

Hollywood and New York show-business seems incapable of seeing real human nature, which is mainly biologically and genetically determined and is not liberal. But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on this because the subject is blocked across the culture and never seen in the movie scripts adapted from comic books they read.

As to talent, you can count on one hand any real talent in Hollywood or New York, but they are usually also naive liberals or bat-shit crazy. In the U.S. the late Marlon Brando was an authentic genius and he rejected all the rules of acting, yet even he was more liberal and bat-shit crazier than the the rest of the pack. England has far more talented actors and makes better movies, but they now have the same dumb liberal worldview, even when they make "historical" movies.

Many of us are thoroughly sick of Hollywood and New York show-business and hope that their power will decline. But things will probably become more corrupt and rotten in Hollywood and New York, at least until the whole American empire collapses.

Overcoming the things that have caused our alienation

Many conservatives spend time sifting through the Media looking for something they can agree with. We take for granted now that we have to read between the lines of everything we read or see. This leads to feelings of alienation from our culture.

This alienation is less a problem of ideas or ideology and more the reality that as the people change the culture changes, and the Northern Europeans and WASPS who largely founded the West have been declining in numbers and influence.

The fact is, distinctively different people with distinctively different genetic traits have been forming distinctively different cultures within the West. If left to their own resources Northern Europeans develop distinctly different cultures from Southern Europeans, Africans, or Asians. This helps explain the rise of populism, nationalism, separatism and ethnopluralism in the West, people naturally do not want to feel alienated in there own lands.

I believe the way out of this alienation in America is to follow the decentralizing constitutional separation of powers and states, but to then go further and legally decentralize toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. That is the way the West seems to be going anyway with the movements toward populism, nationalism, separatism and ethnopluralism. But not without great resistance from those who gain power from our alienation by preaching no borders, globalism, and multiculturalism, the very things that have caused our alienation.

Comparing the morals of Donald Trump and Anderson Cooper

How are the actions of Donald Trump having a voluntary tryst with a porn actress less moral than the voluntary homosexual acts of the arrogant Anderson Cooper who interviewed the porn actress yesterday?

The corruption of gender differences

We know that the male and female gender share nurturing and combative traits, but these traits are more dominant in one gender than the other. Radical feminism, like cultural Marxism, denies that there even is a human nature, preaching to us that gender differences are all taught to us and are environmentally caused and are completely malleable.

But female nurturing and male combativeness are biologically or genetically programmed in human nature and trends and fashions that try to tell us otherwise don't last long. 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 may be more rapid), but we all remain kin-centered, gender defined, even ethnocentric, among other traditional and conservative traits.

What annoys me is that this denial and subterfuge regarding gender differences is usually due to those who seek to weaken the genders as a method to power for their own agendas. The academic world and the Big Media---or specifically the people who control them---have been gaining power using this corruption.

The one good thought regarding this corruption of the genders is that real human nature will not go away, it will return. Let's hope it doesn't return with a hurricane of fascism or radical Islam---block real human nature too long and that could happen, with the people cheering it on.

Family gatherings from the sociobiological perspective

Altruism, or unselfish interest in the welfare of others, is not really all that selfish since it is genetically biased toward the survival and reproductive success of ones family, ones kin, and ones larger ethnic group, whether we are conscious of the bias or not.

When I think of larger family gatherings, including my own, if I am honest, I can see that blood brothers and their families get along together better with each other than they do with their half brothers and their families. Also differences in ideas can be more difficult to smooth over in divorced families than in undivorced families, which relates to why tradition has been against divorce in general, it tends to divide families and divided families did not survive as successfully as undivided families.

Sharing the same overarching universal or religious world view can help families get along better but it is naive to think universalism can overcome distinct genetic differences. We see this also in the increasing disorder in multi-ethnic societies, no matter what cultural philosophy is in place. That may be a hard fact to admit in our liberal, culturally Marxist societies, but it is the truth.

I think it helps to understand bonding problems and successes when we look at our family gatherings from this sociobiological perspective. We may then better understand why some members are closer than others, beyond the problems that come from political differences. If there are no divorces or half brothers, and if everyone is of the same religion and political persuasion, consider your family unusual in today's world.

Accepting that your family gatherings may not be perfect from this sociobiological perspective may make you less frustrated with your family, so you don't drop out or shun your family. That at least is the hope.

The Great Lie about what human nature really is has been promoted mainly by internal battles within our societies

For most of human history tribes and nations fought in open conflict with one another, but in modern times, due to immigration and increasing population, conflicts are more often fought inside our cultures, and often deceptively fought.

I have speculated that this may have begun way back with warriors originating religious asceticism as techniques to calm and strengthen warriors for battle, but warrior ascetics then became asceticism as an an end in itself with a specialty priest class.

Then we see ancient Indo-European conflict between warriors and priests leading to splits and migrations, which happened, for example, between ancient India (Hindu priests) and Iran (Zoroastrian warriors). In our time we have ever more internal conflicts within modern societies between different groups, classes, intellectuals, and ethnic groups, often fought secretly.

The Great Lie about what human nature really is has been promoted mainly due to these internal battles within our modern cultures between different groups, classes, intellectuals, and ethnic groups. The Big Media and our educational system is now telling us to deny patriotism, gender and ethnic differences, and other mostly traditional values, and promoting instead cultural Marxism, homosexuality, pornography, promiscuity, universal equality etc. 

These internal conflicts have led to the disorder and degeneration of the West even more than open conflicts have. This is why fascism on the left or right develop supposedly to create social and cultural order by quickly and totally forcing order. But then fascism ends up denying and blocking human nature as much as the degenerate culture did.

I believe the cultural mess we have today strongly suggests that the way out of the mess is to realize and understand, instinctively and rationally, that real human nature leads naturally to the cultural/social expression of regionalism, localism, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by some sort of federalism.

Given who we are this appears to be the best way we can optimize the gene expression we inherited from our human ancestors toward being kin-centered, gender defined, heterosexual, marriage-making, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other mostly traditional traits, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but our cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and humans can then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.

How can we best live in the world if one ethnic group's gain is equal to the another ethnic group's losses?

Modern liberals who are usually lost in political fantasy-land do not want to see that ethnic or racial interactions are mostly a zero sum game, one player's gain is equal to the another player's losses. We can see this in the rise and fall of different ethnic groups in America in politics, business and sports. For example, as liberals gleefully tell us, whites will soon be a minority in the country they founded, and as the people change the culture changes. Will Europe become increasingly Islamic?

The science of sociobiology has also empirically shown us that group-selection ranks higher than individual selection in survival and reproductive success, which is why human nature is kin-centered and ethnocentric. Even the totalitarian forces of fascism on the far left (Marxism) or the far right (Nazism) can't make distinctly different people and cultures harmoniously the same. So how can we best live in the world if one ethnic group's gain is equal to the another ethnic group's losses?

We don't want fascism on the right or the left because totalitarian force doesn't work any better than the politically correct cultural Marxism we now suffer under. We need to see, as one writer put it, that the differences that are tearing us apart can put us back together again if we can learn to affirm an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which can be federally protected, at least in America, by the constitutional separation of powers and states. That is the sane and rational way to go, given real human nature.

Can modern liberals and even some conservatives give up their egalitarian and universal fantasies and avoid, or at least greatly limit our inevitable social and ethnic disruptions, by forming an ethnopluralism of ethnostates? First we have to establish that it is not politically incorrect to even suggest an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Does it really have to be said? People and ethnic groups are different from one another!

Why?

Democrats and liberals say the differences come from exploitation of the poor by the rich, or discrimination by whites against those of color.

Republicans and libertarians say the differences are caused by big government liberals and socialists.

Populist nationalists and the Alt-right say the differences come from biology and from global elites.

The answer? All of the above, with the last mentioned closer to the truth.

According to Taki Theodoracopulos, Norway's murder rate in 2014 was 0.56 per 100,000, and in 2016 their Per Capita GDP was $70,392. Haiti's murder rate in 2004 was 219 per 100,000, and their Per Capita GDP was $761.

Why?

People and ethnic groups are different from one another!

Real human nature throughout human history shows that people live and harmonize best within their own ethnostates, and people clash when they are shoved together in the same multicultural states and told that they must all be equal in their behavior.

Long-term solution? An ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

The possibility of the constitutional separation of powers and states adapting to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in the short-term? Not good. The possibility of it happening, purposely or unpurposely, in the long-term? Much better.

False dualities are the big enemy of truth

I think false dualities are the big enemy of truth, probably originating in ancient religions and then moving on to philosophy.

Religions separated mind from body, material from spiritual, beast from man, rational from irrational, and came up with a method for seeing or experiencing God which required the duality to take things as far as blocking all material desires.

There may be a hierarchy of drives with the most important force being the basic material drive within life, within every cell of the body (Tirips), to active life to evolve in the material world toward the greatest success in survival and evolution, which is supermaterial Godhood.

Even so, mind, body, beast, man, rational, irrational, all are one, and all are material and supermaterial with different but related tasks, at different stages of evolution.

We evolve in material and supermaterial life from frogs to the Gods, and religious/philosophical talk of a duality between the material and spiritual, with religion preferring the spiritual, is false and misleading and is holding us back from attaining real Godhood.

Defining Progress

I see human history as progress, but not all people and states progress at the same time. I don't see determined cycles of golden ages and their falls, or original sin.

But human nature remains biologically as it has always been, kin-centered and ethnocentric, among other traditional human behavior, even if this is denied by postmodern liberalism.

Empire-building might have made more sense when the world was far less populated, but now empire-building should not be defined as progress.

Now there are too many distinctive people and states who will not accept being conquered or assimilated in an empire and will therefore naturally create social disorder.

Progress now means declaring that from now on empire-building is not acceptable. For example, the Russians should not reconquer old satellites which have become natural ethnostates, Israel should not seek land beyond its borders, the Palestinians should have their own state, and the U.S. should bring its empire home.

Human progress is now defined as empires devolved into a natural ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected from future empires by some sort of federalism. We might not all go there at the same time, but that now defines human progress.

Revenge of the transhumanists

I like the wild creativity of the transhumanists but I think they are chickenshit in centering on artificial intelligence rather than human intelligence or super-species intelligence.

I understand the problems that come from talking about human intelligence, being called a racist or bigot when you are not, but high creativity isn't only comic-book heroes and dweeby computers.

Then there is that revenge of the nerds quality to the transhumanists, their resentment of the blond preppies in high school who got all the girls, or the girls themselves who wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole.

It is not human-computer melds we need most it is the biological and genetic evolution of humans and beyond that we need, with men and women controlling the computers, not the other way around.

The "trans" we need is not transhumanism (or transsexualism for that matter) but the great transformations that come from biological evolution, which can include a sane and moral genetic engineering.

We don't even have to lose religion when it is understood that we materially evolve to supermaterial Godhood.

The activating force of the body is not irrational

Socrates tell us that man is a self-knowing being living in a not-knowing body. Freud calls the forces of the body an irrational Id. But it seems to be virtually the the other way around.

What are called the irrational forces of life are called that mainly because spirit and mind are considered superior and rational by the mystics and the body is considered inferior or even evil.

The activating force of the body is not irrational, it seeks to active the body and mind to evolve all the way to supermaterial Godhood in the material world. That does not indicate an ignorant unconscious.

The "ignorant" and "irrational" Id force of the body is more like a rational Super-Id because it seeks to activate life, along with the mind, to evolve in the natural world toward the ultimate evolutionary success of Godhood.

Is it not time to unblock the Great Spiritual Blockade to Godhood? I think so.

National defense strategy and the swamp

I have always respected the realism of the military in general. But the best leaders know when to call retreat to regroup.

It seems that those who think one power---the U.S.---should rule the world (Mattis and president Trump) have won our national defense strategy, over those who seek a multi-polar world (Pat Buchanan and the populist nationalists). 

So it looks like Trump's populist nationalism, at least regarding national defense strategy, which he campaigned on and won with, is over

According to Srdja Trifkovic's stats America has declined economically from having 40 percent of the world economy in 1960 to 20 percent today. We can't afford a bloated global military. We have also had a big cultural decline in traditional values and moved toward cultural Marxism and a relativity of values and morals, now tearing us apart.

It looks like we will have more of the same military industrial complex. The swamp will continue. Washington politicians don't have the balls to promote populist nationalism in the face of the lobbies who control them.

We could be very tough without a global empire, yet still deal with the world, but the global blowhards can't see it that way.  I suppose we will have to fall like Rome without a realistic recovery plan before we will have the recovery of our natural constitutional separation of powers and states, yet alone the more permanent ethnopluralism of ethnostates which usually follows the fall of empires.

This is not happy news, but realism is not always pretty.

Reversing metaphysics

Ultimately mans status in the universe is not wholly determined by the "quality of his thinking" but by the level of his evolution, which includes both mind and body.

The highest status in the universe goes to Godhood, which is the highest evolved being, or beings, at any given time in the universe.

We don't transcend the "limits" of flesh and mind by blocking material evolution with ascetic compulsion. Flesh and mind evolve materially toward supermaterial Godhood.

Spirit isn't light and matter isn't darkness, as the mystics have constantly told us, the activation of life toward Godhood is material, not spiritual.

Life is materially activated from within and life must then evolve, hopefully, with higher and higher success toward Godhood, in whatever environment life finds itself living in, adapting as life goes along.

We can now be an aid in our evolution toward real Godhood. Blocking evolution, religiously or politically, is not an aid at all.

Even so, even so, as conservatives, we can retain the old ascetic first inward glimpses of "god" as we reverse, transform, and evolve our metaphysics. The involutionary and evolutionary Twofold Path does that.

Honoring the inward activation of life

I think of evolution from the inward perspective perhaps even more than the outward perspective. Evolution is the activation and struggle of life to exploit or control its outside environment so that life can successfully survive, reproduce, etc. Life is not always successful in this struggle, and sometimes life is forced to mutate and change due to its environment. But it is that essential (divine) desire to survive and live that is a central evolutionary, and religious, force.

That is where the Twofold Path in theological materialism comes from. The Inward Path does not see God, it sees or experiences that divine yet material inward spark of life, whereas the Outward Path of life seeks a way in the environment to honor its inward activation and successfully evolve all the way to supermaterial---not spiritual---Godhood.

I see conservative reasons to retain the traditional religious first imperfect glimpses of "Godhood" in their traditional inward paths, which is transformed by the Outward Path of natural material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. Religion, science and the cultural ethos can join in the old hope of a consilience and unity of knowledge.

The spirit of our times is the desire of people to fragment from centralized states and from globalism

The spirit of our times is the desire of people to fragment from centralized states and from globalism, more in Europe than the United states, but dawning everywhere. It would be seen in Russia and China too but their general tendencies toward centralized fascism on the right and centralized communism on the left have blocked this populist trend.

But the more the desire to decentralize and localize grows the more centralization and globalism will block this populist trend by seeking even more centralization to control the social disruptions, virtually to the point of fascism.

This harkens back to Spengler's idea that civilizations always cyclically enter a period of pre-death emergency where "Caesarism" and the omnipotent executive takes power. But are these sort of cycles inevitable?

Growing resistance to Caesarism may start locally and then gradually build to the nation. I hope we will retain some form of federalism to protect the whole and not seek complete secession, as we decentralize into regions and states in harmony with real human nature, which remains, kin-centered, gender defined, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

I think this points toward the political/cultural solution of ethnopluralism, often written about here. It is a conservative transformation---not revolution---that I hoped will come which will bring about an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where different ethnic groups can politically and culturally conduct themselves according to who they actually are, in their own regions and states within our Democratic Republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to our already existing constitutional separation of powers and states.

I don't think these cycles have to be inevitable, although we may have to suffer another version of Caesarism which will be used to try to calm the inevitable social disruptions caused by globalism, open borders, and multiculturalism, before we will see the real devolution and decentralization of these bloated and corrupt centralized states.

The biological origin of our social behavior actually ends the intellectual defense of postmodern relativism

The corruption of the Media in America is at bottom the consequence of decades of teaching a dumbed-down version of "postmodernism" to journalists and everyone else in our colleges and universities---you know, the same postmodernism that teaches a relativity of values and the cultural Marxism which has been destroying us.

Although an analogy to a sword might make the effete intellectuals of postmodernism quake, postmodernism can be defeated as easily as Alexander cut the Gordian Knot with his sword rather than trying to unknot the occult philosophy of the Phrygians.

The biological origin of our social behavior, as empirically explained by sociobiology, actually ends the intellectual defense of postmodern relativism. As long as we are alive every cell in our body demands survival and reproductive success. This natural activation can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied. Any existing "relativity" of values can come only from the various social and cultural methods we try (including postmodernism) to biologically and genetically advance out kin, related ethnic group, locality and nation.

This defense of real human nature affirms in general the populist nationalism now trying to rise in the corrupted West.

Modern liberals want to change things that cannot be changed

Modern liberals propose utopian schemes like universal equality and cultural Marxism but those proposal do not change the mainly conservative foundation of human nature, they only pervert and abuse human nature and human social behavior.

The great cultural achievements of mankind have been reduced by modern liberalism to foolishness and perversity. But many conservatives (mainly neoconservatives) have also corrupted the natural inclination of human nature toward populist nationalism with a grotesque elitist form of free trade and globalism.

I'll repeat again the mantra on real human nature, most recently empirically defined by the science of sociobiology: In every human culture ever studied human nature included, among other conservative things, 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.

Change or evolution can and should happen while keeping the best of the past and while including new things that are assimilable with the natural inclinations of human nature, including populist and economic nationalism (which China is now succeeding with as America once did.)

But even more harmonious with real human nature is the finer tuning of populist nationalism toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which is the next great political movement that can bring us back to reality, and perhaps with only a few amendments to our constitutional separation of powers and states.

Tucker Carlson is almost right on conspiracy theories

In a recent interview in "Chronicles (March 2018) Tucker Carlson had some interesting things to say about conspiracy theories.

He talked about how older people, not young people, tend to think conspiracies exist..."not just conspiracies where people meet off-site to subvert the system, but conspiracies of like-mindedness, of similar temperament, of instinct...maybe all the people in charge are from pretty much the same world and have the same preconceptions, maybe they, maybe they unknowingly, act together to produce a certain result..."

I waited for Carlson to then say: "and maybe they are of the same ethnic group, maybe they are ethnocentric," but he did not. I don't think Carlson was trying to be politically correct, I think, like most conservatives, he is largely missing the knowledge of real human nature that comes from the science of sociobiology, or at least is too cavalierly dismissing that knowledge.

Conservatives seem to have a hard time admitting the biological origin of social behavior (and of course liberals won't go anywhere near it), they don't want to admit that ethnocentrism is a deep part of natural human nature and it affects politics, and even religion---that sounds too much like "racism." The religion side of it is especially the line they can't cross probably because of the universalism running through religion.

But conservatives can still be conservative if they admit that distinctly different ethnic groups and races need to be allowed their own natural agendas, but not all living within the same space. which leads to negative things like racial supremacy and bigotry.

The U. S. constitutional separation of powers and states could be legally adapted to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which would end, or at least slow, the main conspiracies that are tearing our country apart. Radical revolution could be avoided.

Unsung political connections

Conservatism, populism, nationalism, and even modern liberalism have an unsung common ground with ethnopluralism.

The difference between conservatives and ethnopluralists is that ethnopluralism is often backed by a materialist definition of human nature (though not always), and conservatism is usually backed by a spiritualist foundation. But they share the same essential traditional definition of human nature 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. 

Both religion and science (sociobiology) more or less concur in this definition, which is also an unsung connection.

Modern liberals are usually materialists and therefore they should be able to share the same natural definition of human nature as conservatives and ethnopluralists. But liberals wrongly define human nature as cultural Marxism, which is the opposite of the conservative and ethnopluralist definition of real human nature mentioned above. 

Liberals and even some conservatives like to proclaim that ethnopluralism or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is racial supremacist and fascist, but ethnopluralism is the opposite, believing in the separation of powers and states, not centralization, and the independence of each ethnostates and distinct ethnic group. Liberals should welcome the independence and cultural affirmation of the ethnic minorities they constantly champion, who will be free at last to proclaim their own unique cultures---as the majorities have done---but this time in harmony with real human nature.

So why do we not make these unsung political connections between conservatism, populism, nationalism, modern liberalism, and ethnopluralism? Some of it is just plain ignorance, but much of it is because a few powerful people seek to benefit from the present multiculturalism and cultural Marxism that is destroying us.

My Box

It's not easy to be a social human being living in a swamp, which is why many people drop out of it all. But that allows the bad guys to conquer more easily.

Many Americans see the Democrats, Republicans, and the Big Media, as not worth a damn in cleaning up the cultural swamp, which is why they voted for Donald Trump who lived outside the swamp of Washington.

Some people speak of cycles of these things happening in human history and that we should just ride out the cycles. Others fall for the totalitarian temptation, that is, using a powerful flood to clean out the swamp, which then levels everything in sight. Some advocate "thinking outside the box" but end up thinking inside another box.

I believe if we actually listen to every cell in our biological bodies we see life reaching to live and successfully survive, and we can also see that the biological origin of human nature is the real natural "box" defining the real origin of human social behavior. That can counter and defeat the relativity of postmodernism completely.

In every human culture ever studied human nature included being biologically 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. If a culture proposes to not include these things the culture does not last long and will always return to these things.

I affirm the courageous idea put forward by the late, politically incorrect, Wilmot Robertson suggesting that perhaps we don't have to accept Oswald Spengler's endless cycles and we can counter the cycles by setting up a real ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with real human nature, which swampy empires always cyclically return to in any case. Different ethnic groups can politically and culturally conduct themselves according to who they actually are, in their own states, even within our Democratic Republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to the constitutional separation of powers and states.

That's my natural box.