The taboo that is still dooming us

Two things doom us to dissatisfaction, or worse to a fall: when we overemphasize being-for-oneself, as in libertarianism and superindividualism, and on the other hand when we overemphasize being-for-another, as in the universalist religions and in modern liberalism/Marxism.

Satisfaction and social stability come more naturally when we can affirm the biological origin of our social behavior, that is, when we see as E. O. Wilson said that in human life and survival "within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals." That brings whatever natural coordination we can have to harmonize the process of being-for-oneself and being-for-another.

The obfuscated arguments regarding individual/social doom or satisfaction by Hegel and Marx, Nietzsche, the postmodernists, and the feminists are simply overcome by the instinctive and rational affirmation of the biological origin of our social behavior. How interesting that this remains a taboo view.

I suppose it remains taboo because the biological origin of our social behavior points toward a human nature that goes against modern liberalism, cultural Marxism and globalist corporations, in affirming real 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.

That directly and naturally shows the way toward the populist nationalism now rising in the West, and later toward an ethnopluralism of smaller ethnostates, and not toward the globalized corporations or Marxist/fascist dictatorships now preferred by the corrupted elite.  We will get there, but we will be stupid and devious in getting there, as usual.