My evolutionary conservatism

I would say I am an evolutionary realist in art and literature, an ethnostatist in politics, and a theological materialist in religion. I would place these under the term evolutionary conservatism. That is what my writing tries to synthesize every day.

I see evolution as explained by sociobiologist E. O. Wilson and social psychologist Raymond Cattell as the main path of progress. I see future politics leading to the ethnostatism as first examined by maverick historian Wilmot Robertson. I affirm conservatism as explained by Russell Kirk and Pat Buchanan. I see art as examined by the writer Tom Wolfe, and literature as examined by T. S. Eliot. And I affirm my own religious philosophy of theological materialism.

But of course I don't agree with everything these writers said. Wilson couldn't emphasize clearly that the base of group selection and altruism is ethnic selection. Cattell didn't try to conserve traditional religion within his courageous new religion from science. Robertson was brilliant and historically wise but spent too much time fulminating against the Jews. Russell Kirk's writings were straight talking but also oddly pretentious, and both he and Pat Buchanan ultimately affirmed the non-materialism and asceticism of traditional religion which blocks the material evolution to real Godhood.

So for now at least my evolutionary conservatism has placed me in no man's land, beyond these different regimes of thought and action, just outside the city walls, where I try to accept my fate.