Future statesmanship and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates

“The true, noble statesman according to Cicero, follows Plato in seeing the governing of the commonwealth as guardianship: he is in some deep spiritual sense "oblivious to [his] own advantage," at least in any vulgar sense of the term. Above all, he hates civic discord and dissension and aims to be just to the legitimate claims of the rich and the poor, the few and the many. Sedition and discord, culminating in civil war, are the great evils to be avoided” (Daniel J. Mahoney, “Ballast on the Ship of State: Statesmanship as Human Excellence,” Modern Age, Fall 2020)

If the noble statesman of the future see guardianship of the commonwealth and avoiding sedition and discord culminating in civil war as the way to go, then they will propose and defend an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. They will honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality etc., and advocate the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real human nature, which is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. Then they will protect each ethnostate from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosenists, Marxists, etc.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states. Nothing less will define the goals of the true and noble statesman of the future.

The biggest problem with political thinking today is the lack of information on the biological origin of social behavior

The biggest problem with political thinking today is the lack of information on the biological origin of social behavior, or the blocking of this field. This applies to virtually everyone from the experts in the field, to politicians, and to ordinary people.

What we need is a new field to help make cultural sense of the sociobiological perspective in human nature and culture, we need a philosophical sociobiology.

The evolutionary science of sociobiology has excellently defined and explained human nature and human culture. Sociobiology does not inevitably lead to Marx, Spengler or Goebbels, this is a scare tactic. Just because progress can be affirmed through evolution does not mean that one does not believe in the past or in traditions.

I say don't study “political science” until you first study sociobiology. Read Edward O. Wilson's books, he is at least as accessible as Marx, and much wiser. The evolutionary sciences should be taught front and center in the humanities. Why isn't sociobiology featured in the humanities? You know the answer, sociobiology is not politically correct in that nefarious culturally Marxist community where the biological origin of social behavior is the kiss of death to their absurd ideas about the cultural origin of social behavior.

The biological origin of our social behavior, as empirically explained by sociobiology, actually ends the intellectual defense of the modern liberals and the postmodern relativists. 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.

Real human nature and natural rights relate very well to primary group-selection, with individual selection as secondary, which, for example, could be affirmed with regional ethnostates in the American constitutional separation of powers and states, while being protected by federalism. In the natural configuration of ethnostates human nature can be free to be what it is: genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, etc.

Conservative's have not fully realized yet that multiculturalism has made their nations too diverse for nationalism to take hold, and modern liberals think nationalism and ethnocentrism are evil. So reforming the West in harmony with the biological origin of social behavior will not be easy, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied forever.

Evolutionary Realism and the Godhood Goal (from the archive)

A mixing of realism and idealism defines the classical arts, according to Gail Leggio. I think evolutionary realism best describes the arts involved in our sacred evolution toward Godhood. Evolutionary realism brings art philosophy back to the living object, the natural world, but also extends it out into the future toward our evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

What we consider “beautiful” tends to have evolved in the Pleistocene through natural selection and sexual selection, and we retain it today. We can build on this, on what we are, since it doesn’t work well to reject human nature. We can build on instinctive feelings and empirical ideas of what is true, beautiful and good, with the goal of evolving to the zenith of these things, which is Godhood.

We are aided in this direction by the inward, purely physical, activation of the Will-To-Godhood, or Tirips, which seeks Godhood by materially activating life to evolve toward Godhood, working along with the shaping of outside evolution and selection. But even without acknowledging this inward purpose, evolution has been moving toward more efficient forms, more complexity, with occasional stops and side-turnings along the way.

Morality does not have to be a counter-movement opposing nature's endeavors to arrive at a higher type, which was Nietzsche's view. But devolution can and does take place with various negative or down-going kinds of morality, the kind of morality that says this material world is not good. Godhood is not only the zenith of truth, beauty and goodness, it is the zenith of successful survival and reproduction. Science and religion can meet here.

“Must we not ourselves become gods?”

Contrary to Eric Voegelin we can indeed immanentize the eschaton.

The desire for the absolute is the desire for the zenith of survival and reproductive success, which is Godhood. When we answer Nietzsche's question “must we not ourselves become gods?” we say it will happen through material and supermaterial evolution toward ascending levels of Godhood.

The vitalistic desire for the absolute or Godhood is the desire for the zenith of truth, beauty, and goodness, and is also the desire to successfully survive and reproduce. This great material, not spiritual, process of evolution is activated from within every cell of the body, demanding things like metabolism and reproduction, which then react and adapt and evolve within the various outside environments that life lives in.

This theological materialism brings the material grounding of naturalism and evolution to perspectivism and to the relativism of post modernism.

We don't need Heideggerian and Traditionalist School gloom

 Heidegger concluded after years study that the West has lost its spiritual strength, lost its Gods, destroyed the earth, reduced humans to a mass, and created only the mediocre, and the Traditionalist School agreed with that assessment.

Rather than killing religion and God, or going backward to a Traditionalist School which repudiates all the great Western achievements of modernity, they might have gone back to the point of the metastasis and rejected the split between the material and the spiritual. There is no non-material spiritual God but we can reach ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood by way of material and supermaterial evolution. Real Godhood is reached by material evolution, which is not the symbolic experience of bliss reached in ascetic practices.  

^{Why didn't the Heideggerians and Traditionalist School followers study more Western geniuses, like Edward Wilson and the great Neo-Darwinist field of sociobiology, or men like the brilliant British/American psychologist Raymond Cattell, or the courageous historian Wilmot Robertson? Why did they not find science (a jewel of the West) nearly as important as Eastern spiritualism (a jewel of the East)?}

I see Heidegger's idea of Being as Time in line with that tendency of intellectuals to overlook the fact that the “names” of things are an abstraction which only point toward the reality of the thing named---the abstract name is not the thing-in-itself. All philosophy and theology is full of this metaphysical error, with God, Being, and Truth as only names and abstractions, often with no connection to real objects. Godhood, religion,Truth, need not be lost when we bring our thinking back to real, evolving, material objects.

The big problem with the Traditionalist view is that there is no non-material spiritual world, there is only ascetic interpretations derived from spiritual language and strict ascetic disciplines designed to overcome or block all material desires, which bring feelings of great bliss to the ascetic that is exaggeratedly described as a spiritual union with God.

If they needed a God and religion why not the ascending levels of material/supermaterial real Godhood reached through material, not spiritual evolution, by employing the Western evolutionary sciences, rather than hearkening back to asceticism, which seeks an inward god by way of blocking all material drives and desires to experience the bliss of "god" (satori, moksha, illumination, etc.), which is really a peak material experience brought on by blocking all material desires.

Edward Wilson's sociobiology makes it impossible for honest people to sidestep the biological origin of our social behavior---which includes religion and philosophy. These men of the West deeply respected the culture-creating West and the Western gene pool; they certainly inspired my work on theological materialism and ethnostatism.

Carlson is mistaken in defining identity politics

 It used to be that liberals fell all over themselves accusing conservatives of being racist. Now it is conservative's like Tucker Carlson denouncing liberals as being racist and even as eugenicists, because the CDC's Vaccine Advisory Committee approved recommendations from a doctor, Kathleen Dooling. who said that more lives would be saved if the elderly receive priority access to the vaccine, but that: "Racial and ethnic minority groups [are] under-represented among adults" age 65 and older. Therefore, the elderly should not be a top priority, race should be. Harald Schmidt advised the CDC: "Older populations are whiter. Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already have more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit."

Carlson is also upset by the Black Lives Matter movement which is really a black racist moment supported by clueless white liberals. Carlson passionately insists that race has nothing to do with defining the nation. Carlson is mistaken in defining identity politics. The neo-Darwinist science of sociobiology has courageously defined the biological origin of social behavior which has been ignored by both modern liberals and conservatives in defining nations.  

According to various dictionaries "nation" is nacion (old French) birth, descendants, relatives, from Latin nationem, natio, breed, stock, race of people, tribe, from PIE root *gene, referring to procreation, familial and tribal groups. Ethnic groups of hereditary altruists formed ethnic groups so cooperative and well-organized as to out-compete non-altruist groups. Ethnocentric groups are more likely to win the battle of group selection. Real human nature is ethnocentric, not with one group overall superior or inferior but with different talents, never equal, because for many thousands of years right up to our present time group selection, or ethnic altruism, was the best way to be successful in survival and reproduction.

Defining cultures by creed or ideas alone with such unreal ideas as egalitarianism is not enough to offset the reality that multicultural multi-ethnic societies are a zero sum game where the gain of one ethnic group is offset by the loss of another ethnic group, with much cruel social discord in the process.

Although now just rising again, identity politics will continue to ascend, identifying with ethnicity, nationality, race, culture and faith is the world's future. People will see that diversity within the same state is not our greatest strength but is our weakness. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., with a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

The “innovation” in metaphysics comes from the Evolutionary Outward Path

Spirit” IS matter, but the highest epiphenomenal matter, it “dominates” matter in that it can also be defined as the Will To Godhood, or Tirips, activating within life---so there is no need for a duality here. And, again, evolution is not “blind and pointless.” The lesser CAN evolve into the higher, just as the child grows to be a man. The Logos is definition or principle only, which is less than the Object God which the Logos defines. It is time to affirm the real thing, not merely the definition of the real thing. Matter CAN create the Spirit and Soul and Godhood out of itself.

Who says “there is no innovation in metaphysics?” Perhaps not in the religions that stem from the Perennial Tradition, but they are all of the non-material spiritual Involutionary Inward Path. The “innovation” in metaphysics come from the Evolutionary Outward Path, which is really a recognition of the sacred direction of material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

The problem is in how the beast is civilized (from the archive)

Nietzsche didn't want to “tame” man with morality, but rejecting morality is a form of taming man, and this is Nietzsche's form of “improvement” which he otherwise condemns in priests. Nietzsche's preferred “immorality” mostly applies to individuals, especial genius individuals, it overlooks natural group selection, which is the prime unit of selection, and group selection requires group morality and the natural “taming” of man.

The problem is in how the beast is civilized. Rousseau and Thomas Paine saw primitive and natural man as a wild, free, and innocent, individual, as if group morality were not just as primitive and naturally evolved over the tens of thousands of years when man became man. Edmund Burke had a better grasp of the naturalness of group behavior (before sociobiology) and the civilization that naturally grows up around it.

Our instincts, passions and reason can be enlisted in service to our higher evolution, and higher evolution does not merely “tame” us, it makes us healthier as we move toward the zenith of truth, goodness and beauty, or Godhood. As with artists, geniuses in various fields can be as free as they need to be during the creation of their work, (they probably actually need to be free during the creation process), but then it is most natural for their work to be judged by the cultural needs of the group or by group morality, which is more impotant than individual morality.

 
What happened when the Nietzschean geniuses of modern art (or philosophy for that matter) had no group or social concerns? By any sane standards we received mostly garbage. For example, with psychometrics today we can almost easily distinguish the social geniuses from the anti-social criminal geniuses, and our grants and work awards to individuals would follow after this lead---but always leaving room for those few who fall between the psychometric cracks.

Evolutionary conservatism

In trying to define conservatism George Will said we should ask the question: what do you seek to conserve? He says that the proper answer is: “We seek to conserve the American founding.”

And there we have the big problem with the typical conservative philosophy. The real and true answer to the question: what do you seek to conserve is? We seek to conserve ethnic and racial groups and the individuals citizens of the groups, who then create the culture of the groups. The biological origin of social behavior make this true and real.

Sociobiology brings forward what I call “evolutionary conservatism,” after the understanding of our biological human nature was drummed out of the conservative movement by William Buckley and others. That left the conservative movement handicapped and missing the deepest view of natural rights and the richest design of nature.

It turns out that conservatism as defined by sociobiology can be perhaps the best way to survive and reproduce successfully over the long term, but conservative's have a big problem with the materialist foundation of science, so few conservatives seriously apply sociobiology in defense of conservative principles.

Evolutionary conservatism can add to and deepen basic paleoconservatism. To put it in modern terms, biology is the hardware and culture is the software. Human nature is biologically kin-centered and ethnic-centered, even xenophobic, as well as being genetically gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, and religious-making, with group-selection and ethnic selection as the primary unit of successful selection followed by individual selection. Alas, like the liberals and neoconservatives the paleoconservative's tend to block or conceal the ethnic-centered and xenophobic parts of human nature due it seems to universalist religious edicts.

Evolutionary conservatism believes that if real kin and ethnic-centered human nature was allowed to be what it is, it would naturally lead to regionalism, localism, general conservative values, eventually ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., and defended by federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states... Then we can all get on with materially evolving toward supermaterial Godhood.

Answering Einstein and Kirk's spiritualism

“All forms of life are animated by a power which does not originate within them,” wrote Russell Kirk (Chapter IV of The Conservative Mind).

“A Purpose, a Will, emanates from God; this Will has created our humanity and guides us now in ways beyond our understanding, toward ends which even our reason cannot make out clearly. Providence acts through the instincts and intuitions of our feeble flesh. This being so, the man who takes the materialist, the mechanist, and the Utilitarian for his preceptors in the ends of life is a forlorn fool” – who facilitates rule by demagogues, I would ad”

“My religion,”Albert Einstein said, “consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.”

Tirip's answer to spiritualism

Simply put Tirips or the Will, which is material-supermaterial, is reborn in the body in procreation and reproduction, with its primary quality of activating the body to evolve to Godhood while being shaped outwardly by natural selection and evolutionary mutations. Then Tirips is born in new bodies, and so on. This has happened since the beginning of the unending cosmos, leading ultimately to the evolution of life to ascending levels of Godhood, which is the sacred goal of all life. A civilizational and cultural totality issues from this religious worldview of aiding the evolution of life to ascending levels of Godhood which brings religion and science together. Then, given human nature with its group selection, the biological origin of social behavior suggests that ethnostatism with an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the most humane, rational, and instinctive way for us to live and evolve.

Is/was Trump the best we can do for a right wing movement in the U.S.​?

Trump's populist nationalism was on the right track but we need a right wing that will oppose the moral, political, and demographic crisis we are in, a right wing that will stop the massive flow of cheap labor across our borders, reject the free-market globalist corporations, go against neoliberalism, openly oppose the ideological demands of LGBTQ and feminist activists, and perhaps most importantly honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality, and advocating the creation an of ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real ethnocentric and xenophobic human nature, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosen, Marxists, etc., and defended by federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states. And the right wing movement that will have to do this in the face of being called fascist, homophobe, anti-Semite, etc. etc. Is that asking too much? Nothing less will truly save us.

The simple art values of future evolution (from the archive)

High intelligence can better deal with the world and its possibilities and give us better ways of responding to life and evolution. But high intelligence needs good character as well, we need to have that intersection between the emotional parts of the brain and the abstract parts, non-feeling geniuses are not what we need. Courage is also needed so that intelligence can venture out toward new solutions, in new or old territories. And good health helps define beauty, which completes the combo. We should not be seduced into putting all our evolutionary hopes into intelligent machines (singularity) which can be a sly way of avoiding human evolution and its problems.

And we can't forget the importance of artists who can be geniuses at working with emotional responses to life in their art. But antisocial art needs to be distinguished from socially redeeming art, as Cattell pointed out, which seems like common sense but is not much considered in the suicidal modern art world. I'm not talking about a Platonic total control of art, socially redeeming art need not stunt creativity, on the contrary, it provides order to the total freedom of art creation.  For example, emotions connected to art can underline and interpret the emotions implicit in our evolution toward Godhood.

The arguments against choosing these evolutionary values seem increasingly selfish and short-sighted. These are simple conservative values---although perhaps not so simply attained---within an Ordered Evolution toward the zenith of intelligence, noble character, courage, and beauty, which helps define ascending levels of real Godhood.

The answers to the real origin of morality move from philosophy to sociobiology

"The genes hold culture on a leash. The leash is very long, but inevitably values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool. The brain is a product of evolution. Human behavior . .is the circuitous technique by which human genetic material has been and will be kept intact. Morality has no other demonstrable ultimate function." Edward O. Wilson

“Hereditary altruists form groups so cooperative and well-organized as to out-compete non-altruists groups.” (E.O. Wilson “The Social Conquest of the Earth.”)

The answers to the real origin of morality move from philosophy to sociobiology. The genealogy of morals follows from the biological origin of social behavior. We have been programmed by nature. Biology and the genes are the hardware and culture is the software: true religion and politics simply follow the program occasionally improvising and adapting the program. 

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.

Although now just rising again, identity politics will continue to ascend, identifying with ethnicity, nationality, race, culture and faith is the world's future. Multiculturalism would have worked if the various cultures had linked their ethnic group and race to their own territory or ethnostate.

People will see that diversity within the same state is not our greatest strength but is our weakness. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., with a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

The solution to the material-spiritual dilemma is to realize that we can attain Godhood directly within nature and material evolution

“From an Augustinian perspective, the kingdom of God is not “of this world” but exists in the hearts and minds of believers while gaining coherence in a transcendent, mystical body—the church. Conversely, the political realm is merely a means for achieving a measure of order and peace in a world dominated by sin...The difference between the church and the state lowers hopes for enacting justice in this world and raises them for the world to come, the eschaton. But evangelicals typically immanentize the eschaton. That is, they try to realize the ideals of the world to come in the here-and-now. Politics becomes a means for doing so ” (D. G. Hart, Moden Age Winter 2020)

The solution to the material-spiritual dilemma is to realize that we can attain Godhood directly within nature and material evolution when we affirm that material evolution moves inevitably in a pattern, even though it has its random elements, and the pattern has a discernible direction, in spite of instances of stagnation and retreat, toward higher and higher more effective living forms, all the way toward ascending levels of Godhood---religion and science can help it along the way. But this means cutting the Gordian Knot of Augustinian (and Buddhist, Hindu etc.) insistence that there is non-material spiritual world.

There is only the material world evolving toward the supermaterial world and toward ascending levels of Godhood with starts and stops along the way. In theological materialism religion and science can legitimately unite with evolutionary politics, such as forming an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, as often affirmed in this blog. We can indeed immanentize the eschaton.

Is there one real and true single narrative of history and morality?

 Is there one real and true single narrative of history and morality? The postmodernist's find none. Nietzsche found two languages of morality running through varied narratives of history, the aristocratic morality of good and bad and the slavish morality of good and evil. Other thinkers thought that what is older is closer to the primordial truth. Others thought classes and nations which have reached their highest development are classical in their culture, still striving cultures are romantic, and fallen cultures show art forms of decay and a relativity of values. Some thought that cultures were highest when they were most religious, others thought cultures were best when they were racially homogeneous and fell apart when they were not. There is some truth in all of these narratives.

I believe a true single narrative of history and morality is mapped out in the following quote from the great sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson: "The genes hold culture on a leash. The leash is very long, but inevitably values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool. The brain is a product of evolution. Human behavior . .is the circuitous technique by which human genetic material has been and will be kept intact. Morality has no other demonstrable ultimate function."

Applying the biological origin of social behavior in defining real human nature we find that human nature is genetically ethnocentric, racial, and even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, followed by individual selection.

That human nature suggests that although now just rising again, identity politics will continue to ascend, identifying. with ethnicity, nationality, race, culture and faith is the world's future. People may see that diversity within the same state is not our greatest strength but is a weakness. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., with a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

Then when we can get people to take a serious look at activating purpose in evolution, along with random selection, toward higher and higher consciousness and intelligence, and toward ascending levels of Godhood, the duality between religion and science can be made whole. Then one real and true single narrative of history and morality may come into view.

The abstract universal lie of equality has been the biggest cause of modern political problems

The impossible mission of attaining equality has led to totalitarian governments and endless ideological crusades.

M. E. Bradford said (Chronicles, Feb 2020) that it was “sophistry” to distinguish between equality of condition and equality of rights and opportunities, “as the first is as impossible of attainment as the latter in this world, and there is also no way of stopping short between them. Those who demand equality of rights would eventually demand equality of condition.”

Aristotle said all when he said it was unjust to treat unequal things as if they were equal. Real human nature is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. Defining cultures with such unreal ideas as egalitarianism is not enough to offset the reality that multicultural multi-ethnic societies are a zero sum game where the gain of one ethnic group is offset by the loss of another ethnic group, with much cruel social discord in the process.

A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., with a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.