Saturday, January 15, 2022

The common good-group selection morality of the Founding Fathers connects with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature

"Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals." (David Sloan Wilson)

Charles Darwin himself argued for group selection. He postulated that moral men might not do any better than immoral men but that tribes of moral men would certainly “have an immense advantage” over fractious bands of pirates.” Steve Mirsky

"Individual versus group selection results in a mix of altruism and selfishness, of virtue and sin, among the members of a society." E.O Wilson

Uncourageous and dishonest scholars have interpreted the morality of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as mainly promoting equality, but the Founders understood that the main symbol of American life was the common good, individualism was not the main symbol. And the common good relates to group selection.

Historical life is biological life and biological life is the foundation of human nature, and human nature is 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.

Modern liberal and neoconservative intellectuals (and even many real conservatives) do not admit that human nature is at root biased toward kin and ethnic group (although some of them, like Leo Strauss promote their own group, however subtlety, over other groups) even while claiming to speak the “universal” truth in promoting an “American creed” or a “propositional nation” of universal "reason," which is in fact biased against the Germanic or Anglo-Saxon roots of the American order.

Did Strauss have a bias against traditional conservatism because he feared the rise of a future volkish German-type revolution and he therefore emphasized his propositional nation over (volkish) conservatism? If he did have such a bias it is a bias that a great philosopher should not have had. It is a bias that probably led to the marauding neoconservatives trampling over the traditions of other nations.

The common good-group selection morality of the Founding Fathers connects with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature. If 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 a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

No comments:

Post a Comment