Unless a miracle occurs comparable to Trump's 2016 election China may rule the future

Srdjaja Trifkovic in Chronicles (aug 2021) wrote this of the Chinese: “Unlike the Western tradition, China does not treat the individual endowed by natural rights, as the key building block of good harmonious polity. It gives absolute primacy to the family, the community, the Han ethnicity, and the State. It does not see diversity as strength but as a self evident weakness to be exploited. Accordingly, China does not accept immigrants and asylum seekers...It shares an essentially conservative consensus on gender roles, marriage, family, local community, and the nation. It continues to uphold the hierarchical order in a competitive, merit-based society: good grades, loyalty to the state, and hard work will be rewarded...”

Unless a miracle occurs comparable to Trump's 2016 election China may rule the future.

How conservatives can be worthy of their name

Why aren't all conservatives also racial conservatives, if you don't conserve the races who created the cultures, you don't conserve the cultures for long, so it is not enough to be only a cultural conservative.

This tragic political mistake seems to stem from conservatives not knowing or not affirming the biological origin of social behavior, and from the blocking of the subject and making it taboo by those who benefit from integrating the world, which includes the worlds religions as well as global business people.

Conservatives need to admit our behavior, intelligence, and personalities are to a large extent heritable. Both liberals and paleoconservative's block or conceal the ethnic-centered and xenophobic parts of human nature.

If real kin and ethnic-centered human nature was allowed to be what it is, it would naturally lead to ethnostates, and finally to 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. Then conservatives would be worthy of their name.

In establishing ethnostates, reform should repair, not tear down

When I think about establishing ethnostates my first thought is the conservative principle that reform should repair, not tear down. And so I don't think of anti-federalist secessions, ethnostates will eventually need at least a light federalism for protection from big marauding imperial-projecting countries like Russia and China.

My conservative instincts see a constitutionally sanctioned independence and separation for the states. A federalism of the American variety with strong states rights can work for future ethnostates. The Constitution certainly gives the states independence and freedom, especially with the Tenth Amendment, which means that radical solutions such as revolution or secession are not necessary.

First of all it's the people that need conserving, the biological origin of social behavior tells us that the culture and the laws are basically there to aid in the successful survival and reproduction of the people living under the culture and the laws.

The biological origin of social behavior and real human nature, which is genetically kin and ethnic centered, leads naturally to regionalism, localism, and eventually an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all ethnic groups or races, black, brown, red, white, or yellow.

DC Comics usher in a gay white superman

 “Superman Comes Out," read the headline, and it was not a joke. I'll bet if superman was black this would not have happened. This is a “woke” attack on a hero of the white man. There seems to be no limit on how much humiliation white men will take from these minority-driven cultural and racial attacks. Today white men have no real defense against their growing dispossession.

Conservatism was the movement to sustain the community in all ways and to ensure the community’s long-term survival, but conservatism virtually left out conserving the biology of the community, the genes, the genetic pool, the ethnic group that defines the community. Conservatism defended religion and high culture against the materialist doctrine of progress but---inspired by its universalist religion---conservatism forgot about conserving the materialism that makes up the genes, the genetic pool, and the ethnic group of the community. The Black Lives Matter movement and its white-woke-cuckold followers doesn't have that problem.

Real leadership is moral leadership: Political morality in harmony with real human nature and human nature in harmony with political morality

I think it was a Marine Corps defense leader who said that morality is the main source of real leadership decisions. Real leadership is moral leadership. "Style" comes in how you present your moral decisions. That applies to the leader of a Marine Corps platoon all the way to the president. Maybe its inherent, or best instilled early in life.

Traditionally, religion, culture, and education helped develop the morality with which leaders would later make decisions. But we have been dominated by postmodernism in our cultural institutions which teach a relativity of all values. Demagogues tend to be all show seeking selfish power by simulating morality.

We now have libertarian capitalists and non-judgmental progressive liberals as leaders, and both have no real morality other than believing in a relativity of values, therefore they offer no real moral leadership. The moral relativity of so-called high-culture elites is copied by the moral relativity of pop culture, and then promoted by a powerful and corrupt Media, which has its own selfish agenda.

Unlike many conservatives I don't see the individualism of libertarianism as the best way to counter the hedonism and the degeneracy of all standards in the West. Ethics and morals have always been created by the group ethics of mutual love and self-sacrifice, not by individualism. Human nature has been and remains 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, followed by individual-selection.

Decentralization is the best moral political solution I see, small separate states, or ethnostates, with their independence protected by a defensive federalism. Powerful men as well as the unpowerful need to see that it is in their own best interest to support and protect a decentralized world where hedonism and the degeneracy of all standards can be better prevented.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established in America largely within the traditional American cultural framework of our separation of powers and states. We need to honor the biological origin of social behavior and advocate the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red. That is political morality in harmony with real human nature and human nature in harmony with political morality.

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.

Toward noble art and popular art in theological materialism

The Traditionalist School doesn't like Renaissance art, or the ancient Greeks because they think art shifted from the inner presence to the outer presence (see Ananda Coomaraswamy), or from the future to the present, from spiritual to material, from Godly man to animal man.

Russell Kirk said that “decadence” can be defined as the loss of an end goal. Noble Art is basically art concerned with the goal itself, the ethical perception of Godhood, iconography, sacred objects. Noble and Popular Art are concerned with progress toward the goal, variability, evolution, common but religious objects.

Both Noble and Popular Art need to be concerned with theology because both are “heavenward leaning,” which is the old inward term for our outward material evolution toward real Godhood. The distinction is between theological and non-theological, not between cultured or primitive art. There may only be a difference in the degree of refinement.

As it turns out the so-called ignorant masses may be the only ones to preserve traditions, sometimes without even understanding them, as the decadent higher social levels have now all but broken the links.

Falling away from the good as defined by St. Thomas and by sociobiology

St. Thomas said: “The good for everything is what is fitting to it according to its form; evil is what does not correspond to the order of its form,” and “sin is nothing other than falling away from the good which is fitting to ones nature,” and evil is “a privation of form or order.” (The Breviary of St. Thomas, Peiper)  

My comment: while the traditionally religious view of human nature is remarkably like the sociobiological view of human nature, eg. human nature is universally and genetically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, etc., the evolutionary sciences have also found that human nature is ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, because all of these traits, which are still with us, were the most successful in the survival and reproduction of our genes and cultures over time.  

St. Thomas also believed that human nature is spiritual, but if we wanted to use the St. Thomas specifications of “evil” and “sin” in terms of falling away from human nature as defined by the evolutionary sciences, that would mean that the liberal-left which opposes both the traditionally religious view of human nature and the the sociobiological view of human nature is sinful and evil.

Thoughts on war and the need for a deeper realism

Raymond Cattell's best argument against war was that when regarding evolutionary ends it is the quality rather than the size of the group that should be the basis for natural selection.

This for me underlines the realist position on war (see Barry Posen) regarding the strategic position of the U.S. The U.S. is enormously powerful, geography favors the the U.S. due to ocean barriers and relativity weak neighbors, and we will best procure our security with a transition back to realism, and away from both the liberal and neoconservative idea of hegemony in the world, which tries to maintain a unipolar world dominance that does not seriously take into account ethnic/racial, national, religious, and identity politics, which are the most powerfully human instincts against a unipolar world.

The neoconservatives and liberals (and even some religious  conservatives ) have taken the Hellenized position of a universal elite who think ideas can transcend tribes, cultures and epics, but this never works well. Like Rome, America is, or used to be, too pragmatic for the idealism of Greek philosophy, we wanted to build roads more than philosophy. People create ideas, ideas then reflect the biological traits and needs of the people.

We need to build more than roads, philosophy needs to get back to philosophical naturalism. I believe traditional religion also needs to affirm theological materialism. We are realistically evolving to Godhood in the material and supermaterial world and we need long term realistic strategies to do so. Wars of hegemony in the world are to be avoided. We need to take into account ethnic, national, religious, and identity politics, which are the most powerfully instincts against a unipolar world. Ethnic or racial imperialism needs to eventually give way to ethnopluralism, with regions and states set aside for ethnic/racial cultures, protected from marauding imperialists, supremacists, and global money grubbers, by a light federalism.  This could legally be accomplished by adapting the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Conservatively overcoming the Great Spiritual Blockade with the Twofold Path

St Thomas and other sages of the “revealed religions” said that evil springs from human nature, based on the idea that “being” or God is non-material and spiritual, and that is the root of the problem I have with their interpretation of human nature and God.

How many traits in the following sociobiological definition of real human nature and the biological origin of social behavior does religion find evil?: Human nature remains genetically and 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. Political orientation, race, gender, religion, and sexual orientation tend to eventually conform to the human nature reflected in this genetic, biological, and sociobiological definition of real human nature.

If we check the first idea, that evil springs from human nature, with the sociobiological definition of real human nature, we see a similarity of conservative values, perhaps with the religious exception to human nature being ethnocentric and xenophobic. Then if we add the definition and interpretation of Godhood from theological materialism, that ascending levels of Godhood are evolved to in the material and supermaterial world, we can not only heal the rift between religion and science, we can stop the Great Spiritual Blockade that the revealed religions have put up against evolving to real Godhood.

The grip of the Great Spiritual Blockade remains, although the religions and philosophies of the great sages have been slowly fading in the West, replaced not with another religion or political philosophy but with the great license of libertarian individualism, or the nothingness of hedonistic nihilism, or in the middle-east with a fundamentalist Islam. Science has tried to remain materialistically neutral which has led to its general social impotence. Modern versions of evolutionary religion or spirituality are often updates of Buddhism dealing with or dismissing the material world using the old perspective of so-called non-material inward bliss and a non-material God, e.g. Ken Wilber.

Theological materialism and the projected Theoevolutionary Church conservatively overcomes the Great Spiritual Blockade with the Twofold Path, by including the great sages of the Blockade in the Involutionary Inward Path to the symbolic-experience of the Father Within, even as it is transformed in the Evolutionary Outward Path of material and supermaterial evolution to ascending levels of real Godhood. The old God or Father Within experienced as ascetic bliss is included but Godhood is seen as attained in reality through the Outward Path of material and supermaterial evolution. Science and religion can live in harmony with identity politics and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all as we unblock the Great Spiritual Blockade so that we may get on with evolving toward unending levels of Godhood in the cosmos.

A Godhood and religion of real material life

The great metaphysical error has been the concept of “transcending the world of things.” Why would we want to do that?! Yet that is the sacred goal of traditional religion and philosophy. The ascetic idea of this was to bring about the experience described as apprehending the God or Father within by way of overcoming or blocking all material desires. But it is really a peak material experience and not a spiritual experience that "transcends the world of things."

Nietzsche thought this spiritualism was the conscious will to power of the priests and royals to control warriors and farmers, but it is more deeply defined as a metaphysical error, a plain misunderstanding, and it belongs to the usually unconscious biological origin of social behavior.

As a consequence of his perspective Nietzsche radically threw out God and religion. But the conservative thing to do is to transform God and religion with knowledge coming in from the evolutionary sciences regarding the biological origin of social behavior, which includes religion as the bonding agent for morals and values, caring for others, etc., because that enhanced successful survival and reproduction. 

 

Are we not now mature enough to stop the obvious religious and political lies we use to disguise the biological origin of our social behavior? If real kin and ethnic-centered human nature is allowed to be what it is, it naturally leads to regionalism, localism, ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could be accomplished, not by way of radical revolution, but through adapting, not overturning, the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states, with the ethnostates protected from marauding imperialists, supremacists, and global money grubbers, by a light federalism.

We can have Godhood and religion as the bonding agent for morals and values, but it is a Godhood and religion of real material life, with the sacred goal of evolving in the material world to ascending levels of Godhood. In the Twofold Path we will need new liturgies and feast days conservatively transforming, and not rejecting, those first inward experiences of God.

What pisses me off me off about the little jackal Adam Schiff and his phony impeachment party

What pisses me off about the little jackal Adam Schiff and his phony impeachment party is when they purposely play to the feelings of suburban women and effete liberals by bringing ambassador Yovanovitch before their committee and feature her hurt feelings about being fired by President Trump. It is done so that even when their phony impeachment doesn't fly they can decrease the votes of suburban women for Trump which could bring Trump down.

Did Schiff and his nasty democratic friends learn pubic relations techniques from Joseph Goebbels who said, “It is not the task of propaganda to discover intellectual truths,” or did they learn PR from the Frankfort School who developed the cultural Marxism which many suburban women and effete liberals already absorbed in our corrupted colleges?

I suppose I don't have faith that suburban women, who are otherwise solid citizens, will vote for Trump while saying they dislike his personalty, which, given our choices, is the way mature women, and men, will vote who haven't been brainwashed by the little jackal Adam Schiff and the culturally Marxist democratic party...Trump's economic nationalism is saving America from utter decline.

Cultural nationalism, ethnic nationalism, and civic nationalism have been falsely divided

In a praiseworthy article for The Burkean, Maolsheachlann Ó Ceallaigh's thesis is that "there are three basic varieties of nationalism, cultural nationalism, ethnic nationalism, and civic nationalism,” and he argues that “cultural nationalism is by far the most important of the three, but that the other two cannot be disregarded.” He concludes his essay with a suggestion of how the “three nationalisms” might be blended: “cultural nationalism above all...and an “acceptance of the importance of blood ties, even if they are not paramount; and a place (but very much the third place) for civic nationalism, so that those left out of the first two categories are not entirely excluded.”

The problem with that thesis is that cultural nationalism, ethnic nationalism, and civic nationalism have been falsely divided in the modern world by politically correct cultural Marxism when in reality they are not divided and were not divided through human history.

There is a co-evolution between culture and biology. The great sociobiologist E.O. Wilson has also found that there is a co-evolution between group-selection and individual-selection with group-selection paramount in successful human survival and reproduction. Group-selection created altruism which favored genetically related groups over more distantly related groups. There is a natural continuum of altruism where concern for the world comes after concern for ones own land and people. Ethnocentrism and racialism are part of real human nature and were genetically selected because they were the most  successful in survival and reproduction.  Ed Dutton concluded that universalist humanitarianism is ultimately a losing strategy because it is “unable to sustain high levels of in-group cooperation.” Humanitarian groups invariably “waste their precious reproductive potential helping out free riders who give them nothing in return...”

But the biggest damaging error that has been foisted on us has been equating or confounding racism and ethnocentrism with supremacism, which has been the constant propaganda of the Media, who portray marauding barbarianism any time race or ethnicity is mentioned---especially white racism. They have managed to make even the discussion of this subject illegal in some countries.

The Ethnopluralism Hypothesis has tried to counter this propaganda. Real human nature remains 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 selection, followed by individual selection, and this leads naturally to the cultural expression of regionalism, localism, ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Given who we are this appears to be the best way, the most humane way, for all distinct groups to thrive and develop, with the ethnostates protected from marauding imperialists, supremacists, and global money grubbers, by a light federalism.

What defines the evolutionary conservatism that could save America and the West?

I believe the conservatives are right in affirming the traditional old ways, the natural customs, habits and ceremonies of the people, but there are flaws in conservatism that arise from ignoring or blocking the biological origin of social behavior and thereby misreading human nature and misreading the causes of the universe.

But changing traditional misreadings is not as easy as affirming them. Change doesn't usually happen until the flaws are seriously bringing the traditional system down. But the changes are often too radical and short term, which is why conservatives are usually right in affirming the traditional old ways. Changing a traditional system can also take time, often too much time in the face of decline and degeneration.

But then, we see how short a time it took Cultural Marxism to take over the culture of the United States and the West. It goes back only to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, although it had ties to older classical Marxism.

Libertarianism among many businessmen shares much of the blame for the decline of America. Concentrating almost exclusively on making a god of individualism and exploiting the freedom to make money came back to bite the libertarians when the Hollywood moguls and leftist publishers and producers of New York, as well as the academic world, exploited the lavish American freedom and deformed a formerly conservative culture to fit their leftist cultural agendas. The Hollywood moguls and leftist publishers found that they could make big money while also changing culture in a culturally Marxist direction. They marched right through the institutions and they won the cultural war. It was brilliant. And it didn't take very long.

The success was made easier by the flaws in American conservatism, such as valuing the individual or individual selection over the group or group selection, and more deeply, from the flaw in religion that sees everyone as the same under God, thereby opening the door to egalitarian evaluations in social policies akin to socialism/communism.

The big flaw in Cultural Marxism, aside from ignoring or blocking the biological origin of social behavior, is that in same way that Satanism depends upon deriving their values from going opposite religious values, Cultural Marxism does the same with conservatism, both are negative systems which depend for their values on turning the values of another system upside down.

Human nature as empirically explained by sociobiology remains basically 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. Even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, took hundreds of thousands of years---although genetic engineering may speed that up.

Even in advanced modern societies where survival is easier, the dangers of Marxism (demanding biologically unnatural equality for the unequal), radical feminism (demanding biologically unnatural roles for women), homosexuality (demanding biologically unnatural sexual life styles) and postmodern relativism (demanding a biologically unnatural relativity of values) will eventually lead to biologically and culturally diseased societies.

I see sacredness and deep religion coming from seeking to understand how life can become best synchronized with the process of evolution, and help it along. Those who believe in the complete randomness of evolution, the majority of scientists, often make dismissive comments regarding any kind of direction to evolution, usually in footnotes to show its unimportance to the text, but then the footnote’s are often emotional and long, protesting too much. I find the arguments that evolution is “non-purposive” and random as closed as the religious arguments denying evolution, information is lacking in both arguments.

I see evolution moving 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.” The goal of evolving to Godhood need not deprive us of either science or religion. The internal activation of life moves life toward evolving toward higher and higher forms and eventually to Godhood, shaped by outside natural selection and inside evolution. This may be a bit further than these men want to go, but we need to go there. I think such a drive and direction will one day be acknowledged by science and religion.

This all suggests that if real kin and ethnic-centered human nature is allowed to be what it is, it naturally leads to regionalism, localism, ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. For example, in the U. S. this could be accomplished not by way of radical revolution but through conservatively adapting---not overturning---the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states, with ethnostates protected from marauding imperialists, supremacists, and global money grubbers, by a light federalism.

Future evolution

Obviously the future evolution of life and specifically human life is a complicated synthesis of human nature, the environment, and the biological origin of social behavior, but first we have to survive, and surviving depends on correctly defining real human nature so we can know which social structures will work best with human nature, that is, which social structures will lead to survival and reproductive success for distinctly different ethnic groups and races now competing on earth.

Raymond Cattell remarked that we seem genetically unadapted to large altruistic societies, yet man has a natural tendency toward tenderness and protectiveness and altruism toward kith and kin. This is one of the biological pillars of the political argument for localism and small ethnostates over large multicultural states: localism and regionalism are the most natural way to hold civilization together with natural altruistic group behavior, and better keep us from the selfish anti-social behavior which happens in large groups.

The latest fashion of machine technology seems to proceed in direct proportion to the devaluation of human biological evolution. I am not against technology but the evolution of biological man needs to be valued higher than the evolution of machines. Technology is only an aid in the evolution of life, even if the restrictions of political correctness (cultural Marxism) make it difficult to say so. Life and evolution need defending. The Great Spiritual Blockade to real Godhood needs to be unblocked.

There is something fishy about “singularity” or machines evolving to be as intelligent as humans. It makes it look like humanity is too scared to advance intelligent humans and beyond, rather than (or as well as) advancing machines. It seems like a cunning bypass of the subject of future genetics because it is a politically incorrect subject and doesn't fit various agendas. We have to get over the abuse of genetics and eugenics of World War II, truly healthy people don't dwell on such negative things as a way of life.

We can use technology to help advance humans, but to become machines and possibly therefore lose future human evolution sounds a bit sick. We seem to be allowing deceitful nerds with media power to determine our future. Let's have a little courage and begin to at least talk about the great evolution of real life toward Godhood, only aided by intelligent machines. It's actually a religious mission.

The future superstructure of genetics and bio-engineering need to rest on the evolutionary base of biology, and not become a new artificial structure without a natural base, arrogantly overlooking the biological origin of social behavior. We can enhance our genetic and biological capabilities endlessly as we evolve toward Godhood, but if we upload ourselves into silicone chips we could end natural evolutionary life, which is a diabolical end.

There seems to be something almost paranoid about those who see racism behind any talk of the improvement of hereditary qualities, which is taken to the point of preferring artificial evolution to biological evolution. A very cynical reading could also see those who wish to stop the evolutionary biological improvement of hereditary qualities as an underhanded way to enhance their own genes, consciously or unconsciously, by stopping the advancement of others.

Ethics can be inferred from evolutionary history (what else?) otherwise we attempt to go beyond nature itself. As Cattell said, this does not mean we will not move beyond the human species---ethnocentrism, for example, is a conservative stopping off place to secure beneficial mutations before moving on to the next stage, the next pause, the next species.

Is there a direction to evolution? The evolutionary process has shown a direction toward higher, more complex, more intelligent, more conscious forms, in spite of occasional backward going and stagnation. Evolution gives us hints of direction so we may aid evolution in the direction it is going, applying the sciences of sociobiology and genetics.

Cattell's “Beyondism” seems to suggest that progress is blind, and he thought we can therefore only speak of “going beyond” what we are. I believe that life and evolution show a religious goal of attaining the supreme survival success of ascending levels of Godhood by way of evolving in the material and supermaterial world, activated from within, and shaped by by natural selection and evolution from without.

 

This means ascending levels of Godhood from man to superman to supermaterial Gods and not a transcendence from material life to non-material ''spiritual" life.

We can learn to prevent the decline and early death of a variety of people, ethnic groups, and societies by understanding the social and biological patterns that bring collapse, and by applying voluntary population control and genetics. We can help prevent negative ends, but we can also civilize the beast and seek positive ends, even as we recognize that competition, separation, and distinctiveness are a good thing on the evolutionary path to Godhood.

The biological origin of social behavior evolved a human nature that is very conservative

By affirming the deepest level of conservatism as the result of the biological origin of social behavior, we can affirm conservatism while rejecting the big government totalist state, and individualistic (hedomistic) libertarianism, but we can also affirm real conservatism while rejecting the spiritually defined transcendent moral order but retaining the religious moral order of theological materialism, which sees Godhood as attained by way of material evolution.

Bitter arguments over what is “conservative" and what is “ideology” usually have conservative's denying that conservatism is not founded on abstract ideas. But nothing is more abstract and ideological than the airy spiritualism which grounds conservatism.

The biological origin of social behavior evolved a human nature that is very conservative. Human nature is biologically and genetically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection or ethnic selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. What could be more conservative than that?

This strongly suggests that an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the best political configuration for humans beings to live within. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be conservatively established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected from marauding imperialists and supremacists by a light federalism.

Let's hope we can get on with it.

Bonding problems on the left and the right

1. We can't successfully bond one distinctive ethnic ethos and agenda to another distinctive ethnic group. 2. We can't successfully bond multi-ethnic or multicultural societies to one ethnic ethos and agenda. 3. The ethos and agenda of democracies breaks down due to demographic changes in voting ethnic groups, especially with open national borders. 4. We can't successfully block the biological origin of human nature (why would we want to?) which is genetically kin-centered, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection, among other conservative traits.

As the consequence of this reality in the U. S. the democratic left has become a party mainly for promoting minority ethnic groups and races, and the republican right mainly promotes whites, and the increasing clashes between them naturally makes social harmony un-bondable. This explains the origin of most of the problems in the West today.

Given human nature, if we want democracies (or any political system) to work as harmoniously as possible we need to develop ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected from marauding imperialists and supremacists by some form of federalism. This can be done in the U.S. by slightly adapting the constitutional separation of powers and states. But since the schools, the media, the political parties, the business world, and most of the people indoctrinated by the schools and the media now object to this solution, who can say when it will happen? Even so, I believe it will emerge.

The deep changes eventually needed on the right

History repeats itself because human nature and the natural world have remained basically the same since humans became humans, although history repeats itself not precisely but with variations.

The right (and of course the left) need to eventually understand that human nature remains basically the same for all groups, that is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Consequently I think American patriots will need to eventually adapt the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions, protected from marauding imperialists and supremacists by a light federalism.

Conservatives as well as the traditionalist school will need to stop rejecting the material world in favor of non-material spiritual cycles which always end up with non-material spiritual utopias that reject or demean the material world, and they will need to accept that the Godhood they speak so much of in reality is reached in the natural world through material and supermaterial evolution.

Aryan noble supremacists and Jewish chosen supremacists will need to reject supremacism and accept an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which is the civilized and realistic way to survive in the crowded world, and then not use their ethnostates as staging areas for meddling or marauding in other peoples territories.

Some of these changes on the right will likely have to wait for inflexible generations to pass, and I believe the changes need to be made conservatively and legally within the system and not by way of radical revolution.

The progress and change needed in conservatism

Contrary to many conservatives, progress and change does not have to wipe out the norms of order, justice, and freedom if these things are based in real human nature. Real human nature is conservative in 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 selection. You will notice that conservatism today misses affirming human nature as being ethnocentric, and even xenophobic, and ignores group-selection being the primary unit of selection.

The nineteenth century brought new ideologies which conservative's disproved of, due mainly to the growth of science, but the evolutionary sciences eventually affirmed the view of human nature listed above, which is very much in line with conservatism. But this sociobiological view affirms the biological origin of social behavior which conflicts with the conservative spiritual view of human nature, which is where conservatives need progress and change. But theological materialism says that we evolve in the material world to supermaterial Godhood, so conservatives don't lose religion, they just need progress and change in deepening religion.

The biological origin of our social behavior actually ends the intellectual defense of postmodern relativism and the cultural Marxist ideologues. But it also takes some of the virtue-signaling away from conservatives. For example, the biological origin of our social behavior shows us that, given real human nature, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the best political configuration for humans beings to live within.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be conservatively established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected from marauding imperialist and supremacists by federalism, which would be far preferable to radical Marxism or Fascism, or the political dissimulations based on present flawed definitions of human nature within unworkable multicultural (multi-ethnic) societies.

This progress and change conflicts not only with the spiritual view of human nature but conflicts with the ruling political correctness of cultural Marxism, so this progress and change will require some courage to materialize.

How suicidal whites have become

I am pro-American and anti-interventionist, I don’t think Americans should be involved in the internal affairs of other nations. I am not anti-black or anti-Semitic, I am pro-white. I am not anti-feminist or anti-gay but pro human nature, meaning in favor of the biological origin of human nature and social behavior, which finds radical feminism, homosexuality, anti-Americanism, and anti-white-whites to be a departure or aberration from what is normal or genetically inherent  in real human nature. 

Real human nature is kin and ethnic-centered, among other conservative traits, so I believe in supporting my own ethnic group and race. This certainly does not mean I am against other groups supporting their own race, ethnic group, and nation.

This naturally leads to affirming the American constitutional separation of powers and states, then that separation of powers and states leads instinctively and logically to legally affirming an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

  

For these beliefs, backed by science and common sense, I have occasionally been called a “racist” meaning an evil and vile thing by those who have been indoctrinated in our schools and in the Media to be anti-white, anti real human nature, and pro cultural Marxism.

  

It has become almost against the law to be pro-American or pro-white, that is, to be for the biological origin of human nature and social behavior, but it is okay and politically correct to show loud favor for any other race or ethnic group. 

How suicidal whites have become.