Putin is an imperialist and supremacist not an ethnostatist

Putin and his intellectual Dugin should have celebrated the breakup of the Soviet Union into natural ethnostates. Putin is an imperialist and supremacist not an ethnostatist.

It is not necessary to hate other races to love your own; this has caused the most problems for the right---the hatred is gleefully exploited by the corrupt left. I never liked supremacism or imperialism on the right, it is antiquated human strategy to promote the supremacy or imperialism of one group against all others as exclusively superior, even if this sociobiological tactic enhanced survival in hunter-gatherer times, this behavior now only brings the overpopulated world together to destroy the supremacist imperialist group.

I wait for the day when forced imperialism, supremacism, and multiculturalism of the world will give way to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in line with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature. I think the real debate should be over how we can conservatively adapt the Constitutional separation of of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Cooperative competition between small ethnostates and regions, protected internally and externally from imperialism, supremacism, and multiculturalism by some sort of federalism, can bring the variety and creativity that evolution prefers, as we all materially evolve toward Godhood.

The former Eastern Bloc is winning the culture war

Ian Henderson points out in “How Communism Saved the Eastern Bloc from Cultural Marxism” (Chronicles March 2020) that although “Joseph Stalin was a mass murderer who ran a vast system of gulags...he promoted ethnic Russians throughout the Soviet hierarchy...made the Russian language compulsory in schools and offices... initiated socially conservative policies to enhance social discipline and increase the Russian population via the promotion of strong family units and motherhood...outlawed homosexuality, placed restrictions on abortion and divorce, and shut down the feminist agenda...In stark contrast, the free world, after about 20 years of strong cultural conservatism following the end of the Second World War declared Western civilization to be the problem and its dissolution the answer...Eastern Bloc nations, despite living under Communism, retained all the elements needed for a culture to prosper...With the exceptions of Estonia, Belarus, and the Czech Republic, all of the former Eastern Bloc nations are overwhelmingly religious and all, including the aforementioned three, are socially conservative.”

No wonder many in the Western Alt-right have embraced the Russian Aleksandr Dugin (who hates the West). Dugin sees the world dualistically with the West as the evil Antichrist and the Eurasia as the good “Angel of Arctogaia." Dugin and the Traditionalist School have virtually rejected all that is great in the West, science, technology, biological evolution, and perhaps most importunity the high genetic quality of the people of the West. Real patriotism in the West is lost in seeing the only the flaws of the West, which are redeemable. For example, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism.

Henderson concludes by saying, “...So-called conservatives in North American and Western European countries seem to cave to the demands of the cultural Marxist left that dominate the political narrative...As of this writing, the former Eastern Bloc is far better positioned to preserve their respective cultures than is the West. We may have won the Cold War, but it’s the East that’s winning the culture war.”

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.

Ethnostates and ethnopluralism, supremacism and imperialism

The supremacy or imperial dominance of one race over all others, whether noble, chosen or savage, it is a bad survival and reproductive strategy, especially in today's overcrowded world, the unincluded groups always gang up on and defeat the supremacy-claiming group, and on it goes.

In any case people don't bond with imperial empires, empires are too far removed from local people for natural altruism to work. But the exploiters and marauders of the earth prefer empires, which they selfishly dominate, and, irony of ironies, they often pursue for ethnocentric reasons. Empires always fall apart and reform into ethnostates, or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, as an honest reading of history shows us. But any ethnopluralism needs to be strongly protected and defended from marauding empires.

Racial supremacism was a big problem for the fascists, they couldn't find a way other than to apply racial supremacism to deal with ethnocentric human nature in a world of diverse races. Humans have been ethnocentric and racialist since humans became humans because in the old tribal days ethnic or group-selection was the best way for individuals to successfully survive, so altruism, or being for others, was naturally limited mainly to kin and ethnic group because they shared the same genes which strive for successful survival and reproduction. Those genes are still with us today.

We may gradually realize the reality that multicultural multi-ethnic societies just don't work. It would be better to talk of un-assimilating differences rather than about superiority/inferiority, and it would be better long-term strategy to promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc.

Our upward evolution probably works better with a variety of ethnostates anyway, and they certainly fit well with real human nature.

The Old Right is not enough

In an essay back in September 2019 about “Resurrecting the Old Right” Paul Gottfried said white nationalism and the Alt-Right “represent a moribund ideology that offers an imaginary antidote to a misdiagnosed pathology.” But that is preciously what the Old Right represents.

I generally support the Old Right and courageous paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan, but they won't rationally, instinctively, or openly affirm the biological origin of social behavior, and that makes all the difference in the world. Until that sociobiological reality is front and center culturally and politically the Old Right must be considered a partly moribund ideology (yes ideology) that offers mainly a traditional religious antidote to a misdiagnosed pathology. Conservatism fits together into a system, a magisterium, which includes as much “social-justice engineering” as any ideology. Russell Kirk is one of my favorite thinkers but his anti-ideology is also an ideology.

Politics is both the art of the possible and the ideal, but the Old Right wants to affirm only what it deems as the possible, which does not include the future biological evolution of man. The biological origin of our social behavior, which includes religion, 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.

In America conservatives have the political tool of the constitutional separation of powers and states, which has been increasingly losing to the growth of Big Government and globalist control. The constitutional separation of powers and states needs not only to be fought for but legally expanded toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates within the regions and states of America, balanced and defended by federalism. That would be in true harmony with real kin and ethnic centered human nature as accurately and courageously defined by sociobiology. That is the way to actually conserve people and therefore conserve the ethnic cultures people create.

The “idyllic imagination” which Russell Kirk is so skeptical of can project the evolution of material life all the way to supermaterial Godhood, which is best done by preserving the best of the past, and by conserving variety, as we evolve toward higher forms of the good, the true, and the beautiful. That is the change coming of "evolutionary conservatism," which is really more prudent than reckless.

The goal of materially evolving to Godhood need not deprive us of either science or religion. Defining the internal material force of life which activates life toward evolving toward higher and higher forms, and eventually to Godhood, while being shaped by natural outside evolution, may be a bit further than religion and science want to go now, but we need to go there.

Will the Old Right affirm evolutionary conservatism? Will the Left? In any case I believe that the biological origin of our social behavior will be affirmed, not today, not tomorrow, but perhaps the day after tomorrow.

Why I don't have much time for Dugin

“Is Dugin a Traditionalist?” Andreas Umland and Anton Shekhovtsov asked in their review of Neo-Eurasianism and Perennial Philosophy (The Russian Review, 2009). They decided that Aleksandr Dugin was only using traditionalism or giving his own interpretation to the authentic traditionalist school of Rene Guenon. Even though I don't approve of the imperialistic West-hating Neo-Eurasianism of Dugin, I say, it is well that Dugin try to breathe some life into the anti-life school of Guenon.

As Umland and Shekhovtsov said the traditionalist school repudiates all achievements of modernity. Traditionalist's believe that a “perennial wisdom” or “primordial Tradition” was revealed to humanity during a “Golden Age” (the Hindu Satya Yuga). As ages (Yugas) superseded each other, the world slid into decadence, and “perennial wisdom,” as a single “spiritual language,” gradually disappeared from people’s life. In our current age—the Era of Vice (Kali Yuga)—the ancient cultural foundations of human existence have degenerated completely: only traces of the “primordial Tradition” remain, and they survive only in certain world religions that traditionalists understood to be dialects of the lost single “spiritual language.”

The big problem with that worldview is that there is no non-material spiritual world, there is only ascetic interpretations derived from spiritual language and strict ascetic disciplines that 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. The inward God of the beatific vision of Christianity, or the Samadhi in Hinduism, was/is an ascetic peak material experience and not a spiritual union with God.

If we take the word “metastasis,” the spread of something, like a disease, from an initial site to a different or secondary site, and apply it to the split between the material and the spiritual, we can see the numerous problems this led to, not the least of which was, ironically and tragically, the decline of religion.

The liberals and progressives more or less rejected religion mainly because Western science could find no trace of the spiritual or a spiritual God. And they were right. But they were wrong to reject religion and Godhood. 

Rather than killing religion and God or going backward to a traditionalist school which repudiates all the great Western achievements of modernity, we might have gone back to the point of the metastasis and rejected the 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. As seen in the philosophy of theological materialism, real Godhood is reached by material evolution and not by the symbolic experience of bliss reached in ascetic practices.

So given Dugin's combined imperialistic West-hating Neo-Eurasianism and his version of the anti-life Traditionalist School, I don't have much time for Dugin.

A few thoughts on the European New Right

If the European New Right really wants to replace biological racism with cultural racism when we know that they both work together in a co-evolution, as explained by sociobiologist E. O. Wilson, then they are mistaken. I'm not convinced the New Right does that. I think Alain de Benoist knows well the biological origin of social behavior.

I think of the New Right chiefly as correctly rejecting supremacism and affirming instead an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Given the real biological origin of social behavior you can't tout culture without biology since they work together in a co-evolution. Ethnostates have to be grounded in genetic similarity as well as the culture of their populations otherwise you have civil strife.

Then too I hope the New Right is conservative in believing in adapting new changes to what exists, rather than radical revolution. I see they have flirted with the Traditionalist School which gives little attention to the new or to evolution and seems to reject the biological origin of social behavior---which ironically happens to include traditional religion.

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 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.

What's missing in conservatism and needs to be included

Conservatism rightly speaks of human scale culture, nurturing roots, centering on the common good more than commercial gain, and maintaining long established customs and habits, that is, not globalism, or universal cultural formats (see Russell Kirk). But conservative's rarely mention nurturing the roots of ethnic groups at the foundation of culture. Why not?

I think in our time it is lack of courage from fear of being called a “racist” for affirming ethnicity and all the social problems that can come from confronting the prevailing politically correctness of cultural Marxism.

Conservative's affirm natural law and human nature but overlook or downplay the basic parts of human nature that conflict with the politically correctness of cultural Marxism, such as, human nature being ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection---which usually means ethnic selection---as the primary unit of successful selection---although conservative's readily include human nature as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making and religious-making.

Since group-selection---which usually means ethnic selection---is the primary unit of successful selection, that is a serious omission within conservatism which has driven too many energetic natural conservatives away from conservatism and down radical paths that feature ethnicity and race but overlook or downplay other basic parts of conservative human nature, like maintaining long established customs and habits, and not radical formats.

My kind of conservatism sees that an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the best political configuration for ethnic groups to live within, and needs to be included in conservatism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected from marauding imperialists and supremacists by federalism.

It may require a few constitutional amendments to give more power to states and regions to move toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and it will not be easy at all, but it is far preferable to radical Marxism or Fascism, or the political dissimulations we now have based on flawed definitions of human nature, which have brought us radically destructive civil disruptions, or even civil war, and which are now increasing across the world within unworkable multicultural (multi-ethnic) societies demanding that we all get along...We will all live more naturally, homogeneously, and as harmoniously as is possible in our own ethnostates.

Why doesn't the Alt-right feature more Western geniuses?

Why doesn't the Alt-right feature more Western geniuses, men like the brilliant British/American psychologist Raymond Cattell, or the courageous historian Wilmot Robertson, or the great Neo-Darwinist field of sociobiology, rather than converting to the West-disparaging Russian imperialist Aleksandr Dugin and his Traditionalist School teachers, Guénon and Evola, who did not find science (a jewel of the West) nearly as important as Eastern spiritualism (a jewel of the East). Patriotism is unfairly lost in seeing the flaws of the West, which are redeemable. For example, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism.

If they needed a God and religion (civilizations rise with religions) why not the 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. We can retain the traditional Inward Path to bliss but transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to real Godhood.

Ethnostates were examined courageously in clear prose by Robertson back in 1993 without veering into Heideggerian metaphysics. A humane religion from science was valiantly mapped out by Cattell. And Edward Wilson's sociobiology makes it impossible for honest people to sidestep the biological origin of social behavior---which includes religion. These men deeply respected the culture-creating West and the Western gene pool; they certainly  inspired my work on theological materialism and ethnostatism.

Connecting and not connecting with the political right

I think it was the clear strong paleoconservative writings of Russell Kirk and Pat Buchanan, which was an American version of the older classical conservatism of family, race, rank, aristocracy, and continuity, that caused me to include conservatism in my philosophy. I had to accept the practical side of paleoconservative continuity, bringing the new into the old, the way the evolution of the human brain retained the old reptilian and mammalian brain as it evolved the cerebral cortex on top of them all. We need to work within the system to transform it, as evolution does. But the paleos do not like me using evolution as a comparison because they are skeptical of evolution mainly due to their religious perspective---astoundingly Buchanan seems be unsure that evolution is even real. Which is why I couldn't connect with the paleoconservatives.

My view of the absolute importance of human evolution kept me away from the brilliant seduction of the traditionalist school too, which is where the Alt-right turned from their old racial nationalism. Many on the far right have now gone over to the traditionalist school of Guenon, Evola, and the Russian Dugin, and embraced a non-populist, old spiritual religious, imperialist, hierarchy of rule, and have downplayed or even rejected the idea of evolutionary progress. So I couldn't connect with the traditionalist school.

I drove myself further away from those on the right (and the left) who do affirm evolution as I gradually developed the religious philosophy of theological materialism, which sees a selector in natural selection, a direction, a driving intention in evolution, with evolution moving inevitably in a pattern, even though it has its random elements, toward ever-ascending levels of Godhood, in spite of instances of stagnation and retreat. This has been a bit further than the conventionally science-minded want to go. And the fact that I conservatively insist on the inclusion of the old inward spiritual religion transformed in the outward evolutionary path of theological materialism does not bring the paleoconservatives back my way on this either.

I never liked supremacism or imperialism on the right, it is not necessary to hate other races to love your own; this has caused the most problems for the right---the hatred is gleefully exploited by the corrupt left. It is antiquated human strategy to promote the supremacy or imperialism of one group against all others as exclusively superior, even if this sociobiological tactic enhanced survival in hunter-gatherer times, this behavior now only brings the overpopulated world together to destroy the supremacist imperialist group.

I wait for the day when forced multiculturalism will give way to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in line with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature. Wilmot Robertson brilliantly suggested this years ago.  I think the real debate should be over how we can conservatively adapt the Constitutional separation of of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Cooperative competition between small ethnostates and regions, protected internally and externally by some sort of federalism, can bring the variety and creativity that evolution prefers, as we all evolve toward Godhood.

The right remains divided or rejects these things, and the left just thinks the biological origin of social behavior is evil.

I assume it's about over for the conservative people and culture of the United States, the question is what to do about it?

I assume it's about over for the conservative people and culture of the United States; Big Business, the Big Media, the academic world, and venal politicians have destroyed us, or I should say those who control these things have destroyed us. The question is what to do about it?

Radical revolution doesn't appeal to my sense of the reality of human nature and the world. We will need to build on what we have and try to conserve the best of the past. The separation of powers and states enshrined in the US Constitution may be the best way to reaffirm and even expand the power of the states and the principle of states rights and federalism; the Constitution now says that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution, all remaining powers are reserved for the states or the people.

From this base we can develop ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, legally without radical methods, in harmony with real kin-centered and ethnic-centered human nature. That is the best way to calm the increasingly violent but predictable competitive battles we are now having between distinctively different ethnic groups, races and cultures, which we foolishly tried to jam together in the same living space, at the pernicious insistence of Big Business, the Big Media, the academic world, and venal politicians.

That is the basic solution to the destruction of the conservative people and culture of the United States. A few people in the beleaguered Alt-right agree with the ethnostate solution, but not always on the methods. Nothing else makes instinctive or rational sense given that human nature 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.

No one can agree on what universal rights are mainly because no one can agree on what human nature is

What we have today is cultural and economic imperialism based on the flawed definitions of human nature leading to flawed definitions of universal rights. Errors in political and cultural philosophy stem from this.

The heart of the ethnopluralism hypothesis is the rights of ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates based on the sociobiological definition of human nature and universal rights.  Human nature is now and has been for tens of thousands of years basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

What does this indicate regarding human nature and universal rights? It indicates that realism affirms ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. What we have now are various forms of cultural and economic imperialism and supremacy.  Our age of nuclear weapons makes cultural and economic imperialism and supremacy unworkable and very dangerous. “International law” needs to affirm the rights of ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. The time of multicultural multi-ethnic states is over.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism. It will not be easy, it may require a few constitutional amendments to give more power to the states to move toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

But an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is far preferable to the political dissimulations we have today based on flawed definitions of human nature and universal rights which have brought us radically destructive civil disruptions, or even civil war, now increasing across the world within unworkable multicultural multi-ethnic societies demanding that we “all get along” living in the same space.

At this time only the “Alt right” has shown the courage to affirm ethnostates, but they often turn their backs on conservatism and the valuable assets of tradition, and they too often attack their own country and affirm radicalism and revolution (some even choose Putin's Russia over the West), leading to more of the same marauding cultural and economic imperialism and supremacy, contrary to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates and conflicting with the sociobiological definition of human nature and universal rights.

The vital changes toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates need to be done legally, constitutional, patriotically, and not by radical revolutionary means which almost never work and usually cause great biological and cultural convulsions in life.

Unblocking the widespread obstruction against real human nature would go a long way toward solving many of the problems of modern philosophy

The alienation and nihilism we have seen complained about by modern philosophers, at least since Hegel and Nietzsche (and especially since the two big World Wars) was largely caused by being unable or unwilling to admit, and affirm, the kin-centered and ethnocentric infrastructure of real human nature, among other traditional traits, like being gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, and even xenophobic.

Was the obstruction against real human nature the result of ignorance, or a lack of courage. Or is ignorance to a degree a lack of courage?

Why did Hitler punish the Jews for being kin-centered and ethnocentric? The big problem is supremacy and imperialism, not ethnocentrism. The alienation and nihilism complained about by modern philosophers comes mainly from people not being allowed to be kin-centered, ethnocentric, and even nationalistic.

Hitler and the Jews should both have advocated an ethnopluralism of ethnostates and the return to real human nature, while making supremacy and imperialism (and now globalism) the real enemy, not ethnocentrism.

Dilemmas of the Alt Right

The way I see it the main dilemma of the Alt Right was how to deal with the ethnocentrism of real human nature while also dealing with religion, science, conservatism, nationalism, and radical racialism.

Religion versus science presented itself, with the science-minded Alt Right moving toward a scientific racialism and rejecting religion. A lesser number moved toward transhumanism preferring intelligent machines to humans. A larger group moved toward the Traditionalist School of Guenon and Evola and are now mainly followers of Aleksandr Dugin, who hates the West---this school downplays science in favor of spiritualism over materialism, but keeps an element of racialism-as-tradition. Another wing moved toward paganism, such as Odinism. Perhaps the largest group on the far right never quite fit in with the Alt Right, they are the racial supremacists, sometimes in the Hitler mode. Others on the far right moved toward a racialist version of Christianity arguing that Christ was not Jewish, etc. Few if any moved toward conservatism or paleoconservatism.

I faced many of the same dilemmas of the Alt Right and the paleoconservatives, and I developed theological materialism, having been impressed and influenced by Raymond Cattell's religion from science called Beyondism, Edward Wilson's deep sociobiology, Russell Kirk and Pat Buchanan's paleoconservatism, the ethnostatism of Wilmot Robertson, and the esoteric religious thinking of people like Guenon, and others. I believe I successfully included or synthesized these thinkers in developing theological materialism, which sees the material world evolving to supermaterial Godhood, the God first symbolically but incompletely glimpsed from within by traditional religion. I also dealt with the courageous Friedrich Nietzsche, and later, Heidegger.

I eventually found a way to be a conservative patriotic American, grounded in religion, philosophy, and science, while affirming the constitutional separation of powers and states in the United States, slightly amended to save itself, by becoming an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where different groups within ethnostates can be what they actually are and what human nature actually is, rejecting the various forms of ethnic supremacy as unworkable and immoral. The sacred goal of life is to materially evolve toward supermaterial Godhood in the cosmos.