The natural sacred purpose that contradicts Nietzsche and postmodernism

 Some think the nihilism and the hopeless relativity of postmodern philosophy began with Nietzsche's declaration that “God is dead,” but that declaration was probably more a call for the freedom to create new non-Christian values with Nietzsche trying to sweep away the idea that there could be any absolute truth. It wasn't necessary, because Godhood is not dead, Godhood is redefined and transformed as the goal of biological evolution, and it is a teleological evolution.

Future religion depends on changing the scientific taboo that evolving life has no teleological or theological goal. “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” (Cattell) all the way to ascending levels of Godhood, while working along with natural selection and evolution. This process of evolution is activated from within every cell of living bodies, which then react and adapt to the various outside environments that life lives in. This activation is reflected in the desire to successfully survive and reproduce. And this activation is a material/supermaterial activation, not spiritual.

For Nietzsche, life seeks goalless power, amorally or immorally if need be, or creates its own morality. Theology and metaphysics are spent forces for Nietzsche mainly because Nietzsche dismisses direction and purpose in power and in evolution. But when Godhood is seen and known as a naturalistic and theological goal, the goal of evolution, then biology and theology need not settle for the empty spiritualism that Nietzsche detested.

Nietzsche wanted philosophy to ally itself with natural science, but with the naturalism of sociobiology, for example, the altruism which Nietzsche saw as only weakness is rather seen as advancing the power of group survival and reproductive success, with religion helping to bond that altruism. I see no reason to reject these values as a weakness for the will-to-power. Nietzsche remains a nihilist, and his preference for naturalism in philosophy doesn't change his nihilism because Nietzsche saw no direction, no order, no goal to evolution, other than amoral, directionless power.

Civilizing the beast, the last metamorphose

Thinking of Nietzsche's three symbols of metamorphoses, the camel (Christian-Platonic asceticism), the lion (rebellious willing), and the child (new value creator). I would add a last as the broncobuster, the horse trainer, the civilizer of the beast.

The camel is the will to nothingness goal of the Inward Path to the God within of Traditional religions. For example, the eastern experience of nirvana, and the beatific experience of heaven or the Father Within of Christ, is a peak experience in the physical mind, after much ascetic discipline, in blocking or overcoming material desires—a will to nothingness. The lion defies fixed philosophies but does so out of rebellion and goes about rebelliously creating fixed philosophy. The child represents the creator of new values assuming there are no fixed values, which is Nietzsche's philosophical preference.

The problem with the symbol of the child thinking there are no fixed values (like the postmodernists) is that there are fixed values, so I would add another metamorphose to the symbols of the camel, lion, or child; I would add the broncobuster, the horse trainer, the civilizer of the beast.

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. The biological origin of our social behavior as empirically explained by the evolutionary sciences and sociobiology actually ends the intellectual defense of postmodern relativism. Generally speaking any existing values come from the various social and cultural methods we try (including postmodernism) as attempts to biologically and genetically advance ourselves, consciously or unconsciously.

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,” as Cattell put it. But even without acknowledging an inward purpose, evolution has been moving toward more efficient forms, more complexity, with occasional stops and side-turnings along the way.

I believe we are aided in this direction by an 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.

When we define evolving toward higher and higher forms, always moving toward ascending levels of Godhood, the goal of materially evolving to supermaterial Godhood gives natural purpose and direction to modern life and culture, and it need not deprive us of either science or religion. We train and ride the horse of natural biological evolution.

Where Nietzsche and his postmodern followers went wrong

The will to power is a secondary activation to the will to evolve in the material world to ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood, which activates the will to power for that essential purpose, like the pleasure from eating food is secondary to the need of food for successful survival and reproduction.

"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 to ascending levels of Godhood. As long as we are alive every cell in our body demands life and survival and reproductive success, with the zenith of success as evolving to Godhood. This natural activation can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied.

If the epistemology and ontology of the philosophers can't find this to be real and true, if the intellect can find no direction or purpose to life or can find no meta-narrative to life, then there is something wrong with the way the intellect finds truth.

The purpose of life is far more than Nietzsche's directionless will to power and the nihilistic relativity of his postmodern followers.

Why Nietzsche and his superman require evolutionary conservatism

"Man is a rope stretched between the beast and the Superman, a rope above an abyss."

If Nietzsche and his superman affirm radical individualism then his superman will not survive or make it possible for the next stage of man, because Nietzsche's “rope above an abyss” involves conservatism. If Nietzsche's trans-humanism is “genetic or or eugenic (rather than cybernetic)” as Romain D' Aspremont suggests in improving the biological body and mind of the species, then if Nietzsche affirms individualism and bypasses group selection that will not allow us to retain and nurture the best of what we evolve long enough to surpass it, which evolutionary conservatism can do.

In theological materialism natural law includes our material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood, so it affirms the rational science inherent in natural law as aiding in our evolution to Godhood. Natural law in evolutionary conservatism brings a conservatism grounded in the order of ascending levels of material evolution to Godhood, which counters both the stagnation of traditional conservatism and the nihilism of modern thinking.

Like most conservatives Irving Babbitt ruled out naturalism as the source of ethics, but E.O. Wilson said regarding the biological origin of social behavior, “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...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.” I would add to Wilson's “ultimate function of morality” the highest goal of material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

Evolutionary conservatism sees progress as life infused with the upward climb of evolution toward ascending levels of real Godhood at the zenith of material evolution, which we can and should aid with the evolutionary sciences. It turns out that conservatism as defined by sociobiology can be one of the best ways to survive and reproduce successfully over the long term, but few conservatives seriously apply the insights of sociobiology in defense of conservative principles.

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 a defensive federalism.

Then we can all get on with evolving toward Godhood.

Redefining Godhood as supermaterial and evolved to in the material world

The will to power is one of Nietzsche's most misunderstood ideas. At various times Nietzsche described the will to power as a psychological, biological, or metaphysical principle. It seems to me that when Nietzsche declared that “God is dead” he also killed the spiritual view of God, which is the basic definition of god, so those who think of Nietzsche's philosophy as spiritual and not hereditary or biological are mistaken. All social behavior is grounded in biology, including philosophy and religion. Nietzsche wrote: “Wherever I found a living thing, I found there the will to power.” ("Thus Spoke Zarathustra") Philosophers since Nietzsche seem to fear biology or sociobiology making inroads in the humanities.

The reality that all social behavior is grounded in biology doesn't kill God it redefines God as supermaterial and evolved to in the material world. So only the traditional spiritual view of God is dead. Nietzsche's overman needs to be biologically evolved to, all the way to Godhood. The will to Godhood better describes the will to power.

This noble and sacred goal can be attained by different political methods, including representative democracy. All men are born with the desire to survive and reproduce successfully but natural rights do not guarantee results, since evolution cannot always guarantee results. This suggest that if the noble statesman of the future do see guardianship of the state as avoiding sedition and discord culminating in civil war, 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. 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.

Then we can all get on with evolving toward 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.

Renewing mythopoetic power with material evolution (from the archive)

The transfiguring goal for Friedrich Nietzsche in his early writings was the creation of great men, a republic of genius. Although that is important it is not nearly enough. Renewal requires the religious goal of our material evolution to Godhood in the cosmos, which brings a far more exalted renewal of consciousness, and contains the power to revive religion, philosophy and art in the modern world.

Early Nietzsche could not see his way out of the loss of both religion and science other than through the rebirth of art-myth as a guide to truth, along with creating individual great men as the goal of culture. Nietzsche thought that this loss of myth was the result of the reasoning ideal of Socrates which supposedly destroyed myth, and also after the “historical sense” and the abstract pursuit of knowledge for knowledge sake in modern times further destroyed myth and religion. Kant helped this destruction along by showing the limits of knowledge, and Schopenhauer by adding the Will as the superior force to all knowledge.

But we don't have to loose reason with religion or lose science with religion. Theological materialism continues the alliance of faith and reason but with an evolutionary, nonspiritual, material view of Godhood and Logos, with religion affirming an ordered, rational, material, evolution to supermaterial Godhood. 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---science can help it along the way.

It is not tragic music, as Nietzsche and Schopenhauer thought, which expresses “the immediate language of the will,” it is evolution. It is not the will to power but the material inward evolutionary will to live, or Tirips, that activates evolution to ascending levels of Godhood, which evolution and natural selection then shapes. That is the real and deepest source for a renewal of mythopoetic power; evolution is the source of the super-epic for art, affirming the struggle to attain Godhood. Art can bring religion to life but it is not religion.

What would Nietzsche have thought of the rise of sociobiology? (from 2013)

According to Quentin Taylor and others, early Nietzsche hoped that the Germans could find a culture analogous to his beloved Hellenics (not copy it), and they could do this by doing as the Greeks did: preserving the values of real life over all the pseudo-needs of knowledge for knowledge sake, or by not spending so much time on gaining knowledge of the cultures that surrounded them, Persians, Egypt etc. This would mean bringing unity to diversity, or “harmonious manifoldness.” Nietzsche rejected the Socratic-Alexandrian and affirmed the Tragic-Dionysian believing that the Germans had gotten lost in Alexandrian specialization and scholarship, they were mere “pupils of declining antiquity.”

But what would Nietzsche have thought of the rise of “Alexandrian” sociobiology, which has done just what he asked for in modern times, organized the chaos of scholarship, found the values of real life, let go of the pseudo explanations of culture and life. Now what is needed, as E. O.Wilson pointed out, is for sociobiology to enter the humanities, which have become almost completely divided from real human nature and real life.

Science, specifically sociobiology, can save culture when it is also seen as an aid of our sacred evolution to Godhood in the cosmos. Science working with religion and art can unite the Alexandrian and Dionysian cultures. Theological materialism can revive myth-religion, this time it is the Alexandrian which can save us. The God first seen inwardly is now the Godhood evolved to outwardly applying religion and science.

Speculation on Tirips and primal beginnings and endings

The “first cause” could be the material activation within life, Tirips, or the will-to-Godhood activating material life, and then life is shaped by the vagaries of natural selection and evolution. This activation is not confined to biological life, it happens with prebiological life, chemicals, even in big bang beginnings, etc. I do not see a final cause, I see endless evolution toward higher and higher truth, intelligence, beauty, and goodness, that is, continually evolving ascending Godhoods are reached. Life can also fall back in devolution, new cosmos are formed again, always giving life another chance to evolve to Godhood.

This suggests that the “essence” of life is Tirips or the will-to-Godhood within material life.  Tirips is the “God-Instinct” (rather than the "soul") and is the highest of all the material  instincts, higher even than the conscious brain which the activation of Tirips helps develop. Tirips has been concealed under the superficial polish of civilization. We need to go back and allow Tirips or the will-to-Godhood to develop and evolve. Science needs to discover and define Tirips.

This suggests that Tirips is “rational,” within the bounds of reason, not irrational like Nietzsche's power-seeking Dionysus. Tirips could be a form of divine consciousness since it "knows" to seek Godhood by activating material life to evolve to Godhood.  But Tirips is not Godhood, it seeks Godhood and is shaped by the vagaries of outside natural selection and evolution. 

Human consciousness develops in the brains of humans which the materially-life-activating Tirips first helps develop along with outside natural selection and evolution. The Tirips theory of history says that the outer events of material life are the result of the activation of the usually unconsciousness inward Tirips or will-to-Godhood, and then is shaped by evolution from the outside, all the way from big bangs or electric universes to human civilization and beyond.

This resembles the way intellectual intuition is often followed by empirical science, that is, Tirips or the will-to-Godhood decides where it wants to go first, to Godhood, and then the body, mind and culture, and outside evolution, follow as best they can, given the various environments life finds itself living in.

Being and becoming are essentially material evolution

Being is mainly becoming, never static, never really absolute, always evolving---although when material life evolves to the level of eternal life that seems almost absolute. Being and becoming are essentially material evolution.

When Nietzsche says becoming I say material and supermaterial evolution, when mystics say Being I say material evolution leading to supermaterial Godhood. This brings material reality back to the mind and body, and back to nature itself.

It was a metaphysical and philosophical error to make a God of logos, reason, and even science. That error caused the worship of words, equations and ideas which are only abstract definitions of living truths and living Gods. A living thing is more important than its definition. The name of Godhood needs to be transformed from a mere abstract spiritual name or idea into a living or future living material/supermaterial object, or objects.

The blocking of a conscious material evolution has taken place along a wide path, from religion to politics to the arts, and even science, which means many obstacles remain in the evolution of life toward Godhood.

This does not call for the rejection of religion, politics, the arts, and science, but requires their adaptation to take up the cause of the evolution of life toward Godhood, which may be the closest we can come to defining the sacred meaning of Being and Becoming. Religion, politics, the arts, and science can grow and become more real and less alienating with the worldview of theological materialism.

Nietzsche's nihilism can be overcome when Godhood is seen as a naturalistic theological goal

Can we know the ultimate cause, the final cause, or purpose, of all things? We can't have the wisdom that evolved Gods have but we can know the ultimate cause in a general sense. Yet even saying that we can be accused of arrogance or pseudo-philosophy, especially by those who believe that man is fallen from grace and is sinful, or by those who have an exaggerated view of a non-material god, or by those who believe that evolution is totally random and goalless.

For Nietzsche, life seeks power, goalless power, amorally or immorally if need be, or creates its own morality. Theology and metaphysics were a spent force for Nietzsche mainly because Nietzsche dismissed direction and purpose to power and evolution. But when Godhood is seen as a naturalistic and theological goal, the goal of evolution, then biology and theology need not settle for the empty spiritualism that Nietzsche detested. Nature and philosophy can be seen as life materially evolving to Godhood.

Nietzsche at one point wanted philosophy to ally itself with natural science, with what would today be called sociobiology, and Nietzsche thought this would finally do away with God and religion. But with sociobiology, altruism, or being for others, which Nietzsche saw as only weakness, is seen as advancing the power of group survival and reproductive success, with religion helping to bond that altruism.

When sociobiology is seen teleologically then religion re-enters the world. The vitalism and teleology of the activating material will, or Tirips, can save Godhood and religion while affirming the naturalization of philosophy which Nietzsche championed. But we need to affirm that 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 up the levels of Godhood.

Nietzsche remains a nihilist, and his preference for naturalism in philosophy doesn't change his nihilism because Nietzsche saw no direction, no order, no goal to evolution, other than amoral, directionless power. This purposelessness seems to be another fiction to replace the old fiction of a material-free, evolution-free spiritualism.

Theology needs to join with a new natural philosophy that sees direction and purpose in material evolution. Godhood becomes the goal of evolution in the philosophy of theological materialism. Nihilism can only be legitimately overcome this way. At this point it is a “faith” that there is no purpose to the will-to-power in evolution, against the faith that there is purpose in evolution. I believe the science which Nietzsche at his best preferred will one day affirm the purpose, direction, and material/supermaterial goal of attaining the supreme survival and reproductive success of Godhood in evolution. This will then give us the best of both faith and reason.

Where does the blame lie for the degradation of Western art and culture? (from 2010)

Beyond the Conservative critique 

Blame can go all around yet those who see the degradation of Western art and culture as a “disease of faith” (T.S.Eliot etc.) are more right than they knew. Why? Because they blamed our degradation on the loss of faith without seeing that the faith itself played a big part in the degradation. 

Perennial Tradition from prehistory to the Revealed Religions began with the Great Spiritual Blockade of the material world, and it was this great error in the perennial foundation of spiritualism that gradually led to the degradation and virtual downfall of art and culture. 

By the time Nietzsche declared that God was dead, which greatly influenced all modern philosophers, religious influence was all but over. The fact that this great error of hating or at least blocking the material world was exploited by the enemies of Western culture was a secondary--although very damaging--occurrence. Non-Christian's followed their own natural wills to power in helping to kick down the rotting door. And the only alternative other intellectuals felt they had was atheism and Godless forms of materialism.

To bring back Western art and culture conservative's advocate going back to traditional values and images. They say: “True art is an appeal to our higher nature, an attempt to affirm that other kingdom in which moral and spiritual order prevails.” (Roger Scruton, “Beauty”) But it is that “other kingdom” that essentially hates the world, no matter how clever and pedantic the religious philosophers parse their arguments. The world they seek is beyond the material world. 

What I believe is needed to revive art and culture—and religion---is the theological materialism of the projected Theoevolutionary Church, which retains the Gods of our Fathers in the Twofold Path but transforms true Godhood into the Zenith of Material Evolution. With the Theoevolutionary Church, science can join religion, art can affirm biology, and materialism can strongly support religion. Affirming this may come slowly, one hopes not too slowly to save us.

Attaining real Godhood requires the affirmation of material life and evolution not the rejection of material life and evolution

Josef Pieper defined true “leisure” as orientating ourselves to the whole of existence, and to be orientated not in material things but from material things, and that is the general position of all serious asceticism, but it is gravely mistaken.

Ascetics all agree that being “truly human” means being free from the material world, which is like saying being truly human is not being human or being dead. Why this loathing of the material and the human?  Asceticism is directed toward blocking all material desires to experience the exclusive bliss that comes from this very difficult and sacrificial experience, which is interpreted as experiencing God or the Father.

We cannot be free from material things unless we are virtually dead, which is indeed what all serious ascetics advocate. For example, “...whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it.” Luke 9:23-24. The Vedas, the Bible,
the Tripitaka, all declare this goal of asceticism.

But Nietzsche was wrong to say that therefore God is dead---although he meant that religions which advocate blocking all material desires are dead. Real Godhood cannot be reached by blocking all material desires because real ascending levels of Godhood are reached only by way of positive material evolution.

So religion need not die from science, science need not die from religion, and humans need not die to the material world to experience Godhood. Theological materialism not theological spiritualism is called for. Attaining real Godhood requires the affirmation of material life and evolution. 

The great spiritual blockade of human beings and material evolution

A deep devaluation of human beings and human nature exists in the way traditional religion's tell us that the higher we go the more we become like the angels who are said to be non-material, spiritual, purely intellectual beings, without the gross material human nature.

Why does traditional religion think that higher beings must be non-material, spiritual, purely intellectual beings? Nietzsche probably came the closest to answering this question in saying that the priests and ascetics of traditional religion gained power and control by disparaging materialism and blocking the will to power of their followers, even if some of them were unaware that they were doing it.

This degrading of human beings and human nature was especially misleading and damaging because it set up a great spiritual blockade against the real path of material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood.

While the ethical bonding and social order of traditional religion are important, the control method they use of degrading human beings and human nature, and even making it sacred to block the real path of material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood, was and is fatally and metaphysically wrong.

Theological materialism seeks to set this right so we can get on the sacred religious path of material evolution to real Godhood.

The real antidote to the relativity or purposelessness of the will to power and the cultural Marxism we see today

We can see how Nietzsche could become cynical about human beings, so much of human behavior has to do with people being concerned with their own interests even to the point of disregarding standards and moralities in order to achieve them. Nietzsche ended up calling this the will to power, people only used morality as a means to power---Nietzsche viewed religion as doing this.

Nietzsche was almost right in his cynicism, but his postmodern intellectual followers thought he was all right, and they picked up the banner of the relativity or purposelessness of all power values, somehow overlooking the idea that this meant that their relativity of values was also relative. And many of the post-moderns also somehow arrived at Marxism or cultural Marxism as their political philosophy, overlooking the idea that Marxism was also their own relative will to power in action.

The problem is that the will to power is not relative, it has the deeper goal, the sacred goal, of attaining the zenith of success in survival and reproduction by way of material evolution all the way to ascending levels of Godhood. Religion, politics, and culture in general have unconsciously used the will to power and their cultural creations for that unconscious divine purpose. 

The philosophy of theological materialism seeks to make that deeper goal, that sacred goal, conscious, believing that this is the real antidote to the relativity or purposelessness of the will to power and the cultural Marxism we see today. Natural morality and religion can return without cynicism.

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. Morality, religion, ethnostates, and ethnopluralism can return without cynicism, in harmony with kin and ethnic-centered human nature, along with the evolutionary activation of life toward Godhood.

The desperate genius of political correctness and cultural Marxism

Not that long ago it was accepted that people naturally prefer their own kin, ethnic group, and culture, but then the political correctness of cultural Marxism was brainwashed into the population, so that the old fairy tale “the emperor's new clothes" or the saying “the elephant in the room” now apply to the politically incorrect guy who says at a party, “but I prefer to hang out with my own ethnic group.”

This brainwashing in political correctness and cultural Marxism was what Nietzsche called a “trans-valuation of values,” implying that only a desperate or even genius people could pull it off. And it has been brilliantly pulled off in the U. S. and the Western world. The naked emperor is called clothed and the elephant in the room is not seen.  Now merely saying you prefer to be with your own ethnic group is called “hate,” and in some countries is even against the law!

Astoundingly, the desperate genius of political correctness and cultural Marxism has denied real human nature, which remains as it has always been, 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.

To love your own kin, ethnic group, and culture, does not have to mean that you hate other ethnic groups. The realistic way to to find order in our crowded world of different kin, ethnic groups, and cultures, is not with the farce of “multiculturalism,” which jams everyone together in the same living space and demands that they all get along, when this arrangement naturally causes competitive civil disruption, and eventually civil war. The realistic way to find order in our crowded world of different kin, ethnic groups, and cultures, is to develop ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which is the best political configuration for humans beings to live within, given human nature.

It may require a few constitutional amendments to give more power to the states to move toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and it will not be easy at all, but it is far preferable to the destructive farce of political correctness, cultural Marxism, and multiculturalism.

The loss of religious sacralization and how to get it back without spiritualism

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 science could find no trace of the spiritual or a spiritual God. And they were right! But they were wrong to reject religion and God.

Rather than killing religion and God we should 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 God but we can reach ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood. Real Godhood is reached by material evolution, and not by the symbolic experience of god reached in the ascetic practices of the traditional religions.

We needed to transform religion and God, not kill them. That was the real conservative project missed by the conservatives, and missed by Nietzsche, the abused father of postmodernism, who affirmed only new values created by individual supermen. Having no religion and no God modern men lost the sacralization of their morals, values, cultures, long-term goals, and even their survival.

How to get it back? The philosophy of theological materialism begins the process.

Fear and resentment led to hatred of the instincts and the material world

Running through traditional religion is the fearful warning that the instincts are evil and we must tame the instincts. Great religious philosophers later tried to put a positive spin on this, but the tone leaned toward calling the instincts as well as the material world "evil" and the spiritual world good. The wilderness too was disorderly and barbarian and needed the order of tamed civilized cities. Survival was far more difficult in the past, the wilderness was far more sinister, and barbarians far more deadly, as we see in fairy tales (although to be nonpartisan nuclear bombs can be rather deadly too).

That extreme fear and resentment led to hatred of the instincts and the material world and eventually led to the complete rejection of the instincts and the material world, which was the path of asceticism in traditional religions, resulting in the apotheosis of the non-material "spiritual" world. Material desires were blocked by ascetics in monasteries and on mountain tops, and that blocking of material desires brought on the peak physical experience of bliss described as seeing the spiritual God within. To the losers was said such things as: "If you cannot restrain your desires, go ahead and marry--it is better to marry than to burn with passion." 1 Corinthians 7:9.

Nietzsche saw this fear and resentment within religions and rebelliously took things in the opposite direction by affirming the instincts, the advancing barbarian, and even disorder and chaos, with virtually no checks or taming of the instincts. While I can agree with the idea that the instincts are not evil, Nietzsche went too far in the opposite direction.

The apotheosis, the highest point in the development of the instincts, the culmination or climax of the instincts is the material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. But that requires the taming or shaping of evolution, it requires aiding, not blocking, the instincts in their drive to evolve toward real Godhood. Materially evolving to ever-ascending levels of Godhood is the highest point in the evolution of the instincts and the genes, and that Godhood is good, and those instincts leading to Godhood are good, not evil.

On the origin of a separation between religion and politics

If you think about human behavior from the perspective of the biological origin of social behavior the hallowed separation between religion and politics doesn't look so hallowed. The separation seems to have developed mainly in Judaic-Christian societies as the result of trying to accommodate multicultural and multiracial societies.

The Hebrew tribes were continually dominated by the Persians, the Greeks, the Syrians and Egypt, and the Romans, and they survived by having a separation between religion and politics in multicultural and multiracial societies. This conception fed into Christianity and the founding of America.

That separation between religion and politics continued to be necessary to Jewish survival right up to the twentieth century founding of Israel---and it is still important for Jews living in multicultural and multiracial societies like America and Europe.

It seems common sense that moral and political bonds are stronger in homogeneous societies with less survival need for a separation between religion and politics, perhaps like present day Israel, which has moved ever closer to having no separation between religion and politics---now that they have their own land the presence of Palestinians in their midst seems to have led them not to a multicultural society but to an even more nationalistic Israel.

It should be obvious that multicultural and multiracial societies breed resentment in the population. Nietzsche hypertrophied "resentment" as at the origin of the development of Judaic-Christian societies, he therefore rejected religion preferring the winning Greeks and Romans to the Jews and Christians who they enslaved---underplaying the vital bonding qualities of religion.

In any case, this is one more reason why I think ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates are desirable, they have less of the squabbling and competition of multicultural and multiracial societies which ends up weakening and even destroying them. It also explains why it is difficult to develop ethnostates in Judaic-Christian societies founded on the separation between religion and politics.

If Israel---now having less survival need for a separation between religion and politics---can move toward a more homogeneous ethnostate, why can't the U. S. develop ethnostates where the moral and political bonds can be stronger in homogeneous societies which have less survival need for a separation between religion and politics? In the U. S. an ethnopluralism of ethnostates could legally work in harmony with federalism and the Constitutional separation of powers and states.

If real mercy is the privilege of the most powerful men

If real mercy is the "privilege of the most powerful men," as Nietzsche declared (didn't Aristotle think that too?) then those who cannot get over the wrongs of World War Two and seek only revenge must be put outside that category of powerful men. But resentment and revenge also keeps the wrong alive as the will to power of the wronged, even if is an ignoble will to power.

We need to move toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. Distinctly different people naturally compete and need their own space. Differentiated ethnic groups in general do not get along well jammed together in multi-cultural-multi-ethnic states.

To resolve this unending problem we do not need the imperialism or supremacy of noble Aryans or Chosen Jews, we need an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in line with kin and ethnic-centered human nature.

Those who block even the discussion of ethnostates are causing great suffering in the world, and for themselves too.