Developing a healthier world compatible with what we actually are as human beings

I don't know exactly where I would create the dividing line between what I call the Age of Warriors and the Age of Nurturing in the West, because the "warrior" remains biologically and genetically the central feature of men, and "nurturing " remains the central feature of women, no matter how much communism, feminism and postmodernism deny this biologically-derived definition of gender differences. Of course men can be nurturing and women can be warriors but that is not the specialty of the genders.

If we begin the Age of Warriors in hunter/gatherer times when deep human nature was evolved, say, a million years ago, give or take, and follow it up to, say, the fall of the Roman Empire around 476, or the end of the Viking age in 1066 AD, that could be called the long orthodox or formal Age of Warriors in the West occupying at least 90 percent of human history. But as I said, since the warrior and the nurturer remain biologically and genetically the central feature of men and women even today, the Age of Warriors never really ended, it was just buried or sublimated by modern culture, especially in the West---with the exception of the voluntary military men who defend the West, in spite of women being inserted into the military.

So does this mean we should go back to an age of tooth and claw and demand ancient wide differences between men and women, or declare one supreme noble or chosen people over all others? In our increasingly crowded world it would bring survival and reproductive disaster to a people who declared such intentions as the rest of the world would gang up on them and destroy them.

What we do need to do is affirm real human nature and the biological origin of our social behavior. The science of sociobiology recently affirmed biologically-derived human nature as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

This suggests that we should reject (I wanted to say shitcan) the communists/socialists/liberals, feminists, and postmodernists for being against real human nature and therefore harmful to life itself. Then we can get on with developing a healthier world compatible with what we actually are as human beings, for example, developing the ethnopluralism of ethnostates often written about in this blog, which is about as equitable as human beings can be given human nature.

Utopian thinking with its feet on real ground: Religion and philosophy as biological propaganda

If people accuse Hegel's philosophy of being "political propaganda" (Kojeve) then what would they say about religion and philosophy as biological propaganda, which it is?

That isn't an overly reductive statement, it is a basic truth about human and animal life which is hidden mainly because it discloses real intentions related to gaining power.

How can we fix our troubled world with different factions scheming and fighting wars for power if we won't speak about the primary causes?

When we find the courage and the smarts to admit the biological origin of our social behavior then we can have a much better chance of finding longer term harmony.

Both communism and capitalism may more easily see that a world of ethnostates, or as I put it an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, is the closest we may come to longer term political harmony in line with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature.

Then we can get on with affirming the sacred, all of us, with all our differences centered on evolving toward Godhood.

That is utopian thinking with its feet on real ground.

The great wrong of Sen. Schumer and Rep. Pelosi that cannot be mentioned

Beneath the political lies and hypocrisy of Sen. Schumer and Rep. Pelosi is the biological origin of their political decisions, which involves fronting for votes in the changing demographics of America and counting on the coming minority status of formerly majority whites. That has everything to do with their stand against building President Trump's wall at the Mexican border to control illegal immigration and the drug cartels. Think of the corruption and immorality of what they and the democrats are doing! Yet this great wrong cannot be mentioned for what it is. Are they not traitors to the biological survival of American citizens? What could be worse than that?

Can traditional conservatism avoid its own tragic drama and downfall?

Traditional conservatism is right in trying to religiously harness human nature but wrong in the type of harness applied, and this is mainly due to the view of a "fallen human nature."

Traditional conservatism agrees for the most part with the scientific sociobiological view of human nature---or perhaps I should say that the scientific sociobiological view of human nature agrees with traditional conservatism---in human nature across the world being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

But the "religious-making" of traditional conservatism falls down (like modern liberalism) in not including ethnocentrism, xenophobia, and fundamental materialism as an important and healthy part of human nature. Traditional conservatism excludes these things mainly due to their view of human nature as having fallen from the very ascetic Christ who was the most perfect man with a perfect nature. It is those basic materialistic parts of human nature that need to be religiously harnessed or guided rather than called unimportant, or cut out of human nature, or called evil.

And here is where the traditional conservative view of god needs to be transformed rather than murdered, by seeing Godhood as material or supermaterial and as evolved to in the material world. The "fallen" human nature, the ethnocentrism, xenophobia, and the fundamental materialism of real human nature can be seen as not fallen but the very traits involved in our evolution toward real Godhood; those are the attributes of human nature that need to be harnessed or guided by both priests and evolutionary scientists toward evolving to Godhood in our very material world (applying, for example, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates). To call these things evil or fallen is to block the upward path to real Godhood.

Is traditional conservatism headed like a tragic drama toward suffering extreme distress or sorrow and the downfall of the main character? If traditional conservatism can transform its view of Godhood from the spiritual to the evolutionary material/supermaterial, and revise its view of fallen man, then it has a chance to not only survive but reach the Godhood it has so fervently sought. If not we may see a real traditional conservative tragedy unfold.

The sacred task of future religion and science

Hegel thought true satisfaction requires a union of the finite with the infinite, according to Eliot Jurist, but I believe that demonstrates how human's always think in human terms, seeing only beginnings and endings in their human lives they define the universe as having a first beginning and define Godhood as a final ending.

I see no first beginning and no final ending, which doesn't kill religion or Godhood, as science often tells us it does, but it does require a transformation of religion and Godhood. We evolve to an unending series of material/supermaterial Godhoods in the material and supermaterial world, with no beginning and no end.

That means we will get our religious and scientific satisfactions not from dreaming about a union of the finite with the infinite but from reaching different levels of Godhood by way of material evolution---which is the sacred task of future religion and science.

You will need a stout heart and a durable ego to sell this religious/scientific overview to people today. But it's worth it; civilization never lasts long without religion.

The big problem is that the lefty-hedonists do not connect their morality to the biological origin of our social behavior

Bob Dylan had a sort of genius for creating songs that stick in your head and he now still represents to me many of our hippie-lefty-scruffy-slightly-stoned youth, but he also embodies many of the baby boomers who still get weepy (and stoned) about leftist causes, at least on weekends.

Dylan morphed from a Jewish boy born and raised in northern Minnesota to a rather weird-looking, southern-drawling, blues man, complete with gravely voice probably brought on by heavy drug use.

Weed is supposed to be so mild but I have seen the heavy use of weed change the personalities of people, change the way their voice sounds, and the way their mind works, apparently permanently.

But beyond that serious problem it is the idiotic leftist/hedonistic philosophy of Dylan, shared by sanctimonious people like the Clinton's and the Obama's, and all the lefties in the Media, as well as the lefty baby boomers, which has caused the most damage to American culture.

The big problem is that the lefty-hedonists do not connect their morality to the biological origin of our social behavior---they even declare that such a connection is racist and bigoted. Dylan has created many dopey songs about it. And the pedantic professors who taught most of them this culturally Marxist politically correct garbage are busy doing the same thing to the next generation.

Real human nature remains kin and ethnic-centered, and even xenophobic, but real human nature has been blocked by these decadent lefties, which is mainly what has brought American culture and the West into steep decline. So the natural and biologically-derived movement toward populism, conservatism, nationalism, and even ethnostatism now must struggle against these established idiots to save the West.

Mutuality rather than submission

"Mutuality" rather than "submission" is the key idea in adapting the constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by some kind of federalism. That is the political and cultural adaptation to manage the no-longer homogeneous (and growing more so) American population, and it has the great advantage of harmonizing with real human nature, which remains kin and ethnic centered in spite of great social and cultural efforts to wipe it out. Egalitarian multiculturalism has been imposed by those who gain temporary power from trying to jam distinctly different people and cultures into the same living space when for the most part they don't assimilate. Seeing and presenting an ethnopluralism of ethnostates as mutuality rather than submission is not only true but a better way to present it. The imperial supremacy of one-people-one-culture in our crowded world simply does not qualify, is unethical, and is bad for the variety preferred in ongoing evolution.

A conservative religious perspective for material evolution

Science and philosophy brought us to the evolution of consciousness, self-consciousness, and reason, and away from spirit, religion and absolute knowing. Hegel tried to bring them back together in a hierarchical philosophical scheme and I believe he would have succeeded if he had brought them all back to material and supermaterial evolution.

When spirit, religion, and absolute knowing are understood as part of material evolution and not as a non-material spiritualism we can then retain the custom of spirit, religion, and absolute knowing.

That is a conservative religious perspective for material evolution in the Western world which is rapidly rejecting religion but can this way include science and religion together in a realistic hierarchical philosophical scheme that retains an evolving Godhood as the zenith of material evolution.

Where are we now, and where do we need to go?

I love America and defend it, but I don't defend the Antifa movement which openly seeks to block conservative First Amendment free speech, the LGBTQ+ crazies who think they can circumvent biologically human nature, or the Open Border nuts who openly want to replace Middle American whites. I defend traditional America and the principle of law and order, and I affirm the paleoconservative or traditional conservatives in the desire to conserve the best of the past. But I believe we have to go further than the paleoconservatives or traditional conservatives have wanted to go to save America.

The Left worked on the offensive for years to make this radical transformation of America happen, and the Right has been only weakly defensive toward the Left. The Right being religious (and afraid of being called bigoted) has been reluctant to affirm all of the elements of the biological origin of our social behavior, especially the sociobiological fact that real human nature is kin-centered, ethnocentric and even xenophobic. But the conservatives do accept that human nature is gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, and religious-making. Conservatives tend to overlook the fact that group-selection or ethnocentrism has been the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

I believe we will need to adapt the constitutional separation of powers and states and decentralize toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. We are no-longer a nation of only Euro-Americans but a nation that the Left gleefully tells us will soon be a land where Euro-Americans are a minority in their own country; and we know as the people and ethnic groups change the culture and politics change toward the new preferences.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the sociopolitical or political/cultural structure most in harmony with real human nature which developed many tens of thousands of years ago and is still very much with us today. I believe we can accomplish this adaptation of the constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates within our institutions and through legally established processes. Like the conservatives and as a deep conservative I don't believe in illegal radical revolutions which are almost always snuffed out and care nothing for traditions.

Future philosophy: freedom, determinism, happiness, randomness, and satisfaction

If the ongoing evolution of life has the sacred goal of evolving all the way to an ongoing Godhood then freedom and happiness are not the goal they have been propped up to be, but are secondary conditions which happen along the way. "Satisfaction" might be a better word for what we can expect as we continue to evolve toward higher forms.

Freedom and determinism would then be conditioned by that essential activation within life to evolve toward Godhood, which is a deterministic biological activation defining the essence of life; satisfaction would come from bringing life into harmony with what life is in ongoing evolution.

The path of the ongoing evolution of life then adapts to or adjusts to the outside environment, which can sometimes be a random environment of obstacles, but the activation of life to evolve in the material world to supermaterial Godhood---which is also defined as the zenith of success in survival and reproduction---is not random.

On the Golden Globe Awards: Hollywood producers and writers have turned our culture into obscene garbage

While surfing last night I paused at the Golden Globe Awards and I was painfully reminded of how much I loathe Hollywood and the producers of television and film who have turned our culture into obscene garbage. And they have done it not only because the producers and writers are vulgar and talentless but because they purposely wanted to tear down American culture. The one thing these conspirators and betrayers of America are good at is creating cultural destruction and then grabbing what remains of the leftover power.

I especially hate Hollywood and the producers for what they have done to the actresses who we see parading across the stage dressed and acting like street hustlers while chasing fame and fortune controlled by those very same vulgar, talentless, obscene, producers.

Virtually not one healthy thing is promoted by these showbiz rats unless it is a lie, not one thing in politics, art, and not in our corrupted schools; they push only Marxist cultural values while living themselves like organized crime families peddling cultural devastation. Will they, can they, ever be stopped, or do we have to wait until nothing is left of America?

These despicable award shows gleefully poke their dirty fingers in the eyes of the MEGA red hat wearing Trumpians who hate them back with equal passion, but what both may not realize is that those of us who firmly believe in changing things legally and peacefully may not be able to stop the hard rain of fascism on the right or the left from falling.

We can't solve a problem if we don't know what the problem is, or if we are forbidden to name the problem

I heard a CEO say: " America divided doesn't help America or the world." That seems like common sense, even if you figure in the self-serving nature of a global businessman saying it.

But looking deeper you come across the politically incorrect and therefore uncomfortable fact that different ethnic groups within the same country naturally compete, which leads to natural divisions.

Then the "common sense" statement becomes "a country needs to know when its divisions are unassimilating, and divide accordingly, to avoid civil disruption or even civil war." We may then have a chance of solving the problem of our divisions in a peaceful way, and hold the country together with some sort of federalism that protects the differences and divisions.

But that ethnopluralistic solution is enhanced or aided by a sociobiological understanding of human nature, which remains a "political incorrect" solution, mainly because businessman like the one quoted above and culturally Marxist academics who dominate our schools block the sociobiological understanding of human nature.

As you hear often in this blog, human nature is 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. This definition of human nature basically supports traditional Western values and morals, and it logically and instinctively suggests---at least to a few people---forming an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which could be peacefully adapted to the constitutional separation of powers and states.

So what or who are the disrupters of this natural solution to present and future divisions in the West? The disrupters are the political left, postmodern philosophy, postmodern art, the Big Media, the academic world, global business, universalist religions, etc. Depressing right? But we can't solve a problem if we don't know what the problem is, or if we are forbidden to name the problem.

Is there a cure for the behavioral psychosis of ethnic suicide?

I see a version of psychosis in many of the white talking heads in the media today indicating impaired contact with reality when they arrogantly and triumphantly declare that white people will soon be a minority in America. It is more than the obvious brown-nosing to trendy minorities, it is suicidal. To arrogantly and even happily announce the decline and death of ones own ethnic group, who share many of your same genes and your same culture, is more than pantywaist cuckoldry, it is sick.

Is there a cure for the behavioral psychosis of ethnic suicide? I suppose so, but it will take years to recover. The overall power of the present media and the academic world who encourage the suicide of white Western culture will need to be curbed. If we want to be logical and fair to all groups we will adapt the constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in line with real human nature, which remains kin and ethnic centered, among other conservative things.

Predictions

President Trump has more or less been turning the country back to what Srdja Trifkofic called the "sovereign realism" of pre-1941 America, before the proto-neoconservative Woodrow Wilson began to condescendingly bully the World.

But not being an intellectual and not following fixed patterns of idealism, Trump has retained a few neoconservative advisers who are trying to turn him toward foreign adventures, although Trump's lavish preference for Israel seems to have been there from the start.

So decentralizing America, bringing the troops home, and giving power back to the states where power belongs has been more or less happening, even in the face of the entire media and the entire academic world hating Trump. Trump has so far had the ego to more or less persist.

But sovereign realism and populism can only take us half way back to a sound and sane country. What we face, which sovereign realism and populism have not faced, is the Western and Southwestern states becoming a non-amalgamating Latino territory, and the Black inner cities of the nation continuing to explode in racial conflict and competition.

Real human nature predicts these things will happen because real human nature has the same human preference for kin and ethic/racial groups, which came to be what it is during the millions of years that our ancestors lived in hunting/gathering bands where those genetic preferences were successful in survival and reproduction, so they became part of human nature.

But sovereign realism, populism, and nationalism can be thought of as the first stage of the return to real human nature, and if that can be successful, the next stage will be to adapt our constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which can then accommodate the natural competition between Hispanics, Blacks, and Whites. Otherwise an ethnopluralism of ethnostates will happen illegally and violently, which we do not want.  In our overpopulated world the imperialism and fascism of one group making slaves of the others is unrealistic.

Politics, business, the stock market, the arts, etc. are the superstructure built upon that structure of human nature, and their future will eventually accommodate real human nature in any case.

Until all the fields place culture on a biological basis we will be lost

For centuries humans have been rushing to claim that we are beyond the animals, even in effect denying that we are animals, and they have overlooked or ignored the biological origin of social behavior.

Especially since World War Two where one side pushed a selfish version of the biological origin of social behavior we have been dominated by resentment and revenge against the idea. The Gentleman Culture of Europe which could show benevolence and goodwill toward past enemies---influenced by the warrior ethos---has been nowhere to be seen among the cads of politically correctness and cultural Marxism who driven by resentment and revenge now rule our culture.

The subject is blocked mainly because it reveals the hidden motive of the biological will to power activating those who block the subject. Nietzsche was one of first to have the courage to suggest that psychology needs to be biologized, anticipating sociobiology and evolutionary psychology.

Until all the fields place culture on a biological basis, from religion and philosophy to science and art, we will be lost in the over-complication or oversimplification that leads to motley alienation and the decay of modern men and women.

The countermarch through the institutions

As Scott Richert of Chronicles aptly put it we need a "countermarch" through the institutions to offset the takeover of the arts, music, film, television, book publishing etc. to counter the cultural Marxism that has deformed (not formed) our culture. But the leftist vultures are not solely responsible for the cultural mess.

Libertarianism among conservative businessmen shares much of the blame because concentrating almost exclusively on making a god of individualism and the freedom to make money came back to bite them when the Hollywood moguls and leftist publishers and producers of New York, as well as the academic world, exploited American freedom and deformed a formerly conservative culture to fit their leftist cultural agendas; they found that they could make big money but also change culture in a culturally Marxist direction. They marched through the institutions and they won the cultural war. It was brilliant.

Now what? Burke and Kirk's "moral imagination" among artists now portrays only the political correctness of cultural Marxism. I guess that countermarch through the institutions has to begin with the first steps. So where are the marchers? Perhaps some of those otherwise conservative businessmen who were hoodwinked by making a god of individualism and money will finance the recovery (there's even money to be made in it). That could redeem them.

Why is modern culture so stupid?

One of the stupid and dangerous things modern culture does is foment against real human nature by incessantly demanding in the media and schools that since people are all equal they must live together in the same living space, which ends up causing more social problems than it helps. People, ethnic groups, races, are certainly not the same, they naturally compete against each other, often causing social disruption which can even lead to civil war.

So why is modern culture so stupid? It is mainly do to the brainwashing of cultural Marxism in the media and in all our schools, but it also has to do with the fact that some individuals gain advantage, at least in the short-term, by pushing the lies. For example, creating "no borders" is the product of global corporations and governments whose leaders become obscenely wealthy at the expense of the rest of the population. The charge of racism and bigotry is hurled at anyone who dares to disagree with the sham of politically correct cultural Marxism, which is even made a crime in many countries

Then there are the intellectuals who affirm such things as libertarianism, which makes a god of individualism, ignorant of, or ignoring, the natural altruism inherent in human nature which genetically favors the group above the individual, without rejecting individual competition within the group, for successful survival.

Modern culture has been swimming up-stream against the strong current of real human nature. Group-selection was the natural way for individuals to successfully survive, and so altruism, or being for others, was naturally limited mainly to kin and ethnic group because they shared the same genes that constantly strive for successful survival. Trying to rid human nature and culture of the deep-seated biological preference for kin and ethnic group is like trying to rid human beings of being human, and that is cruel.

We need to overcome the obstacles that prevent the natural flow of real human nature toward the natural decentralization which favors an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Well, I've survived half the holiday season

Well, I've survived half the holiday season and as usual I could not negotiate a rational discussion with leftist relatives. They believe only in the political correctness they have thoroughly absorbed from the corrupt media and the corrupted culture.

So I move closer to misanthropy, without wanting to go there. What other choice is there living in a world of the multiculturalism of all values, where godhood is defined as the equality of everything? I pull back, think, write, and try to develop thicker skin. But we are genetically kin and group-centered so it's not a comfortable fit.

I know I'm not alone in this dilemma and I feel sympathy for others facing the same thing. Does that means I can avoid misanthropy? I do know that fighting back against the destruction of Western people and adapting old tradition to new sociobiology sustains me.

Speaking the same language it is not enough to create harmony in the land

Everyone in the country speaking English is advocated by conservatives as a remedy for many of our social problems, but if "everyone" consists of distinctly different ethnic groups speaking the same language that is not enough to create harmony in the land.

Yes, speaking the same language is important, but that shouldn't be used as shell game hiding the importance of biological, genetic, and cultural differences between ethnic groups or races.

Ethnic differences are more disrupting to the nation than not speaking the same language. This is only common sense which cannot be spoken because it moves outside the boundaries of the preference for jamming distinctly different ethnic groups together into the same space and telling them that, since they are all equal, they must get along.

This deceptive culturally Marxist social game---also promoted by the international capitalists---will only work for a time before the whole mishmash naturally splits into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. How much better it would be if that could be done consciously, legally, and peacefully...Have we evolved enough to be that civilized?

Let merit rule and have the balls to affirm the social results

Men and women have undeniable different body structures, sexual systems, and biological responses and processes which for many thousand of years naturally separated the functions and roles of men and women---even modern technology which made the independence of women easier has not changed those biological differences.

The main problem with the neo-feminists is their call (really demand) for gender equality when the call should be for MERIT no matter what the gender. The feminist tend to disguise what amounts to a call for female supremacy perhaps so they won't be accused of bigotry against the male gender, which feminism often displays (someone called them feminazis do to their methods of censorship and propaganda). This behavior helps no one.

The same thing applies to Affirmative Action which chooses by race rather then merit. Let merit rule and have the balls to affirm the social results. That is how we make healthy creative societies.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against real human nature, with such experiments as feminism and Marxism, but cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature (eg. an ethnopluralism of ethnostates), and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.

How the body is ultimately wiser than the mind

There are those who say that the mind and thoughts rule and those who say the body rules. Important as the mind is, the mind is part of the body and so the biology and genetics of of body rule the mind.

All the cells of the body seek to successfully survive and reproduce and that primal motivation activates and influences the mind, even as the mind deals with surviving in the minute to minute environment it finds itself living in.

The body uses the mind as an aid in its survival, reproduction, evolution, and cultural creations. This doesn't diminish the mind it just doesn't overestimate the mind or underestimate the body.

And this doesn't "limit" the mind to the body when it is understood that the zenith of the success of the body is to materially evolve to Godhood. The body is therefore ultimately wiser than the mind.

But wisest of all is the combined force within the body activating the body (Tirips) to materially evolve to the ultimate success of Godhood, while working with natural selection and evolution in whatever outside environment the body is living in.

Denying reality in our schools and culture

As Boyd Cathey put it, we teach---really brainwash---"racial oppression by the white race of black and brown people, and sexual oppression by men of women. Thus, reading our history and literature to discover deeply embedded examples of “racism” and “white supremacy,” and of “male exploitation” and the “oppression of women,” has become the central characteristic of the college-classroom experience...Cultural Marxist ideologues inculcate the theories of “critical race theory” and the “feminization of history,” to students who have already, in most cases, endured years of poor education and early indoctrination in our public schools. They have been “softened up” for this process..." (Chronicles, Nov 2018.)

Then from a 2016 study there is the reality that along with this culturally Marxist indoctrination "Only 32 percent of white students scored at or above proficient in math, and just 7 percent of black students did. Forty-six percent of white test takers scored proficient in reading, and 17 percent of blacks did... 34 percent of whites who took the ACT were deemed college-ready in all four areas—English, mathematics, reading and science. For blacks, it was only 6 percent."

Here is the problem in interpreting those real statistics: human nature IS ethnocentric or racialist and has been since humans became humans. Group-selection was the only 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 survival. Trying to rid human nature and culture of the deep-seated preference for kin and ethnic group, which is attempted by both Marxists and many conservatives, is like trying to rid human beings of being human. That is inhumane and cruel.

The reality is that human nature is 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. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but culture is eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.

So what does that suggest?  It is more humane to admit that the cultural Marxist ideologues have it right when they say that people have been and remain ethnocentric and racialist, but they have it very wrong when they try to create cruel totalitarian systems to rid the world of real human nature, which never works. The reality points toward the political/cultural solution of the ethnopluralism hypothesis, often written about here. It is a conservative transformation---not revolution---that is coming, eventually, which will bring about an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. This is the sociopolitical or political/cultural structure most in harmony with real human nature, which developed many thousands of years ago. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could even be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism. It may require a few constitutional amendments to give more power to the states.

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.

Plot/determinism, character/free will, and the primary force of life

If we compare free will and genetic determinism to the way Aristotle thought of the subordination of character to plot in tragedies, the extreme free will/character folks tend to block the determinist/plot folks, and the determinist/plot folks tend to block the free will/character folks. We don't want to see plot destroy character or character destroy plot or we end up with a drama that doesn't congeal.

The challenge is to define which is primary and which is secondary when, as E. O. Wilson said, there is a co-evolution.

Since genetic determinism/plot is the final arbiter, which keeps human nature on a biological leash, I say determinism/plot is primary and free will/character is secondary. We cannot block either out no matter how intellectually clever we are.

Even so, I think Nietzsche chose a secondary force when he made the will to power the primary force of his later philosophy. Darwin was closer in making survival and reproduction his primary force.

I think the material activation within material life (Tirips) that seeks the zenith of success in survival and reproduction, which defines Godhood, is the deeper primary force activating those other forces that seek power and survival for the primary ultimate purpose of attaining Godhood, while working along with outside natural selection and evolution.

The pleasures of eating and sex are not end-goals but means to survival and reproductive success, and survival and reproductive success is not the end-goal but the means to the primary goal of evolving toward the zenith of those drives, which is Godhood.

This definition can exhume and transform religion as primary, while certainly including science. It gives a goal to Nietzsche's relativistic power drive, and creates values for value-free science.

A biologistic reading of culture

We can't legitimately say "I will," but we can say "the" will. In civilizing the beast it would have been more truthful to say that we can be better animals than to say that we are not animals, as much of religion and philosophy said for centuries. It takes strength to admit limitations.

We have free will but it is limited to choices within the determined path of life and evolution, like a loosened boulder rolling down a craggy mountain. The activation to live, survive, and reproduce can only be pseudo-denied with such things as ascetic discipline, because the will or activation (Tirips) is a vital part of being alive in every cell of the body, only death can really stop it---which explains part of the importance of reproduction.

Given the activation to live, survive, and reproduce which puts our will on a loose-fitting biological leash, we can legitimately try to harmonize with what we are, with the life force within us, and aid rather than hinder our material evolution toward the zenith of biological success, which is supermaterial Godhood.

That brings forward the biologistic reading of culture, which rises from the same biological source.

Power to the Populists and Ethnopluralists

It does seem true that various kinds of empires always rule, but they also always fall, and we appear to be seeing the potential fall of the current global empire, which Nicholas Farrell (Chronicles Nov 2018) defined as the global corporatist right (neoconservatives) united with the "humanitarian" globalist left (George Soros).

Leaders like President Donald Trump and Italy's Matteo Salvini are attempting to stand against the globalists on immigration, borders, free trade, and nationalism. It's a vitally important competition which will decide the fate of the United States and Europe. The globalist's firmly believe "nations are only an obstacle to profit" and have been trying to get rid of nations, borders, and ethnic groups.

Americans and Europeans have been rising against the European Union and the greedy centralized states controlled by the globalists. Populists in the U.S. and Europe seem finally willing to vote and protest against the globalist's who have been driving the Western world into the ground for personal profit and power, even colluding with China to ruin the West.

President Donald Trump has had the bold personalty (some call it narcissism) to stand up in the face of constant attacks by the Big Media and stabs in the back by his own party, although he now seems to be gradually sliding toward the neoconservatives who are like rats who won't be trapped. But I suppose we shouldn't count Trump out yet.

The next logical, instinctive, and natural stage is for populism to develop into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. That is developing too.  So, things look good, though hazardous.