Ethnostates as the default social force in world history

In his excellent journal "Chronicles" (Feb 2019) Chilton Williamson suggests that populism is more or less the default social force in world history, from the right or the left, which rises against dominant classes that have taken over and who disfavor the normal natural behavior of the classes below them. I think of the default social force as the return of real human nature rising again and projecting its traits on our social behavior and cultures.

What are the traits of human nature which always rise and influence the shape of our cultures? You hear it here often, human nature is basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as 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, and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.

We could think of human nature as the structure upon which cultures, governments, etc. rise as a superstructure. The superstructure then becomes so gross and oversized (think empires) that it falls apart. But the foundation structure grounded in real human nature remains intact because even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, takes hundreds of thousands of years to change (although now we have genetic engineering which may be more rapid),

I think a clear-eyed and courageous view of human nature and the biological origin of our social behavior suggests that the default social force, driven by real human nature, is a return to ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. In the U. S. that could work in sync with federalism and the Constitutional separation of powers and states. This return to ethnostates would best be done legally, constitutional, and not by radical or revolutionary means which almost never work and cause great biological and cultural disruptions and convulsions.

Intellectual intuition

Traditional religions and philosophies like to say that ants and bees cooperate by instinct but people must have revelation and reason. When people talk about instincts they are really talking about determined genes and the biological origin of our social behavior, which includes revelation and reason.

Anthropocentrism regards the world in terms of human values and experiences and usually considers instincts as mainly for inferior animals and far below revelation and reason.

Moving beyond using only the dialectical circuitous routes of many philosophies, "intellectual intuition" can bring us to the core of knowledge. The words and ideas of modern philosophers are like a game for indoor nerds.

We have ignored the deepest activation of material life where the instinctive sacredness exists, we have preferred words and ideas unconnected to the real material world. We have only circled around the path to where real Godhood is seen as the material evolution of life to ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood, which works along with and adapts to outside natural evolution. Now with the science of genetic selection, equitably guided, we can aid in the sacred path to Godhood---religion and science can end their prolonged feud.

Why not use all routes, revelation, reason, science, instinct, art, in seeking the truth? Specializing has left a lot to be desired.

The film "The Favourite" disses its betters

I'm more of a regionalist than a royalist, and if Western civilization wasn't falling apart there might be time for this excellent but obscene comedic attack against 18th-century English royalty and aristocracy, but Western civilization is falling apart.

The artists in the film "The Favourite" have that odd modern talent of creating excellent acting and directing even though the themes and philosophy of their movies are degenerate, decadent, immoral and destructive. Colman deserved her Academy Award. 
 

I suppose this comes from being brainwashed in culturally Marxist schools, private and public, along with the malevolent culturally Marxist Media, all of whom hate old white history, all royalty, all aristocracy, all Northern Europeans, and all real Western excellence.

Joe Alwyn, who played Baron Masham in the film, said that there was little concern for historical research of characters' backgrounds: "I think people turned up to the rehearsal period thinking maybe they should've read their history books and thought about their characters and their intentions and all of that stuff that you normally think about, but Yorgos made it quite clear early on that there wasn't going to be much consideration for historical accuracy to a degree. He wasn't too caught up with or concerned about that. He just wanted us to have fun as people and as a cast and to explore the relationships between us, which is what we did."

Nothing else needs to said about this film, which disses its betters.

We can face the truth about our stupid and suicidal immigration and asylum laws, can't we?!

Does it really still have to be said that people are not the same, different ethnic groups create different cultures due to different genes and different environments? The decadent West can't even admit this!

Liberal decadence has all but destroyed Western civilization mainly as the result of stupid and suicidal immigration and asylum laws. But it is a more deliberate wreckage on the part of some businessmen who seek cheap labor at any cost (this would include the slave owners in the old South), or non-Northern European ethnic groups who gain power by deliberately weakening the Northern Europeans who founded America and the West.

History has shown us that distinctly different ethnic groups don't melt they compete, so we are in for tough times in the West. Is it too late to radically and immediately revise the immigration and asylum laws in America and the West? The demographics, the specific segment of a population having shared characteristics, is probably too mixed now to to recover.

My position is that we need a conservative, legal, and nonviolent return to ethnostates, which could apply or adapt the U.S. Constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of regions and states. I believe real recovery will come when we all return to ethnostates, which can be protected by federalism. But who knows if this will prevail over illegal and violent methods.

Tough words and tough predictions, I know, but we can face the truth about our stupid and suicidal immigration and asylum laws, can't we?!

Regarding Senator Elizabeth Warren: ignorance of human nature and realism is no excuse for destroying the United States

Goofy Harvard intellectual Senator Elizabeth Warren and the loopy left are now pushing and end to the Electoral College, in addition to pushing other idiotic things like raising taxes and destroying incentives for the most successful and creative Americans. The Electoral College makes candidates pay attention to all the states and reinforces the role of the state in federalism by giving power to electors in each state for the purpose of electing the president and vice president of the United States.

We should be going in the opposite direction from ending the Electoral College and give more power to the states, even to the extent of becoming ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates so that we are more in harmony with real kin-centered and ethnic-centered human nature. Without these amendments the U.S. will continue its slide toward more social disruptions and ethnic civil war.

Ignorance of human nature and realism in no excuse for destroying the United States.

Why conservative things will return, one way or another

In arguing against all the things that are tearing America and the West apart, conservative's rarely mention the deep biological origin of our social behavior, perhaps because they think it intrudes on the works of God as the maker of all things. And liberal's blindly consider such a statement evil and racist. But the biological origin of our social behavior is nevertheless true, even if it is virtually banned in some countries to say so.

When traditional conservative's argue against such things as the excessive love of money, fame, pleasure, the acceptance of homosexuality, abortion, one night stands, and the general party-on hedonism, they overlook the best sociobiological argument against these things: human nature is biologically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Conservatism affirms most of these things, and modern liberalism does not.

People and cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against biological human nature with such experiments as the excessive love of money, fame, pleasure, the acceptance of homosexuality, abortion, one night stands, a general party-on hedonism, cultural Marxism, etc. etc., but our social behavior and our cultures are 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 such conservative things as being gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection will return.  We can help them along or hinder them, but these things will return, one way or another, and by any rational or instinctive measurement that is good for life and its continuance.

If you go by the numbers, Affirmative Action programs have hurt far more worthy students than the rich cheaters

What's more unfair, wealthy parents paying and cheating to get their children into good colleges, or tax-payers and wealthy donors paying for Affirmative Action programs that place minority ethnic groups with lower SAT scores in good colleges?

Today Fox News (more neoconservative than conservative) brought on a black youth from a poor family who tried hard and has been accepted in good schools as a contrast to the rich cheaters. Good for him, but I'll bet he had help from Affirmative Action programs that choose by quotas rather than merit or SAT scores, which has hurt far more worthy students than the rich cheaters.

The same sort of unfairness takes place in putting far more money into programs for slow learners than in programs for gifted students. It is the gifted who have the best chance of improving the world, as well as improving the lives of minorities. 

Is there some sort of epidemic of masochism or cuckoldry taking place in the West? Or is it more likely the will to power of people who gain power by destroying the merit system in the West?

Regarding the New Zealand mosque mass shootings yesterday: why does history repeat itself?

Several thinkers have said that history repeats itself, although always with variations. Why?

While we certainly condemn the violence of the New Zealand mosque mass shootings yesterday, we should also place the blame for such violence on the heads of the liberals and neoconservatives who have not only promoted and encouraged multicultural/multi-ethnic societies but slandered anyone who predicated these terrible outcomes for multicultural multi-ethnic societies.

History repeats itself because human nature and the natural world have remained essentially the same since humans became humans, although with variations. Human's adapted to different environments by evolving distinctly different ethnic groups and races but human nature remained basically the same for all, that is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against real human nature with such experiments as globalist 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, and humans then work within and adapt to the natural environments they find themselves living in.

That is why history repeats itself, and that is also why the reality of human nature and of past history point toward the political/cultural solution of ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups. Ethnopluralism is a conservative transformation---not revolution--which is the sociopolitical or political/cultural structure most in harmony with real human nature and the natural world.

It has been mostly ignorance that has kept us from seeing why history repeats itself, not Satan. Is ignorance an excuse? The legal principle ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat, "ignorance of the law excuses not" and "ignorance of law excuses no one." But it has been human nature itself with its genetic tendency toward being ethnocentric, territorial, and xenophobic that has kept us from seeing that the best long term political/cultural solution for all is to allow the formation of ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups.

Will globalist neocons, neoliberals, and their lobbies, continue to decide our politics?

Globalism has been deciding politics for some time now, the "global supply chain" is protected at all costs. That is unhinged hypertrophied capitalism, but it doesn't mean socialism is the alternative, economic nationalism is the alternative, one that nevertheless trades with the world.

That was President Trump's tone or emphasis which appealed to the Trump supporters who elected him. Will he hold to it? Even if he is ultimately out to make more money for Trump Incorporated, if the money comes from economic nationalism I think that would be OK with his followers---although it is better to have politician's not ruled by money or special interest groups, odd as that sounds in today's world.

Will Trump be defeated by the globalist neocons and neoliberals who are totally backed by (or own) the Big Media, Hollywood, and the big academic faculties? Many globalist's care only about money and are politically libertarian individualists, but some globalist's are politically group-oriented and support ethnocentric causes. Will they continue to define and decide politics?

Populist nationalism and economic nationalism are rising all over the world and the globalist's are having problems containing it. Globalism does seem to be heading for a high and tight hair cut. Will they turn to fascism on the left or the right to contain it? That wouldn't surprise us.

The TV stars and coaches charged in college bribery scheme must not have realized that the political correctness of cultural Marxism has already trashed our colleges

That trashing of our colleges by cultural Marxists has been especially true of the Ivy League schools, so getting into these trashed schools has little or nothing to do with becoming educated.

The classic position on education was to make minds and character first and then careers could follow. That has been anarchically thrown out the school windows, now we educate for "career readiness."

I suppose graduating from an Ivy League school still impresses some employers, or excites people who care only about the illusion of status. And science departments seem less brainwashed by political correctness than the totally trashed humanities.

"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold" wrote Yeats way back in 1919, and that describes our educational system. Who or what trashed our schools? Mainly it was trashing the merit system. Our educational policies are now shaped by choosing people not based on their merits but rather by their race, or their political views, or connections to the colleges.

The Lefties established the abomination of affirmative action in college admissions and in job applications which created reverse discrimination against white males and Asians. As Richard Sanders has said, artificially elevating minority students into schools or jobs they otherwise would not be merited for, discourages them and tends to engender failure and high dropout rates for these students. Making up for past real discrimination isn't done with more discrimination, resentment, and revenge.

It might be good if the whole educational system was trashed along with fools and liars who administrate it. Then we could return to schools based on real merit...Maybe that will happen later when we separate into more equitable ethnostates.

What isn't said is that the truths, the character, tone and guiding beliefs, the ethos of the revealed religions, have their source in asceticism

When we hear that all lies have their source in Satan, the father of lies, and all truth is Christian truth, we need to understand that we are seeing the world from the point of view of ascetics. What isn't said is that the truths, the character, tone and guiding beliefs, the ethos of the revealed religions have their source in asceticism. That is, in a lifestyle of abstinence from sensual pleasures, including celibacy, while pursuing spiritual goals, withdrawing from the world, and general renunciation. Christ lived that way, so did Buddha, and thousands of ascetics before them, which is where the values and morals they preached came from. 
 
That was not a practical source of values and morals for the much larger population of non-ascetics, so in the West at least ascetic values were reinterpreted for the people, and the central ascetic goals of the religion were toned down, or not featured. 
 
The Hindus, perhaps the oldest religion on earth derived from the Vedas, found a wise way to handle this dilemma by saying that man has to go through four stages of life. The first, as described by Vandana Singhal, is the "Brahmachari (or a bachelor or you can say a student life). The second is Grihasta meaning a householder. The third is the Vanaprasta or the one who dwells in the forest in a semi-retired state. The fourth is the Sannyasi known as the renounced or a person who has left the material world...The four stages of life represent training, creation, service and retirement...These four stages of life known as Ashramas, gain your fulfillment."

Yet how much clearer are the truths of theological materialism, which is more or less placed in the worldview of “philosophical naturalism,” with the difference being that philosophical naturalism is generally irreligious, and theological materialism is religious in seeing Godhood as the goal of material evolution, first mirrored in the Father-Within of the ascetic traditional religions, now transformed but not rejected by new truths from science and philosophy, and not lies coming from Satan who was just a symbol to aid ascetics.

Burke and Kirk didn't emphasize enough the political significance of kin and ethnic group

Businessmen aren't constructed to be statesman, his/her interest is in making money, they don't spend much time with philosophy or learning statecraft. The reason we have a businessman as President now is because we have had such lousy politicians.

For example, both liberals and conservative's agree that having multicultural multi-ethnic societies is a good thing and both shout racism and bigotry if you disagree with them or point out that human nature has been affirmed throughout human history to this day as being mainly kin-centered and ethnocentric, as well as being gender defined, heterosexual, territorial, and even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Are our politicians stupid, cowardly, or both? Or are they just venal, on the take, and amoral? Some of each I would say, with very few exceptions; the courageous politicians have been labeled racist, bigoted, etc, and destroyed by venal politicians, the amoral Big Media, Hollywood, and our academic faculties.

So what can we do about it? We can become the little platoons that Burke talked about, proceeding towards a love of our country, but more directly toward a love of kin and ethnic group. Burke and Kirk didn't emphasize enough the political significance of kin and ethnic group. The affirmation of real human nature instinctively and reasonable leads not to multicultural multi-ethnic societies but toward ethnostates, and ideally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. That is what defines or should define the values of real liberalism, real conservatism, and real politicians.

Can we save ourselves from the destructive fate that the Big Media, Hollywood, the big academic faculties, and the effete, gender-less, lefty vegetarians have in store for us?

The typical trendy list contains racism, sexism, ageism, ableism, trans- and homophobia, Islamophobia, antisemitism, xenophobia, etc---but who then remains? A tribe of effete, genderless, lefty vegetarians? Ah but they were strongly supported by the Big Media, Hollywood, and the big academic faculties which had enough power to virtually destroy Western culture and Western people.

So is it over for Western people, did the Big Media, Hollywood, the big academic faculties, and the tribe of effete, genderless, lefty vegetarians win? It looks that way. But these people also totally support minority groups who will at least advance. We could try to build our own conservative version of the Big Media, Hollywood, and academic faculties alongside their Church of Cultural Marxism with a conservative counterrevolution, but the foundation we build upon may need more than that.

I believe the Big Media, Hollywood, the big academic faculties, and globalist elites have all but destroyed the chance of such a recovery because they have created multicultural multi-ethnic cities and states that will not bond together, they are too dissimilar to bond together, as human nature has always prescribed.

We may be able to retain the U. S. Constitutional separation of powers and states if we gradually and legally, not radically, transform the powers, regions, and states into an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by federalism. Given human nature things could go that way anyway, and not peacefully. We might this way retain what is best of the past and save Western culture and Western people from the destructive fate that the Big Media, Hollywood, the big academic faculties, and the effete, genderless, lefty vegetarians have in store for us. And it has the big virtue of also saving non-western people and cultures who could at last live in their own ethnostates and make of them what they will.

If we split the difference between nature and nurture we could come up with a reasonable political philosophy

Although there is a gene-culture co-evolution or "dual inheritance" that takes place between nature and nurture, if we split the difference between nature and nurture, which some think is 70% nature and 30% nurture, we could come up with a reasonable political philosophy.

Modern liberalism is about 100 percent on the 30% side of nurture and conservatives are on are that 70% nature side, although both sides approve of individualism. Liberalism wants the government to insure a collective individual freedom, which tends to move toward socialism/communism and ends up taking away individual freedom, while conservatism want unchecked individual freedom, especially for capitalism (libertarianism), which tends to create societies ruled or controlled by people of great wealth or income that end up taking away individual freedom.

If we look a little deeper at what that 70% nature side is telling us about human nature, the science of sociobiology and common sense show us that human nature has been affirmed throughout human history to this day as being basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Sociobiologist E.O. Wilson has found that in successful survival and reproduction, "within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals." And “hereditary altruists form groups so cooperative and well-organized as to out-compete non-altruists groups.” (“The Social Conquest of the Earth.”)  Wilson doesn't emphasize enough that altruism was developed to enhance the survival success of kin and ethnic group, but being-for-others almost disappears beyond the related genetic pool.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this basic human nature, with such experiments as 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, and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.

This suggests to reason and instinct that ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates are the best political configuration for humans beings to live within. 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 to move toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, but that is far preferable to radical and marauding Marxism or Fascism, or the political dissimulations of today based on flawed definitions of human nature that 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.

When there is no love, compulsion is employed

As Russell Kirk said, when there is no love, compulsion is employed. Taking that further to the social experiments of multiculturalism and multi-ethnic states, we see that they do not harmonize with kin and ethnic-centered human nature---the true origin of altruism---and so compulsion is needed. But even compulsion doesn't make them work, as we now see in America and across the world.

Why is this so hard for even conservatives to accept? It's the brainwashing and propaganda from the Big Media and the academic world, and also, alas, from the universalism of even religion telling us that we are all the same. And of course political correctness punishes us acutely for disagreeing with their lies. 

But ironically, or diabolically, this myth of telling us that we are all the same, all equal, and that we must therefore live in the same multicultural and multi-ethnic space, is often promoted by individuals and ethnic groups who selfishly benefit and advance from promoting those lies in the Media they control.

So for now our little media must battle the Big Media. Truth usually prevails, but not always swiftly, and heroes and martyrs are usually needed.

I wonder if we will ever have the leisure, the money, and the time to breed and develop better quality fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, and leadership than the English aristocrats

I obviously believe in change in the evolutionary philosophy of theological materialism, but I don't think changes should be made unless the change is actually better than the past.   

 

I think the Anglophile's are basically right in revering the age of aristocracy in England regarding clothing, fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, and leadership in general; it was one of the greatest aristocracies in history, even if it was eventually prone to etiolation and effeteness.   

 

In my view, changes in fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, etc. would only be improvements around the edges of the age of aristocracy in England. The English aristocrats had the leisure, the money, and the time (1688-1830) to develop the very best quality in fashion, homes, and luxurious lifestyle. The fashions and homes of today are greatly inferior to the age of aristocracy in England by any sane assessment, give or take a few damp manor houses, stiff collars, and bustles. 

 

Breeding between aristocrats of the British Empire was present for a long time not only relating to homes, fashions, etc, but in the greatly successful leadership of the state, armed forces, government, clergy, the big landowners, etc. Even so, in the long run I believe more in the separation of powers and states as seen in the original U. S. Constitution, even to the extent of developing ethnostates for distinctively different ethnic groups. I also believe in meritocracies which prevent the etiolation and effeteness that aristocracies are prone to. And I believe in the constant genetic improvement of human beings all the way to Godhood.

 

Even so, I wonder if we will ever have the leisure, the money, and the time to breed and develop better quality fashions, homes, luxurious lifestyle, and leadership than the English aristocrats of 1688-1830.

Evolution and conservatism

Continuing evolution takes place best in conservative environments where the best of the past can be retained even as we continue evolving higher talent and beauty; those who shout radical revolution, or worse, whenever human evolution is spoken of are wrong. Genetic engineering will speed up the process of human evolution but conserving the best of the past will remain a principle part of our evolution.

Altruism or being for others was evolved from races competing with outside groups, which required altruism within groups to be successful against other groups who may have been less altruistic within their group. So altruistic genes survived, and group selection remains today the central unit of selection, as E.O.Wilson has recently affirmed.

In a better world attuned to real human nature, which remains kin and ethnic centered, ethnic groups will have their own ethnostates, and that would define deep conservatism. As the scientist Raymond Cattell suggested, ethnic groups should be allowed their own evolutionary development, permitting scientific conclusions regarding traits favoring group survival and evolution.

Fox TV conservative's proclaim a conservatism of ideas not race and excoriate modern liberals for featuring race and gender, but Fox conservative's fail to understand that the problem is that liberals proclaim and champion only minority races and make whites the enemy. If the liberals proclaimed the right of every race and ethnic group to be who they are, even within their own ethnostates, then they would be more deeply conservative than the Fox TV conservatives---all liberals would have to do is include whites when they feature race, and of course stop being cultural Marxists.

That which must not be named: "whites"

We are barely allowed to say that the left is out to "destroy our past," we are not allowed to say the deeper truth that the left is out to destroy whites, because the left has told us by way of the Big Media, Big Tech, and our culturally Marxist universities that the "white male Euro-Christian construction" must disappear. But what really is happening is minority ethnic groups have overtaken the minds of leftist whites, radical feminists, gender-benders, etc., who are oblivious to the biological origin of our social behavior, and minority ethnic groups have made cuckolds out of all of them.

Then there are the more despicable conscious politicians like Schumer and Pelosi who are counting on the coming minority status of whites and the new majority status of minorities to keep them in power, and for that reason only, and not for moral reasons, they are sucking up to minorities, calling for open borders, unrestricted immigration, etc.

In reaction to the anarchy of the suicidal left and the will to power of ethnic minorities we now have two Americas hating each other. Euro-American's have no choice but to fight back for the survival of Western civilization and the survival of that which must not be named: whites. Trump became President because he tapped into this group.

But I believe we must eventually have a lawful, gradual, conservative transformation of the Constitutional separation of powers and states into ethnostates, in harmony with kin and ethnic centered human nature---not fascism, not empire building, just congenial ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, a real home that every ethnic group or at least every gene-pool and the distinctive culture they create need to best survive and flourish.

Universal conservatism

Conservatives are right to say that conservatism is not really universal or infallible, like the communist manifesto, and that the U.S. Constitution is not exportable, and yet they will sometimes admit, as Russell Kirk did, that there is a "universal conservatism" which is the "impulse" or "yearning" among all people to conserve their culture, history and race. But at the root of universal conservatism, or deep-conservatism as I call it, is the activation to conserve the gene pool of kin, ethnic group, and race and the cultures they develop. Even "order," which is so important to Burke and Kirk, is put in place because orderly societies are more successful in survival and reproduction than disorderly societies.

Human nature evolved to prefer kin, ethnic group, and race because those traits were more successful in survival and reproduction for individuals and groups. Even altruism, being for others, was created as the preference for kin and ethnic group and weakens as we move out toward universalism, which is the main reason why communism and globalism don't work well and tend to use force to impose unnatural altruism.

Universal conservatism or deep-conservatism instinctively and reasonably calls for ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. That is where the impulses and yearnings of human nature are most naturally directed---it could even be accomplished in an orderly and conservative way. In the U.S. with the growing variety of ethnic groups, each with different genetic pools and different agendas, we could with our Constitutional separation of powers and states legally and gradually develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by federalism. That would affirm a true universal conservatism or deep-conservatism in harmony with what we actually are.

Big Media, Big Tech, and our culturally Marxist universities have become the enemy

The Big Media, Big Tech, and our culturally Marxist universities have been successfully establishing a moral and social order that is not only opposed to our history and tradition but making big profits from pornography while also heavily promoting leftist propaganda...Repeat that please so I don't have to type it again.

They have those who oppose them locked in strait-jackets of political correctness declaring them unhinged bigots and racists, and socially destroying anyone who opposes their lies.

Then if you take it as far as I and few others do and insist on the biological origin of our social behavior, which instinctively and rationally calls for ethnostates or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, you are defined as a dangerous version of crazy Don Quixote. But the reality is that rather than tilting at windmills and thinking them dragons you are tilting at real dragons which the Big Media, Big Tech, and our culturally Marxist universities insist are windmills, and punish anyone who says otherwise...These people have become the real enemy.

Then if you go even further and develop changes in traditional religion, as I do with the philosophy of theological materialism, and admit the reality of the biological origin of even our religious behavior, which points toward evolving to ascending levels of real Godhood in the material world, you lose even the paleoconservatives.

I suppose I believe that truth eventually prevails, but it's not a very secure belief...No one wise ever believed such an undertaking could be easy. I'm just whining to my friends....Wait, what friends?

Isn't it almost time to create mask-free political parties?

Beneath the liberal and even conservative masks lies real human nature. The masks don't blend well today with the primary kin and ethnic centered emphasis of real human nature and the biological origin of social behavior.

The masks partly come off with civil disruptions fueled by ethnic competition and resentment, but usually we again see words like "equality" and "universalism" used to mask the special interests of ethnic groups.

Hiding real biological motives has been standard operating procedure for human beings, is it still necessary? Why can't we admit what we are and then try to set up sociopolitical or more precisely sociobiological social structures in harmony with what we really are?

As heard here often, human nature has been affirmed throughout human history to this day as being basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

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

What would humans do without their masks? Create new masks I suppose. But isn't it almost time to create a mask-free Ethnopluralist Party, or Ethnostates Party, or Global Ethnostates Party, protected by some form of federalism, in line with real human nature? If we wait too long our political masks will have brought us not much left on earth to live on.

Both the right and left have confused and disordered the subject of imperial colonization

Africa is the most recent audacious example of this, where the capitalist's colonized Africa and then later the left called for decolonization, which led to bloody African dictators and a big fall in the standard of living for all except the dictators. Now China, the new imperialists as national socialists, have blocked their people from any objection to getting at the large resources of Africa.

Let Africa be Africa! But then do not accept immigrants fleeing to Europe and America as the consequence of Africa being African. Let Africa work out its own problems!

The same common sense goes for letting ethnic groups be ethnic groups in their own ethnostates across the world; don't try to colonize them with imperial arrogance and greed, but then, do not accept fleeing immigrants who naturally will not assimilate into different cultures.

In any case, reality points toward the long term political/cultural solution of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in America, Europe, China, even in Africa which has always tended to go that way anyway---with some sort of federalism mainly devoted to protecting the independence of ethnostates. That is the political/cultural structure most in harmony with real human nature which developed many thousands of years ago and remains kin-centered, gender defined, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. All else is mainly political propaganda.

How can we live in a culture of crap?

Many people turned to the libertarian religion of greed putting on blinders to the decadent culture surrounding them. You could put your kids in private schools and you could buy season tickets to orchestra halls, but the same cultural Marxism of political correctness was taught in the private schools, and the orchestras increasingly featured atonal crap. When you finally get home from work late, pour a scotch, and turn on your smart TV to relax, all you can find is people jumping in bed together for one night stands, wives and children as well as sports devoted to the humiliation of white men, and foul language everywhere.

Dropping out of culture "for the sake of sheltering one’s faith and family from corrosive modernity and cultivating a more traditional way of life," as Rod Dreher put it in defining the Benedict Option, is really a horrible choice to have to make, it seems like laying down in the fetal position and accepting that all is lost. But if you have tried to fight the Big Media, Big Government, Big Business, Big Academia, or Big Tech, all does seem lost, they all have adapted their impressive wares to the same cultural decay and degeneration. And for psychologically healthy people the ascetic model of rejecting the material world, which in the case of the monks meant being celibate, looks like accepting death as the solution.

I for one fight the decay and degeneration with philosophy in general, even though I reach only hundreds rather than the millions reached by the vile Big Media who I believe are the biggest enemies of cultural health that we have. And some of my readers only watch me walk the tight-rope wondering when I will fall off.

But you do what you can do, and I much appreciate those who follow my work. I say hang in there, real human nature will not accept forever a culture of crap.

Kirk protests just a bit too much that conservatism is not an ideology

The late Russell Kirk is my favorite conservative writer, along with Pat Buchanan, but I think Kirk protests just a bit too much that conservatism is not an ideology.

Where conservatism might not be visionary and unrealistic or idealistic it is a system of ideas and ideals and contains economic or political theory and policy as much as any other ideology.

The defense that conservatism approves of a range of systems as long as there are conservators of that system does not make conservatism not an ideology, it just makes conservatism a wiser ideology.

I also think that while Kirk, like Burke, emphasizes "prudent change" he does not emphasize evolutionary change, and he does not include even prudent change regarding a transcendent-spiritual order, or the fall of man and the imperfect or sinful nature of man, when that is where change most needs to happen in ongoing conservatism.

Politics is both the art of the possible and the ideal, but Kirk wants to affirm only what he 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.

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, but we need to go there.

As I wrote a few days ago, the idyllic imagination which Kirk is 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 of "deep conservatism," which is more prudent than reckless.

Why artificial multi-cultural multi-ethnic societies won't last forever

I would say that the human nature is universal and then culture and geography create variations and genetic adaptations in the way universal human nature is expressed.

Culture and geography feed back and change some of the genetic traits of human nature to better enhance the the penultimate purpose of it all, which is survival and reproductive success (in the ongoing ultimate goal of material life evolving all the way to supermaterial Godhood.)

Culture can also be instinctive, like language, and not merely a creation prompted by the outside environment. Religion too is inborn and part of basic human nature, we instinctively seek social bonding in religious answers to chaos, or now with political ideologies---it helps us survive better.

So different ethnic groups develop genetic variations from adapting to living in different geographies and climates and therefore develop variations on the cultures they create. These ethnic differences don't change much when living in modern, artificial, multi-cultural multi-ethnic societies, no-matter how much propaganda is thrown at us about how we are all the same.

Competition and civil disruptions then naturally develop in multi-cultural multi-ethnic societies largely do to those old ethnic genetic variations in the way universal human nature is expressed. That is why ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates appear to be the most natural and harmonious sociopolitical form for human beings to live within.

The main problem in establishing a natural ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the few elite who gain financial and political global power by promoting border-less multi-cultural multi-ethnic societies, no-matter how much social disharmony they bring to the many.

But these artificial multi-cultural multi-ethnic societies won't last forever because, as E. O, Wilson said, "The genes hold culture on a leash. The leash is very long, but inevitably cultural values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool."

Aggressive empires, marauding globalism, and megalomaniacal states caused the devastation of our World Wars, they were not caused by nationalism, patriotism, populism, ethnostates, or ethnocentrism

"Politics ought to be adjusted not to human reason but to human nature, of which reason is but a part..." Edmund Burke

The present global elite, the media, and the academics call for the subordination of nations and ethnic groups to globalism---think of that asinine globalist speech by Macron on Armistice Day---although they are usually more indirect and weaseling about promoting globalism. Nationalism, patriotism, populism, ethnostates, and ethnocentrism are exactly what the globalists don't want, even though these things are a deep and genetically-derived part of real human nature; it is real human nature that created patriotism, populism, and ethnocentrism as the best means for a people to survive and reproduce successfully.

Aggressive empires, marauding globalism, and megalomaniacal states caused the devastation of our World Wars, they were not caused by nationalism, patriotism, populism, ethnostates, or ethnocentrism. Civil disruptions are mainly caused by trying to melt distinctly different people into one motley living space, they are not caused by the ethnocentric traits of real human nature, which tend to prefer ethnostates.

All this global chaos is promoted and instituted by a very few global elite, the media, and academics for their own selfish ends...They have to be courageously curbed if we are all ever to live in relative peace.

What mischief has been done by theologians and philosophers who preferred to worship abstract ideas more than life

It was a metaphysical and philosophical error to make a God of logos or reason. That error caused the worship of words, equations and ideas which are only definitions of Gods. "Truth" was labeled in the same abstract way; a living thing is more important than its definition.

That version of old nominalism had it right in specifically denying the real existence of abstract objects that do not exist in space and time. What mischief has been done by theologians and philosophers who preferred to worship abstract ideas more than life.

We can have Gods and religion but it is overdo time to see Godhood as living objects we can evolve in the material and supermaterial to become, not spiritually, and not only abstractly cogitated. We can appreciate superior reasoning and brilliant ideas known and unknown, but logos, reason, or the natural order are not God or Godhood, the natural order evolves Gods.

Can we resolve the combative mix of left and right?

Charles Kesler described the "cold civil war" between the left and the right (Imprimis, Oct, 2018). Can this combative mix be resolved and prevent a hot civil war? It can if the better parts of human nature prevail---but that's a big "if."

I can agree with parts of both the right and the left. The idea on the left of a "living Constitution" rightly leans toward the evolutionary side of human nature, toward evolutionary rights---but not revolutionary rights which some on the left and the right encourage. And the left today, in contrast to the apotheosis of the individual rights by conservatives, tracks the rights of various groups or ethnic groups which is in harmony with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection in human nature, followed by individual selection. But the left then goes on to champion the rights of almost every kind of perversion which is not in harmony with real human nature---many in the left don't even think there is a human nature believing human nature springs only from ones environmental upbringing. Human nature remains genetically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other mostly conservative things.

The right affirms a reinvigoration of federalism which is in harmony with the growing variety of ethnic groups in America with different genetic pools and different agendas who could, with federalism and the Constitutional separation of powers and states, develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in harmony with real human nature ---but not secession which could endanger the federal national protection needed for the states in a world that continues to have marauding imperialism.

All of these vital changes need to be done legally, constitutional, and not by revolutionary means which almost never work and cause great biological and cultural convulsions in life...The Right/Left Coalition?

Why the Big Everythings need to be broken down

The often quoted statement that "power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely" by 19th century British politician Lord Acton is an abstract statement, but beneath that abstraction is the fact that it is individual people and individual groups, often ethnic groups, who do the corrupting. Human nature remains as it has been since humans became human: kin-centered, hierarchical, ethnocentric and territorial, among other conservative traits, because that was the most successful means to survival and reproductive success.

Reality suggests that fragmentation, geographical segmentation, and differentiation are not the bad things that Big Government, Big Business, Big Media, and Big Tech tell us they are as they seek global domination. We don't want to go back to a world without automobiles, the internet, or smart phones, but these big enterprises and the people who run them have corrupted our world and need to be broken down.

Localism is not a "yoke" that "restricts" our movement and we are not "confined" by geographical or ethnic segmentation, as the Big Everythings tell us we are; our best biological and cultural survival have always taken place locally and regionally, and best in ethnostates, until the people who push Big Government, Big Business, Big Media, and Big Tech corrupt that natural localism. History has repeated this corruption by Bigness with various kinds of empires time and again.

So corrupt Big Government, Big Business, Big Media, and Big Tech need to be broken down, and will be, one way or another; but it better not be by another version of Bigness, such as big government fascism from the left or the right, but by a constitutional separation of powers and states, eventually ethnostates, protected by some version of federalism. 

This needs to be done or we may lose the whole earth.

A Deeper Realism (from 2014)

 

Raymond Cattell's best argument against war, at least for evolutionary ends, is that it is the quality rather than the size of the group that should be the basis for natural selection, whereas in war, size has counted. In another sense of this idea, special forces now prove this point about quality over quantity in the fourth generation warfare we will now be engaged in.

 

This for me underlines the realist position on war and the strategic position of the U.S., which was reiterated by Barry Posen: the U.S. is enormously powerful, geography favors the U.S. due to ocean barriers and relativity weak neighbors, and we will best procure our security with a slow transition back to Realism, and away from the liberal and neoconservative idea of hegemony in the world, trying to maintain unipolar world dominance, which does not take into account identity politics, ethnic, national, and religious, which are most powerfully against a unipolar world.

 

The neoconservatives have taken the Hellenized position of a universal elite who think ideas can transcend tribes, cultures and epics, but this never worked well with America. Like Rome, we were, or used to be, too pragmatic for the idealism of Greek philosophy, we wanted to build roads more than philosophy.

 

Nevertheless, we need to build more than roads, philosophy needs to get back to philosophical naturalism. I believe Western religion also needs to affirm theological materialism. We are realistically evolving to Godhood in the material and supermaterial world, and we need long term realistic strategies to do so, in which war is to be avoided---as mentioned above, it destroys quality and favors quantity. And we need to take into account identity politics, ethnic, national, religious, which are most powerfully against a unipolar world. Ethnic or racial imperialism will eventually give way to ethnopluralism, with regions and states set aside for ethnic cultures and protected by some sort of federalism. Then we can all best get along. That is a deeper realism.

 

All the fields are, or should be, transmutable or exchangeable

Both science and religion contain elements of the truth, as someone said, "truth is truth is truth" and truth can come in different fields. 
 
But the deepest truths seem to be interchangeable or synthesizable with other fields. The idea that religion and science have different kinds of truth always seems to evade completeness or rationalize unfinished or lazy ideas.

Religion, philosophy, politics, art, etc., should agree on the deepest truths; if they don't, then we probably don't have the truth. All the fields are, or should be, transmutable or exchangeable, it's even a way to check the truth of truths.

This is what is pursued in the philosophy of theological materialism.

The epic transformation in seeing Godhood related to natural not supernatural spiritual forces

Many people in the "civilized" world have virtually no religion or mythology that interests them and so they often feel lost in the modern world. But order and direction can be brought back to the people and the culture by reattaching religion, philosophy, poetry, and science to the biological origin of our social behavior---which perhaps most importantly includes religion---that is, by affirming the evolution of material life to supermaterial, not spiritual, Godhood. We can then have an historical religious synthesis worthy of the past, present, and future.

Godhood is related to natural, not supernatural or spiritual forces. The spiritual was deeply inserted in religion---but not maliciously. As science and reason advanced, the religious insistence on the supernatural and spiritual led to the rejection of God, religion, and even morality. So it was religion itself and not merely science and reason which was responsible for the rejection of God, religion, and morality.

We can return to Godhood, religion, and morality, after the devastation caused by its loss, with the epic transformation in seeing Godhood related to natural not supernatural spiritual forces. We evolve unendingly in the material world to higher levels of supermaterial Godhood. That is a change in metaphysics as prodigious as the discovery of reason and science by the Greeks, only without causing the the slow death of Godhood, religion, and morality.

Understanding natural law to be in harmony with it

Natural law creates order between man and nature, but this means we must know or understand natural law to be in harmony with it. Traditional religion needs deeper knowledge of the natural world, which has evolved since the time of the religious founders, and Aquinas. To be specific, we need knowledge of natural evolution and its religious implications.

Theological materialism recognizes the supreme principle of evolution in nature and the cosmos. Material/supermaterial evolution takes us to the Godhood first spoken about or symbolically experienced in the inward paths of traditional religion. Vital knowledge of the natural evolution of life to Godhood in the Outward Path is missing in traditional religions. The material/supermaterial evolution to continuing levels of Godhood transforms but does not reject the traditional involutionary Inward Path to the material soul-within of traditional religion.

Communities, ethnostates, and nations of men need to be in harmony with the natural law of the supreme principle of evolution. The key to man's downfall was moving away from the natural evolution of life toward Godhood. We can now aid our evolution toward Godhood with both religion and science.

President Trump's battle against the media is only the beginning skirmish of what should at least be a war of legality

The entertainment industry and the big media is now the biggest enemy of America and the West. They must be evil geniuses if they knew when they were gathering media power, by any means necessary, the degree of power they would eventually have over American culture. They have used their media power to destroy traditional American culture, gradually at first, until now the only thing left for them to do is to produce xx-rated sex and violence as the main slime of popular prime time programming. And we have seen the power of the news media to make and break politicians, foment wars, and brainwash the people in cultural Marxism.

Oliver Wendell Holmes Supreme Court opinion written in 1919 regarding free speech or actions said that, "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent."

The destruction of traditional American culture by the entertainment industry and the big media has certainly been a clear and present danger that continues to bring about many substantive evils. But there is no viable movement to curb or dismantle the entertainment industry and the big media, indeed, the number of destructive media outlets and media devices is expanding. President Trump's battle against the media is only the beginning skirmish of what should at least be a war of legality.

On President Trump's SOTU speech

Watching President Trump's worthy SOTU speech we saw the usual mannerism and gestures of self-importance, overbearing pride, even blowhardism, jutting his jaw out almost as defensively as Mussolini did in his speeches. That visual display of self-importance and overbearing pride causes problems for Trump, especially among Democrats, because liberals and Democrats are shallow and immature and can't see past the outward mannerism and gestures of people and political systems.

That is why the Democrats and liberals fall so hard for shallow and immature "political correctness," which is cultural Marxism, they see only the surface trappings of human behavior, and they don't see that it is more important what one does than how we look or what we say when doing it.

With Trump in office the stock market is at an all-time high, unemployment (for all ethnic groups) is at a 16 year low, he renegotiated NAFTA and withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership keeping jobs here, he brought conservative judges to our court system, he has fought against the corrupt media, and he is bringing our military home from across the world, to name only a few of his accomplishments in a very short time.

He does make bad moves, such as continuing to support the greatest influence dealers in Washington, the Wall Street lobby, the fossil fuel lobby, and especially the Israeli and Saudi lobbies who pay off and threaten corrupt government officials and representatives to get them to take actions that are completely against the interests of our nation. And of course Trump has no understanding of the importance of affirming and adjusting to natural ethnocentrism in human survival, reproduction, and cultural creations.

Yet unlike the shallow Democrats and liberals who fall for demagogues, conservative's know that there is never a perfect man, perfect leader, or perfect system---making strenuous effort toward any goal is always necessary.

Reason can be politically manipulated by cunning intellectuals, but instincts are not as easily maneuvered

Trumpian nationalism hasn't decisively won against the international left and the global neocons, but if it can prevail, the next task will be to save the nation internally by allowing an ethnopluralism of ethnostates to form, fulfilling the real promise of the constitutional separation of powers and states. But people aren't always rational, and reason can be and is manipulated by cunning intellectuals.

Instincts are not as easily manipulated. As E.O. Wilson wrote, "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..." Human nature remains kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

The international left and the global neocons have the Big Media and the schools completely on their side, and the people have been brainwashed by them. But the instincts of modern liberals cause many of them to build walls around their homes or move to the suburbs to be around their own kind, even though they talk passionately of the benefits of globalism and how we are all universally and equally the same.

What will happen? If the grip of the international left and the global neocons remains strong it may lead to more serious ethnic/civil disruptions, which could lead to ethnic/civil war. Then ethnostates would emerge as natural protection. But best would be to slowly and rationally develop ethnostates, that is, form an ethnopluralism of ethnostates legally and nonviolently from out of our constitutional separation of powers and states.

In any case, human nature predicts that ethnostates are coming.

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.

That which has been tearing us apart could put us back together again

It took the whole history of humanity to discover the counter-intuitive idea that we could stop polio, measles, etc, by infecting people with a strain of the virus that taught the immune system how to fight the disease.

A similar counter-intuitive, or counter-popular-culture idea was discovered for stopping or at least better controlling human social and ethnic disruptions and that was the knowledge that we could fight racism best by admitting that human nature is and always has been racist, or genetically kin and ethnic centered, so we could therefore affirm ethnocentrism rather than fight it. This also brought forward the idea of affirming ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups as the most natural solution to racism. A wise man said, that which has been tearing us apart could put us back together again.

That idea has been blocked by leftists, but also by conservatives who have other views of human nature. Leftist think human beings are all the same and equal and therefore ethnocentrism is evil, and conservatives believe that human nature is fallen from universal love and therefore ethnocentrism is evil.

Ironically those who are most against racism and ethnocentrism are usually doing so for ethnocentric reasons; they use the charge of racism to block other groups and to advance their own group, consciously or unconsciously. So the ethnocentrism of human nature prevails in any case.