Why happiness and even power, like desire, are secondary goals in theological materialism

Contrary to hedonistic philosophy and relativistic postmodern philosophy, "happiness," pleasure, and even power are only a reaction to deeper materially-rooted needs. The pleasure or happiness derived from eating food is driven by the deeper requirements of successful survival, and not mere pleasure. Before pleasure is experienced there is the materially-rooted desire for pleasure, before food gives pleasure there is the materially-rooted desire for food.

Going deeper, the drive to survival and reproductive success (the sole aim according to science) is driven by the deeper need of evolving toward ascending levels of Godhood as the zenith of success and purpose in evolution. So contrary to many philosophers and scientists survival and reproductive success, happiness, and even power, like desire, are secondary goals. Naturalism in evolution can therefore include the activation toward higher evolution leading to ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood.

Contrary to St Thomas the natural impulses or instincts toward pleasure etc. are not from God, like the other natural instincts they lead to Godhood---while pleasure and the natural instincts are secondary as an aid in the drive to successful survival and reproduction, they are more importantly also a natural aid in evolving toward the ultimate success of ascending levels of Godhood.

Naturalism is religious in theological materialism. Goodness, pleasure, and power, are aspired to for the same reason: they materially evolve toward Godhood. These things do not move from the material to the spiritual, they move from the material to the supermaterial. Defining God as “spiritual” not only defames the material world it defames and blocks the material evolution to ascending levels of real Godhood.

Why Nietzsche and his superman require evolutionary conservatism

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

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

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

Like most conservatives Irving Babbitt ruled out naturalism as the source of ethics, but E.O. Wilson said regarding the biological origin of social behavior, “Human behavior . .is the circuitous technique by which human genetic material has been and will be kept intact. Morality has no other demonstrable ultimate function...The genes hold culture on a leash. The leash is very long, but inevitably values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool. The brain is a product of evolution.” I would add to Wilson's “ultimate function of morality” the highest goal of material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

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

Evolutionary conservatism believes that if real kin and ethnic-centered human nature was allowed to be what it is, it would naturally lead to regionalism, localism, general conservative values, eventually ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., and defended by a defensive federalism.

Then we can all get on with evolving toward Godhood.

Modern art as attack more than art (from the archive)

Art and Sexual Selection

Art seems to have grown out of sexual selection, if so, then women should be better at discerning art, because they have needed to be acute in judging the authenticity of men, since they pay a heavier price with the long-term care of babies if they judge wrong. But the desire of men to impress women might help explain, at least unconsciously, why their are more top men artists and male art critics than women. Homosexuals in the arts, at least in these times, might also explain some of the disparities in the sexual selection-discernment hypothesis.

This gets confusing when we consider the stereotypical common man who says he hasn't a clue as to what color goes with what, especially since men are trying to impress women in sexual selection and should therefore care about the way they look. Perhaps women give central importance to the money or position a man has, at least beyond the teen years, and they just kind of overlook his lack of color harmonizing.

In any case, this connection with sexual selection is probably the way to study art origins (see Dutton's “The Art Instinct) ), which gets us away from the absurd and phony abstractions that define postmodern art. High art (low art too) can then be seen sociobiologically as an affirmation of what the group holds sacred, since the group is the main unit of selection over the long term. 

Modern art as attack more than art

Atonal music actively attacked tonal music, otherwise tones would have now and then occurred, Schoenberg had to consciously avoid tones, as Dutton pointed out. But modern art in general does this too, actively attacking realism, meaning and order, as if to destroy it. Why? Why the anger? Why the desire to destroy? And they were triumphant! They conquered the art world!

People have not, by and large, to this day accepted contratonal music or modern/postmodern art, in spite of its strong promotion, and in spite of the taunts that people are just too lazy to appreciate it. The human mind is not infinitely malleable, not a blank slate. People prefer meaning, order, which are evolutionary traits developed in the minds of our Paleolithic ancestors, mainly because this strengthened social health and helped us survive. Individual artists also used art in the game of sexual selection. Real art throughout human history grew out of these dynamics and out of this human nature.

This says to me that atonal music and modern art were not really a legitimate development in art history but were mainly an attack on the order and meaning of Western culture, more like an abortion, as someone once called it. Who did the attacking, and why? This needs to be brought out more. Was there a pattern?  Names, groups, need to be named. I know years ago Tom Wolfe did a great job in “The Painted Word” exposing the sham of modern art, but more needs to be done, as we try to exhume the meaning of real art from the old battlefield.

The inevitability of ethnostates?

 "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 behavior...is the circuitous technique by which human genetic material has been and will be kept intact..." Edward O. Wilson

The leash that our genes hold on our culture define basic human nature as being genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, and they do so because in the old tribal days ethnic or group-selection was the best way for individuals to successfully survive, so altruism, or being for others, was naturally limited mainly to kin and ethnic group because they shared the same genes which strive for successful survival and reproduction. Those genes are still with us today even if this basic human nature is considered politically incorrect by our decadent prevailing culture.

Ultimately the work of sociobiologists will be allowed to present this real picture of human nature so that we can apply a set of healthy preferences with which political life can find real harmony. This strongly suggests that if real kin and ethnic-centered human nature is allowed to be what it is, it naturally leads to regionalism, localism, ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc. by federalism.  For example, in the U. S. this could be accomplished not by way of radical revolution but through adapting---not overturning---the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states.

For now the marauding imperialists, Marxists, and global money grubbers block this from happening with help from the brainwashing tactics of the schools and the media, but ethnostates seem inevitability because values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool.

The ultimate function of morality

 Since Nietzsche philosophers have increasingly thought that “truth” is more or less a relative thing because words or metaphors hide bedrock truths. Then they go on to say therefore all truth is relative. Nietzsche wondered whether power or music or dance was a clearer way bedrock truths could be expressed.

I think the best human expression of reality exists in the bedrock of biology, which is at the origin of all social behavior, including philosophy and religion. As long as we are alive every cell in our body demands survival and reproductive success. This natural activation can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied. This will-to-the-survival of our genes is at the core of our being. As Edward O. Wilson put it : "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 behavior . .is the circuitous technique by which human genetic material has been and will be kept intact. Morality has no other demonstrable ultimate function." Edward O. Wilson.

I only quibble with last line “morality has no other demonstrable ultimate function” because I believe that natural law includes our material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood, so it affirms the rational science inherent in classical natural law as aiding in our evolution to Godhood. Natural law in theological materialism brings a conservatism grounded in the order of material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood, which counters both the stagnation of traditional conservatism and the nihilism of modern thinking.

Redefining Godhood as supermaterial and evolved to in the material world

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

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

This noble and sacred goal can be attained by different political methods, including representative democracy. All men are born with the desire to survive and reproduce successfully but natural rights do not guarantee results, since evolution cannot always guarantee results. This suggest that if the noble statesman of the future do see guardianship of the state as avoiding sedition and discord culminating in civil war, they will honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality etc. and advocate the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real human nature. Then they will protect each ethnostate from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosenists, Marxists, etc. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

Then we can all get on with evolving toward ascending levels of Godhood.

The same great denial of the biological origin of social behavior by both the democrats and republicans is destroying us

Since Biden was elected president the charges of “systemic racism” have been increasingly hurled at whites by the left and by the media which is then hotly denied by conservatives, and both sides completely deny the biological origin of social behavior. The blacks and the left won't admit that there is any racism behind their motives any more than the whites will admit any systemic white racism, and racism continues to be confounded with supremacism.

The reality is that human nature has been ethnocentrc and racialist since humans became humans because in the old tribal days ethnic or group-selection was the best way for individuals to successfully survive, so altruism, or being for others, was naturally limited mainly to kin and ethnic group because they shared the same genes which strive for successful survival and reproduction. Those genes are still with us today. (see the science of sociobiology)

But as one historian put it, what formerly divided us can put us back together again. It would be far more realistic to talk of un-assimilating differences rather than about superiority/inferiority. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc.

The same great denial of the biological origin of social behavior by both the democrats and republicans is destroying us.

The cultural left have created a nightmare that is the opposite of humaneness

A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., with a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

Liberals---and even some conservatives---say you can't have ethnostates and still hold humane values, but they are wrong. We are fragmenting into an alienated nation of competing races with a zero sum game where the gain of one ethnic group is offset by the loss of another ethnic group, with much cruel social discord in the process.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates is in harmony with the biological origin of social behavior and in accord with real human nature, which contains not only gender differences, but is kin-centered, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

The cultural left, the cultural Marxists, have created a nightmare that is stripping the very human nature out of the people, which is the opposite of humaneness.

Why is it so hard to find or develop conservative artists? (from the archive)

There is something gracious, Burkean, in Robert Lurie  (Chronicles) letting Bob Dylan off the hook for Dylan's 1960's legacy of decadent radical songs, but I can't quite do it. Lurie points to the eight years of, sort of, conservative songs and retreads of traditional songs ("Nashville Skyline", "New Morning", etc), as well as Dylan's years of trying, sort of, to have a traditional home-life and marriage. It seems sad and pathetic to see the hoops that conservative's have to jump through to try to find viable conservative artists who might actually appeal to the people, even to the point of squeezing Dylan into that format.

Why is it so hard to find or develop conservative artists? I think the fault lies in the basic and essential rejection of materialism at the heart of Christianity and traditional religions---even given the valiant efforts of great religious philosophers like Aquinas who laboriously tried to salvage a place for real life, real living, within the otherwise deeply ascetic and monastic ethos of true Christianity. This anti-real-life-materialism has had more to do with the decline of religion and the absence of conservative artists than anything else.

Great art does affirm the sacred, that is a positive mantra on this blog, but it is nearly impossible to affirm anti-living and an exclusive inward life, especially for creative young people. It was easier for Christianity, and for art to affirm Christianity, in the days before science, which can be seen in the great art of that pre-modern period. The Ancient Greeks did not have that great spiritual blockade to work against and their life-affirming art shows it.

What we speak of here, and with theological materialism, is the Inward Path to the Father Within of traditional religion transformed (not rejected) in the Outward Path of material/supermaterial evolution to real Godhood, the God first only symbolically experienced in the Inward Path. This transformation can then help provide a way out of this conundrum for conservative artists. The Great Spiritual Blockade has drained the life out of modern conservative art---and religion as well.  But more deeply it has blocked the sacred material evolution of life to Godhood.

Dylan didn’t show us the way out of the decadent 1960's, which is what he would have had to do to absolve himself of the lefty damage he did, even if many of his lyrics were pure gibberish. He is now back to endlessly touring and partying like a rock star, sporting the almost ridiculous persona of an old white blues singer.

Why non-college graduates who voted for Trump are actually politically wiser than the college graduates who voted for Biden

The big divide in America today is between college graduates who voted for Biden and and non-college graduates who voted for Trump. That's a big problem for America because the college educated have been thoroughly brainwashed. And the percentage of non-college graduates is falling as the number of college graduates is rising.

High European art and culture has been virtually replaced in our colleges and universities by the political correctness of cultural Marxism. As Boyd Cathey put it, our colleges and universities 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.)

And the corruption of the Media in America is at bottom also the consequence of decades of teaching a dumbed-down version of "postmodernism" and cultural Marxism to journalists and cultural influencers.

The non-college graduates for the most part have absorbed the reality of the biological origin of social behavior, which says that human nature is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, followed by individual-selection---even if they do not know that this view of human nature was largely affirmed by Darwin and later by sociobiology.

So the reality is that non-college graduates who voted for Trump (and college grads who have managed to avoid the Cultural Marxist brainwashing) are actually politically wiser than the college graduates who voted for Biden and who think of non-college graduates as a bunch of deplorable rubes.

The great dilemma, absurdity, and tragedy of the left and the right

 Today in America the left thinks the right are racists, the right vigorously denies it and says the left are socialist/communists or even racists eg. like the Black Lives Matter movement. The great dilemma, absurdity, and tragedy of this position is that human nature is racist and ethnocentric and has been since humans became humans, as the evolutionary sciences like sociobiology have been trying to tell us for years. What is missing today is knowledge of the biological origin of social behavior which came with Darwin and later sociobiology showing that real human nature is and has been genetically kin and ethnic centered (ie. racist and ethnocentric) with group selection as the main unit of successful survival and reproduction, followed by individual selection.

Here are a few sociobiological quotes: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals." (David Sloan Wilson). “Hereditary altruists form groups so cooperative and well-organized as to out-compete non-altruists groups.” (E.O. Wilson “The Social Conquest of the Earth.”) "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 behavior . .is the circuitous technique by which human genetic material has been and will be kept intact...." Edward O. Wilson

Human nature has been and remains genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, followed by individual-selection. The real challenge of ethnocentric and xenophobic human nature is to move beyond the supremacism that has plagued it. This suggest that if the noble statesman of the future see guardianship of the state as avoiding sedition, discord, and civil war they will honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality etc., and advocate the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real human nature. Then they will protect each ethnostate from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosenists, Marxists, etc. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

The big question of course remains: how long will the knowledge of real human nature be blocked and distorted?

Economic ethnopluralism

 When economists ask how to understand economic value, like virtually all subjects today, they overlook or even bury biology and sociobiology. As Robert Bellafiore Jr. defines them, (Modern Age Winter 2020) economists come up with ideas like the “labor theory of value,” according to which “a good’s objective worth is proportionate to the amount of effort expended to create it, or the Austrians theory of “methodological individualism,” shifting the emphasis from the objective factors of production to the subjective preferences of consumers.”

It seems to me that economics derives, like most things in culture, from the biological origin of social behavior, and by an instinctive and rational deduction about the nature of man and from accurately defining human nature. Sociobiology has taught us that human nature is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, followed by individual-selection. This seems to point toward economic ethnopluralism in economics.

The old classical conservative saying goes, as the people change, the culture changes, and that goes for economics too. With America increasingly split along apparently unassimilable ethnic lines, the way to bring economic, moral, and political health back to America is to return power to the different regions and states, where each state can bring their own distinct balance to economics as ethnostates, protected internally and externally by federalism. The solution is not to destroy the free enterprise system, which has given us the highest standard of living in history, but to bring the free enterprise system back in accord with the new economic nationalism of economic ethnopluralism. Economic nationalism made our nation great in the first place. Economic nationalism protected the jobs and life-style of the nation with such things as putting up tariffs against globalist intrusions into the nation's manufacturing and business life. This was not unfair government interference, this was rationally protecting the life of the nation. If there still exists a will to survive in America, eventually states or regions can become ethnostates with economic ethnopluralism prevailing.

Speculation on big bangs, black holes, and life in the multiverse

Big Bangs are like powerful black holes that have gathered massive, dense, light, and matter from a surrounding universe. Then the big-bang-black-holes explode and expand into new universes moving away at velocities that increase with their distance. Eventually parts of that expanding universe contract again into a single point in another big-crunch-black-hole before beginning the cycle over with huge black holes that explode with big bangs into new universes. In the multiverse universes are like galaxies in our universe.

The speeding expanding universes move so far away from one another that any life that develops in the expanding galaxies would be virtually lost to one another, which could explain why we seem to be the only life in the multiverse. Since this whole process has gone on forever, far-away life could have developed over the vast endless spaces to amazing degrees of sophistication and intelligence and we wouldn't know of it---although someday we might.

Natural law in evolutionary conservatism and ethnostates

"American revolutionaries favored individual autonomy, and the system of government established under the Constitution was based on that value." (David Gordon) but Bacon's scientific method of "examining experience, organizing data, seeing causes from effects, and then discerning patterns and law-like principles," went on to develop the science of sociobiology, which has affirmed that human nature is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, followed by individual-selection.

The revival of human nature and natural law by sociobiology is superior to the classical natural rights promoted by Leo Strauss, and it supersedes or reforms Christian natural law. In theological materialism natural law includes our material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood, so it affirms the rational science inherent in classical natural law as aiding in our evolution to Godhood. Natural law in evolutionary conservatism brings a conservatism grounded in the order of material evolution to Godhood, which counters both the stagnation of traditional conservatism and the nihilism of modern thinking.

Natural rights suggest that all men are born with the desire to survive and reproduce successfully but natural rights do not guarantee results, since evolution cannot always guarantee results. This suggest that if the noble statesman of the future see guardianship of the state as avoiding sedition and discord culminating in civil war, they will honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality etc., and advocate the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real human nature. Then they will protect each ethnostate from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosenists, Marxists, etc. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

Toward evolutionary sacred art philosophy (from the archive)

 I see cultural and art creations not strictly as only the intention of the creators, not the consequence of ideological systems (see the French), not merely libidinal forces, and not the consequence of historical materialism, or economic determinism, although all of these are included in cultural creations to a certain extent.

I see cultural and art creations as primarily the consequence of biological and genetic instincts related to successful survival and reproduction, along with the deeper sacred activating forces of life and evolution, as defined in theological materialism. This includes, along with the instinctive survival needs of the author, the survival needs of group-selection within which the author exists.

To change a statement by Roland Barthe about literature really being capitalist language speaking and not the author speaking, it is biology speaking deeper than the author's voice, and also speaking is the sacred goal of biological evolution activating creation to evolve toward Godhood. The new anti-intention, anti-author criticism seems largely to be an attempt to empower the critic as the main center of literary and cultural meaning, a bold intellectual grab for power by middlemen, intentional or not, who tend to give works illusions never intended and not instinctively or biologically present.

Why the political dissimulations of today are destroying us: nature and human nature as a ground or limit to human action need to be affirmed

The denial of nature and real human nature is the basis of Marxism and the political dissimulations of modern liberalism, which are based on flawed definitions of human nature. They have brought us destructive civil disruptions, and even civil war, which are now increasing across the world within unworkable multicultural multi-ethnic societies.

Is our identity “hardware” or “software”? 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 more or less on that 70% nature side. 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---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.

Real human nature suggests 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 political dissimulations of today which are destroying us.

Nature and real human nature as a ground or limit to human action need to be affirmed.

How does it feel, conservatives, to be on your own; is there a direction home?

Preserving conservative values has taken a turn for the worse as the Tech Oligarchs have now taken away free speech for conservatives and increased the demands of woke cultural Marxism, with even deeper threats of job loss, financial ruin, and social ostracism for anyone who objects. Hollywood/New York/Washington, the media, and big tech are instituting a neo-Marxist revolution against Western civilization. Who thought it could happen in America? Is the cultural situation of conservative Christians a lost cause?

Where did conservatism go wrong? Way back around the 1950's, at the beginning of the modern conservative movement, the foundation of real conservatism was purged from "conservatism" by people like William Buckley. That is, the largely biological origin of much of human social behavior, from which real conservatism rises, was defined as politically incorrect, bigoted, and even evil. Modern conservatism began to die even as it was beginning. But the conservative biologically or genetic origin of human nature remains kin-centered, gender-defined, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, group-selecting, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection followed by individual selection. But the sociobiological way to justify and save conservatism was not and is still not mentioned by conservatives or by liberals, other than as something evil.

The reality of real human nature points toward a deeply conservative political/cultural solution which could bring about an ethnopluralism of ethnostates within our democratic republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to the constitutional separation of powers and states. Different ethnic groups can then politically and culturally conduct themselves the way they want to in their own regions and ethnostates. We could retain federalism and subsidiarity to defend and balance the states together, because we need the geopolitical heft of a large nation to defend ourselves in the big world.

That is the authentically conservative, evolutionary conservative, way to live healthy lives.

What happens when the people feel their rights and freedoms have been taken from them?

How many Trump and MAGA supporters or Black Lives Matter people would now secretly support a fascist dictator in bringing about their worldview? We don't need fascism on the left or the right, the world is too populated and power is too fluid for any one group to enslave all the other groups; the consequences of trying to do so will be "too dangerous to its temporary beneficiaries," as E. O. Wilson put it. In other words the crowded world will gang up on and destroy any group that claims exclusive rule over all the other groups. What we need is a gradual movement toward ethnopluralism.

Real human nature has been defined as political incorrect. Hollywood/New York/Washington, the media, big tech, and the schools together have blocked human nature. Real human nature is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection.

This time we need real separation, that is, ethnostates designed for the freedom of distinctive ethnic cultures, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosenites, Marxists, etc.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against 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.

Both the left and the right have been tragically wrong in defining “racism” and “systematic racism”

Yesterday both Biden and Harris typically defined the pro-Trump protesters at the White House with “systemic white racism” not seeing or acknowledging the black racism within the Black Lives Matter movement over the summer.

Both the left and the right have been tragically wrong in defining “racism” and “systematic racism.” Real human nature has been defined as politically incorrect behavior. What is missing is knowledge of the biological origin of social behavior which came with Darwin and later sociobiology showing that real human nature is genetically kin and ethnic centered (ie. racist and ethnocentric), with group selection as the main unit of successful survival and reproduction.

Human nature has always first preferred kin and related ethnic group because this preference was successful in survival and reproduction, so it was instinctively, genetically, retained within basic human nature. Ethnic groups of related genes have numerous reasons for cooperating more successfully and harmoniously than with other ethnic groups. As Edward O. Wilson said, "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.”

We could halt and reverse the decline of America by transforming the socially destructive and mistaken way of defining “systematic racism” and by correctly defining racism and ethnocentrism as a central part of real human nature. Then, as Wilmot Robertson said, the new (yet old) solution to the division of the nation, which the liberals and cultural Marxists have willing and consciously created with the help of the media and the schools, is to form ethnostates or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

We can honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality etc., and by advocating the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real human nature. Ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

The leftist democratic win in Georgia and in the Senate majority show that racial demographics is destiny

A majority of Black voters brought the win for the Democrats in Georgia and in the United States Senate majority.

Unfortunately the human reality that racial demographics is destiny has been declared to be “politically incorrect” and even taboo by the deceitful cultural Marxism that rules us, so Americans are more shocked than they should be by what has happened to their country.

How will we deal with the demographic changes in America when we know that different ethnic groups create different cultures and as the demographics change the culture changes?

If real kin and ethnic-centered human nature was allowed to be what it is, it would naturally lead to regionalism, localism, ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. In the U. S. this could be accomplished not by way of radical revolution but through adapting the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states, with ethnostates protected from marauding imperialists, supremacists, and global money grubbers.

Nothing else will save us from the civil insurrection brought on by racial demographic changes within a democracy. Fascism, like the socialism that the Biden administration will now bring us, gives too much power to dimwitted big government against the freedom of regionalism, localism, ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Biological signaling and art theory (from the archive)

Theories on art from evolutionary psychology tend to take the arrogance and humbug out of philosophies of art. For example, art is seen as an extension of sexual selection, which itself is an extension of the more practical and efficient natural selection. Denis Dutton has done excellent work in examining, with very clear writing, the origin of art. These studies got me thinking about how to distinguish individual-selection and group-selection in art, which has not been much written about.

Individualistic art can be seen as the personal ornament of the individual artist, which supposedly displays the intelligence, skill, and great leisure and richness of the artist, as a signal of the fitness of the artist, especially (and originally) in the mating game (think of Picasso). Whereas art created for the group can signal the fitness and power of the group (think of elaborate religious art), which can then reward the individual artists for their great affirmations of the group, and more importantly enhance the group in competition with other groups.

We might then say that since group-selection is the central unit of selection in humans, as E. O. Wilson has recently affirmed, group-selection would define and create the higher art. History seems to show this as true with the greatest art usually defined as art that affirms what the group holds most sacred. 

This kind of explanation brings art theory back to biology, back to life, and forward to the extension and evolution of life---we can then better see the wild abstractions of art philosophy through the ages for what they were, often empty signaling on the part of individual philosophers or artists.  We are looking for truth and reality regarding art, which is perhaps is our form of signaling.

The apotheosis and idolization of only words and ideas

 The apotheosis and idolization of words and ideas alone brought us spiritualism, deification, and God, but it is a spiritualism and God unattached to real physical objects, spiritualism and God became words and language and definition only. And so the “truth” became words and language unattached to real physical objects. Priests and “intellectuals” became the purveyors of spiritualism, deification, truth, and God, using words only. And so the real world of objects slipped away from the minds of intellectuals and their students.

We never, in reality, move beyond the object. Religion and philosophy think that they can move beyond the material or supermaterial object, but they are creating false, non-object absolutes. They create Gods of non-objects and definitions, which are not Gods.

Rational and religious categories can define objects but the definitions will always be the shadows of objects. This means that Plato needs to be trans-valued: it is the mystical definitions that are the shadows, and it is the objects that are reality.

Godhood is an Absolute Mind in an Absolute Body and not merely a Mind. Godhood is not beyond form and structure, Godhood is Absolute Supermaterial Form and Structure. There is no need to put up a great spiritual blockade against the material world if ascending levels of Godhood are seen as supermateriality which we evolve to from the material world.

We are not able to fully conceptualize Godhood at this stage in our evolving intelligence but this does not mean that Godhood is therefore non-conceptualizable. It takes a God to accurately conceptualize a God, and when this is done it will be a supermaterial mind conceptualizing within a supermaterial body, not a non-material body-less mind.

We need to abide strictly within material and supermaterial objects. This is the base of Theological Materialism. The great allure of seeing or experiencing the virtual God Within of the Involutionary Inward Path must not put up a Great Spiritual Blockade against evolving to Real Godhood in the Evolutionary Outward Path of material/supermaterial evolution.

Future statesmanship and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates

“The true, noble statesman according to Cicero, follows Plato in seeing the governing of the commonwealth as guardianship: he is in some deep spiritual sense "oblivious to [his] own advantage," at least in any vulgar sense of the term. Above all, he hates civic discord and dissension and aims to be just to the legitimate claims of the rich and the poor, the few and the many. Sedition and discord, culminating in civil war, are the great evils to be avoided” (Daniel J. Mahoney, “Ballast on the Ship of State: Statesmanship as Human Excellence,” Modern Age, Fall 2020)

If the noble statesman of the future see guardianship of the commonwealth and avoiding sedition and discord culminating in civil war as the way to go, then they will propose and defend an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. They will honor the biological origin of social behavior by taking on the damaging racial competitions disguised as calls for equality etc., and advocate the creation of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, in harmony with real human nature, which is genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. Then they will protect each ethnostate from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, chosenists, Marxists, etc.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states. Nothing less will define the goals of the true and noble statesman of the future.

The biggest problem with political thinking today is the lack of information on the biological origin of social behavior

The biggest problem with political thinking today is the lack of information on the biological origin of social behavior, or the blocking of this field. This applies to virtually everyone from the experts in the field, to politicians, and to ordinary people.

What we need is a new field to help make cultural sense of the sociobiological perspective in human nature and culture, we need a philosophical sociobiology.

The evolutionary science of sociobiology has excellently defined and explained human nature and human culture. Sociobiology does not inevitably lead to Marx, Spengler or Goebbels, this is a scare tactic. Just because progress can be affirmed through evolution does not mean that one does not believe in the past or in traditions.

I say don't study “political science” until you first study sociobiology. Read Edward O. Wilson's books, he is at least as accessible as Marx, and much wiser. The evolutionary sciences should be taught front and center in the humanities. Why isn't sociobiology featured in the humanities? You know the answer, sociobiology is not politically correct in that nefarious culturally Marxist community where the biological origin of social behavior is the kiss of death to their absurd ideas about the cultural origin of social behavior.

The biological origin of our social behavior, as empirically explained by sociobiology, actually ends the intellectual defense of the modern liberals and the postmodern relativists. As long as we are alive every cell in our body demands survival and reproductive success. This natural activation can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied.

Real human nature and natural rights relate very well to primary group-selection, with individual selection as secondary, which, for example, could be affirmed with regional ethnostates in the American constitutional separation of powers and states, while being protected by federalism. In the natural configuration of ethnostates human nature can be free to be what it is: genetically ethnocentric, even xenophobic, as well as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, etc.

Conservative's have not fully realized yet that multiculturalism has made their nations too diverse for nationalism to take hold, and modern liberals think nationalism and ethnocentrism are evil. So reforming the West in harmony with the biological origin of social behavior will not be easy, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied forever.

Evolutionary Realism and the Godhood Goal (from the archive)

A mixing of realism and idealism defines the classical arts, according to Gail Leggio. I think evolutionary realism best describes the arts involved in our sacred evolution toward Godhood. Evolutionary realism brings art philosophy back to the living object, the natural world, but also extends it out into the future toward our evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

What we consider “beautiful” tends to have evolved in the Pleistocene through natural selection and sexual selection, and we retain it today. We can build on this, on what we are, since it doesn’t work well to reject human nature. We can build on instinctive feelings and empirical ideas of what is true, beautiful and good, with the goal of evolving to the zenith of these things, which is Godhood.

We are aided in this direction by the inward, purely physical, activation of the Will-To-Godhood, or Tirips, which seeks Godhood by materially activating life to evolve toward Godhood, working along with the shaping of outside evolution and selection. But even without acknowledging this inward purpose, evolution has been moving toward more efficient forms, more complexity, with occasional stops and side-turnings along the way.

Morality does not have to be a counter-movement opposing nature's endeavors to arrive at a higher type, which was Nietzsche's view. But devolution can and does take place with various negative or down-going kinds of morality, the kind of morality that says this material world is not good. Godhood is not only the zenith of truth, beauty and goodness, it is the zenith of successful survival and reproduction. Science and religion can meet here.

“Must we not ourselves become gods?”

Contrary to Eric Voegelin we can indeed immanentize the eschaton.

The desire for the absolute is the desire for the zenith of survival and reproductive success, which is Godhood. When we answer Nietzsche's question “must we not ourselves become gods?” we say it will happen through material and supermaterial evolution toward ascending levels of Godhood.

The vitalistic desire for the absolute or Godhood is the desire for the zenith of truth, beauty, and goodness, and is also the desire to successfully survive and reproduce. This great material, not spiritual, process of evolution is activated from within every cell of the body, demanding things like metabolism and reproduction, which then react and adapt and evolve within the various outside environments that life lives in.

This theological materialism brings the material grounding of naturalism and evolution to perspectivism and to the relativism of post modernism.

We don't need Heideggerian and Traditionalist School gloom

 Heidegger concluded after years study that the West has lost its spiritual strength, lost its Gods, destroyed the earth, reduced humans to a mass, and created only the mediocre, and the Traditionalist School agreed with that assessment.

Rather than killing religion and God, or going backward to a Traditionalist School which repudiates all the great Western achievements of modernity, they might have gone back to the point of the metastasis and rejected the split between the material and the spiritual. There is no non-material spiritual God but we can reach ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood by way of material and supermaterial evolution. Real Godhood is reached by material evolution, which is not the symbolic experience of bliss reached in ascetic practices.  

^{Why didn't the Heideggerians and Traditionalist School followers study more Western geniuses, like Edward Wilson and the great Neo-Darwinist field of sociobiology, or men like the brilliant British/American psychologist Raymond Cattell, or the courageous historian Wilmot Robertson? Why did they not find science (a jewel of the West) nearly as important as Eastern spiritualism (a jewel of the East)?}

I see Heidegger's idea of Being as Time in line with that tendency of intellectuals to overlook the fact that the “names” of things are an abstraction which only point toward the reality of the thing named---the abstract name is not the thing-in-itself. All philosophy and theology is full of this metaphysical error, with God, Being, and Truth as only names and abstractions, often with no connection to real objects. Godhood, religion,Truth, need not be lost when we bring our thinking back to real, evolving, material objects.

The big problem with the Traditionalist view is that there is no non-material spiritual world, there is only ascetic interpretations derived from spiritual language and strict ascetic disciplines designed to overcome or block all material desires, which bring feelings of great bliss to the ascetic that is exaggeratedly described as a spiritual union with God.

If they needed a God and religion why not the ascending levels of material/supermaterial real Godhood reached through material, not spiritual evolution, by employing the Western evolutionary sciences, rather than hearkening back to asceticism, which seeks an inward god by way of blocking all material drives and desires to experience the bliss of "god" (satori, moksha, illumination, etc.), which is really a peak material experience brought on by blocking all material desires.

Edward Wilson's sociobiology makes it impossible for honest people to sidestep the biological origin of our social behavior---which includes religion and philosophy. These men of the West deeply respected the culture-creating West and the Western gene pool; they certainly inspired my work on theological materialism and ethnostatism.

Carlson is mistaken in defining identity politics

 It used to be that liberals fell all over themselves accusing conservatives of being racist. Now it is conservative's like Tucker Carlson denouncing liberals as being racist and even as eugenicists, because the CDC's Vaccine Advisory Committee approved recommendations from a doctor, Kathleen Dooling. who said that more lives would be saved if the elderly receive priority access to the vaccine, but that: "Racial and ethnic minority groups [are] under-represented among adults" age 65 and older. Therefore, the elderly should not be a top priority, race should be. Harald Schmidt advised the CDC: "Older populations are whiter. Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already have more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit."

Carlson is also upset by the Black Lives Matter movement which is really a black racist moment supported by clueless white liberals. Carlson passionately insists that race has nothing to do with defining the nation. Carlson is mistaken in defining identity politics. The neo-Darwinist science of sociobiology has courageously defined the biological origin of social behavior which has been ignored by both modern liberals and conservatives in defining nations.  

According to various dictionaries "nation" is nacion (old French) birth, descendants, relatives, from Latin nationem, natio, breed, stock, race of people, tribe, from PIE root *gene, referring to procreation, familial and tribal groups. Ethnic groups of hereditary altruists formed ethnic groups so cooperative and well-organized as to out-compete non-altruist groups. Ethnocentric groups are more likely to win the battle of group selection. Real human nature is ethnocentric, not with one group overall superior or inferior but with different talents, never equal, because for many thousands of years right up to our present time group selection, or ethnic altruism, was the best way to be successful in survival and reproduction.

Defining cultures by creed or ideas alone with such unreal ideas as egalitarianism is not enough to offset the reality that multicultural multi-ethnic societies are a zero sum game where the gain of one ethnic group is offset by the loss of another ethnic group, with much cruel social discord in the process.

Although now just rising again, identity politics will continue to ascend, identifying with ethnicity, nationality, race, culture and faith is the world's future. People will see that diversity within the same state is not our greatest strength but is our weakness. A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., with a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

The “innovation” in metaphysics comes from the Evolutionary Outward Path

Spirit” IS matter, but the highest epiphenomenal matter, it “dominates” matter in that it can also be defined as the Will To Godhood, or Tirips, activating within life---so there is no need for a duality here. And, again, evolution is not “blind and pointless.” The lesser CAN evolve into the higher, just as the child grows to be a man. The Logos is definition or principle only, which is less than the Object God which the Logos defines. It is time to affirm the real thing, not merely the definition of the real thing. Matter CAN create the Spirit and Soul and Godhood out of itself.

Who says “there is no innovation in metaphysics?” Perhaps not in the religions that stem from the Perennial Tradition, but they are all of the non-material spiritual Involutionary Inward Path. The “innovation” in metaphysics come from the Evolutionary Outward Path, which is really a recognition of the sacred direction of material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

The problem is in how the beast is civilized (from the archive)

Nietzsche didn't want to “tame” man with morality, but rejecting morality is a form of taming man, and this is Nietzsche's form of “improvement” which he otherwise condemns in priests. Nietzsche's preferred “immorality” mostly applies to individuals, especial genius individuals, it overlooks natural group selection, which is the prime unit of selection, and group selection requires group morality and the natural “taming” of man.

The problem is in how the beast is civilized. Rousseau and Thomas Paine saw primitive and natural man as a wild, free, and innocent, individual, as if group morality were not just as primitive and naturally evolved over the tens of thousands of years when man became man. Edmund Burke had a better grasp of the naturalness of group behavior (before sociobiology) and the civilization that naturally grows up around it.

Our instincts, passions and reason can be enlisted in service to our higher evolution, and higher evolution does not merely “tame” us, it makes us healthier as we move toward the zenith of truth, goodness and beauty, or Godhood. As with artists, geniuses in various fields can be as free as they need to be during the creation of their work, (they probably actually need to be free during the creation process), but then it is most natural for their work to be judged by the cultural needs of the group or by group morality, which is more impotant than individual morality.

 
What happened when the Nietzschean geniuses of modern art (or philosophy for that matter) had no group or social concerns? By any sane standards we received mostly garbage. For example, with psychometrics today we can almost easily distinguish the social geniuses from the anti-social criminal geniuses, and our grants and work awards to individuals would follow after this lead---but always leaving room for those few who fall between the psychometric cracks.

Evolutionary conservatism

In trying to define conservatism George Will said we should ask the question: what do you seek to conserve? He says that the proper answer is: “We seek to conserve the American founding.”

And there we have the big problem with the typical conservative philosophy. The real and true answer to the question: what do you seek to conserve is? We seek to conserve ethnic and racial groups and the individuals citizens of the groups, who then create the culture of the groups. The biological origin of social behavior make this true and real.

Sociobiology brings forward what I call “evolutionary conservatism,” after the understanding of our biological human nature was drummed out of the conservative movement by William Buckley and others. That left the conservative movement handicapped and missing the deepest view of natural rights and the richest design of nature.

It turns out that conservatism as defined by sociobiology can be perhaps the best way to survive and reproduce successfully over the long term, but conservative's have a big problem with the materialist foundation of science, so few conservatives seriously apply sociobiology in defense of conservative principles.

Evolutionary conservatism can add to and deepen basic paleoconservatism. To put it in modern terms, biology is the hardware and culture is the software. Human nature is biologically kin-centered and ethnic-centered, even xenophobic, as well as being genetically gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, and religious-making, with group-selection and ethnic selection as the primary unit of successful selection followed by individual selection. Alas, like the liberals and neoconservatives the paleoconservative's tend to block or conceal the ethnic-centered and xenophobic parts of human nature due it seems to universalist religious edicts.

Evolutionary conservatism believes that if real kin and ethnic-centered human nature was allowed to be what it is, it would naturally lead to regionalism, localism, general conservative values, eventually ethnostates, and finally an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., and defended by federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established, legally, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states... Then we can all get on with materially evolving toward supermaterial Godhood.

Answering Einstein and Kirk's spiritualism

“All forms of life are animated by a power which does not originate within them,” wrote Russell Kirk (Chapter IV of The Conservative Mind).

“A Purpose, a Will, emanates from God; this Will has created our humanity and guides us now in ways beyond our understanding, toward ends which even our reason cannot make out clearly. Providence acts through the instincts and intuitions of our feeble flesh. This being so, the man who takes the materialist, the mechanist, and the Utilitarian for his preceptors in the ends of life is a forlorn fool” – who facilitates rule by demagogues, I would ad”

“My religion,”Albert Einstein said, “consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.”

Tirip's answer to spiritualism

Simply put Tirips or the Will, which is material-supermaterial, is reborn in the body in procreation and reproduction, with its primary quality of activating the body to evolve to Godhood while being shaped outwardly by natural selection and evolutionary mutations. Then Tirips is born in new bodies, and so on. This has happened since the beginning of the unending cosmos, leading ultimately to the evolution of life to ascending levels of Godhood, which is the sacred goal of all life. A civilizational and cultural totality issues from this religious worldview of aiding the evolution of life to ascending levels of Godhood which brings religion and science together. Then, given human nature with its group selection, the biological origin of social behavior suggests that ethnostatism with an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the most humane, rational, and instinctive way for us to live and evolve.