Like their followers, Trump and Hillary simply do not understand one another

I think the generational divide between a 70 year old man who went to military school and then to business school, and those who have been indoctrinated in politically correct cultural Marxism in college has been underestimated, they simply do not understand each another. Think of the smart-ass college sophomore and uncle Pete trying to communicate at the family picnic. This also explains why Trump appeals to non-college educated populists who, like Trump, are not foolish enough to buy the lies of the corrupt Big Media.

I think “the people” would vote for Trump even if he said he was against the equal rights amendment, against affirmative action, against feminism, or even against giving the the vote to women. But that might allow Hillary to win. The question is will there be enough Trump voters who have given up on voting because they believe the corruption is too deep to change? We can't believe the biased polls that's for sure.

Even if Trump is somehow elected president will he be able to overcome the power of Global Business and the Big Media? Perhaps conservatives will have to live with merely going in the right direction---that essentially defines conservatism anyway.

Religious and scientific opposites come together

Is “perspective” only artificially calculated and not really important? So say the postmodernists, influenced by Nietzsche. Perspective can be biased by disordered human psychology or by culture. It is not easy to see real nature and human nature, although it would be easier without such distortions as cultural Marxism.

When real human nature is the codified perspective than we tend to get traditional culture. The real “alienation” comes from being blocked by the drugged cloud of such things as postmodernism, and not from traditional culture. The traditional perspective relates to real human nature, where kin and group are affirmed over the individual, although there is individual selection within groups. And this is not the same as the traditionalist school where all things material are considered illusions.

A real religious and philosophical perspective does not come from only rationally standing above or from only emotional seeing from within, it comes from the Twofold Path combining the inward and outward paths, where intuition and peripheral vision are included with reason. Religious and scientific opposites come together, disjunctions converge, and there is no real duality between the spiritual and material, all things including Godhood are material or supermaterial.

We are living and selecting ourselves and our groups as we all evolve in the material and supermaterial world toward Godhood, with many starts and stops and lies and truths along the way. It is basically an ordered evolution where the goal is largely determined but the path is more free and naturally selected, like E. O. Wilson's boulder rolling down a mountain. This is the perspective of theological materialism.

Change and unchange in the alt. right

The tension between ethnic groups in democracies has been vastly underestimated, it is even a taboo subject mainly due to mistaken notions of human nature which say that we are all the same. The alt. right has had the courage to speak of these virtually irreconcilable differences and so they have been ridden out of the conservative movement where they rightly belong.

Evolutionary realism defines human nature as it is, kin-centered and group-centered, and even xenophobic, but this does not intrude on real conservatism, it transforms conservatism, as evolution transforms nature. Radicals and conservatives usually take only one side of the change/unchange dynamic, when both are needed.

St Thomas Aquinas could be understood as having saved Christian philosophy by synthesizing Aristotle's pagan Greek philosophy into Christianity. Evolutionary sociobiology needs to do the same  to save Christianity now. Theological materialism is attempting to do this, transforming the Inward God of traditional religion into the Outward God reached through material evolution, while retaining the Inward Path in the Twofold Path.

The Traditionalist School is digging in their heels and rejecting not only change but virtually rejecting science, yet many in the alt. right have embraced Aleksandr Dugin (who hates the West) and his retooling of Rene Guenon and Julius Evola, and therefore the alt. right is accepting only the unchange side of the change/unchange dynamic. Talking about long-term cycles that are unchanging is affirming unchange. Godhood is reached by the vehicle of evolution in the material world which the traditionalist school essentially rejects, 

The alt. right has over-concentrated on whites since whites have been overwhelmed by liberal social programs, but the moral high ground goes to promoting an ethnopluralism of ethnostates where all distinct ethnic groups have their own ethnostates protected by federalism. This could be done legally by the constitutional separation of powers and states, and maybe a few amendments to the Constitution.

Great art is the affirmation of the sacred

Beauty and form above subject matter? That idea is part of the perversion of art for artists, not for the public---if you can call them artists. Poetry has done the same thing in being written for other poets---although black rap does reach the public as obscene nursery rhymes (if you compare rap to Shakespeare you are a fool.) It is all empty ideology, like modern liberal politics, feminism, transgenderism, etc etc etc, with no basis in the biological reality of human nature. Great art was formed around the affirmation of sacred religion, and religion is not present in art today, nothing is present in art today, other than the ridiculous.

Here is a simple phrase: great art is the affirmation of the sacred. Great art has a constant sacred theme but an ever-changing character. The sacred may not be portrayed exactly the same for all people but that is what the separation of powers, states and people is all about. The sacred remains. My sacred art points toward evolutionary realism because life is evolving toward sacred material/supermaterial Godhood, and realism best affirms this for the group.

Modern critics have the perverted personalities to define classical Greek art as simply “racist” or “xenophobic.” Why aren't such critics thrown out of journalism? It's the same old corrupt, nefarious, and highly destructive Big Media, which needs to be understood as helping to destroy Western culture, not create it. They have to be held accountable if we are ever to have great art again.

Social problems from unreal abstractions

Conservative Christians define such modern liberal mistakes as sexual freedom and gender sameness as negative and unreal abstractions, but then they go on to affirm the even bigger abstraction of spirituality claiming that abstraction can make us all love one another. It has not worked. The latest street disruptions between black and white seem even more full of hatred than the “love-ins “ of the 1960's which nearly tore our country apart.

Real respect for others needs to take into account what human nature actually is. Human beings remain kin centered and group or ethnic centered and real respect comes from allowing distinct people to live and worship in their own distinct ways, and not jammed together in the same abstract multicultural space. This logically and emotionally suggests an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, well protected by a federalism limiting itself to that protection.

We could actually do this legally due to the constitutional separation of powers and states, even if a few amendments to the Constitution are necessary. It is certainly worth the effort since the alternative seems to be increasing civil disruptions, civil war and the fall of the West.

Worshiping together has not been enough to bond and harmonize “multicultural” societies. Religious and political problems always go back to abstractions and ideologies with little or no basis in reality. But absurd as it sounds we can retain bonds of religion, Godhood, and political philosophy without unreal abstractions. The great spiritual blockade of material life and material evolution was promoted mainly for the sake of experiencing the inward God or the Father Within. That Inward Path can be retained but transformed in the Outward Path to the real Godhood reached through material evolution, grounded in the concrete reality of real nature, real human nature, and real evolution, which requires variety, separation, and differences, as we all evolve toward Godhood.

My hypothetical response to modern physics

"The field is the sole governing agency of the particle."

Albert Einstein

The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence."

Nikola Tesla

There is no such thing as “non-physical phenomena,” there are only the forces developed by physical phenomena, all of which we might not yet be aware of.

I am a long way from being a physicist but I am presumptuous enough to believe that the “forces” Max Planck, Einstein and Tesla spoke of are all material. I think the physical forces of matter, atoms, etc.---or some material force undefined--- leads to those forces, and then also controls the forces.

Energy, frequency, and vibration in the universe are not the secrets of the universe, it is matter, discovered and undiscovered, which drives those forces.

Is not the field which governs the particle created by the interaction of material forces? The field is not spiritual. In the same way gravity or electric forces are not spiritual, they are brought about by material objects.

Science has refused to see it but randomness to explain evolution is not enough, at least not for me. Randomness seems inadequate to explain the development of form and order, and the timeless movement from simplicity to complexity. I see a material inward activation as a “force”and it is not a non-physical force. In the same way the forces of energy which vibrate the particles are a material force “activating” material particles.

The only “duality” I see, which is not really a duality, is the Inward Dynamism of a material Spirit-Will or Will-Spirit of life activating material life to evolve in the world toward Godhood, shaped by endless sometimes random outside evolution. Perhaps that is the force physicists look for.

How Oneness Is Not Godhood

Does “likeness imply a oneness from which all likeness descends” as David Middleton poetically put it? (Modern Age, Summer 2016) If so, why does oneness suggest a highly complicated and wise God rather than a basic primeval origin? If a basic primeval origin is the reality, and I believe it is, then “oneness” has been vastly hypertrophied into a God.

What is important about the beginning, or beginnings, is the activation, the “force” that leads material life to evolve. This force is not God, it seeks Godhood. And this “force that through the green fuse drives the flower” (Dylan Thomas) is not any more “spiritual” then the Godhood it seeks to attain by activating and riding within the vehicle of material life toward supermaterial Godhood.

I have called this force the Will-Spirit or Spirit-Will mainly for the sake of continuity with the old idea of the Spirit or Soul. There is more to evolution than the duality of genes and nature, or genes telling the cells what to do within natural selection. That seems inadequate to explain the development of form and order, and the timeless movement from simplicity to complexity. Godhood is evolved to in the material world with stops and starts along the way, in an unending evolution.

Traditional religion sought the Inward God or Father Within which was a symbolic experience of the real Godhood reached through outward evolution. This is retained and defined in the Involutionary and Evolutionary Twofold Path of theological materialism.

A single beginning is part of that fantasy of oneness mentioned above. “Eden” is not that basic, primeval, unevolved, oneness. Eden is the zenith of material evolution which continues endlessly, like the universe. The world is not “fallen” from that basic primitive beginning, the world has evolved from that primitive beginning. “Time” is not a finality or a God, time is a technical measuring of endless evolution.

If there is something that could be called “divine” in humans it is that activating force within life, which is nevertheless not a God but is an imperfect “desire” for real material/supermaterial Godhood, which seems to define “life” in its evolving essence toward that sacred goal.

Beyond Gesamtkunstwerk

Can metaphor be more than two differences linked? The total words that the German language is so fond of, like "Gesamtkunstwerk" (artistic creation that encompasses various arts), which Wagner and Nietzsche tracked to Ancient Greece, find a deeper metaphor in theological materialism, which combines two things thought impossible to link, the spiritual and the material.

In the grand religious/philosophical metaphor of theological materialism the spiritual is seen as material or more precisely as the supermaterial, and arrived at through material evolution. Traditional religion and much of philosophy sees it the other way around, material things are considered grand illusions of the real spiritual world. That is a very deep “transvalution of values” which even Nietzsche seems to have believed, as his will to power seems to be a non-material force. Heidegger's Being also seems to be non-material and spiritual.

In private caves and public monasteries the ascetics sought to block the material world and material desires so as to experience the God Within, both Christ and Buddha strongly promoted this Inward Path. And the “truth” most philosophers sought was seen as a nonmaterial idea. But the Twofold Path of theological materialism sees the God within as only the first glimpse or experience---which is a blissful experience better than drugs---of the real Godhood reached in various levels of the Outward Path of material evolution. The Twofold Path does not reject traditional religion it retains and transforms it.

What determines history's outcome and what does that mean politically?

The environment interacts with people and ideas to change history, not unlike the nature/nurture pattern where nature tends to be slightly more influential than nurture. But modern liberals who are mainly cultural Marxists think that nature can be left out of it and that human nature is completely malleable. Historians work from these perspectives usually leaning in one direction or another.

How human nature is defined becomes important in understanding the direction of history and culture. Human nature remains today, among other mostly traditional things, kin-centered, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection. This suggest that real human nature works more smoothly with an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where nature and nurture can work most harmoniously in determining history's outcome.

To me this means strong leaders and their character traits, which includes their ideas, can make a big difference in the direction of history. This also means that ethno-demographics can change history. As the people change the culture changes. Immigration can change a culture, and multiculturalism can confuse and disrupt a nation, whereas homogeneous ethnostates tend to work more harmoniously.

How long will these plain truths remain politically incorrect and taboo? I suppose as long as some people gain short-term power from lies.

The modern liberal principle of tolerance for almost everything has all but destroyed Western civilization

In theological materialism the laws of nature and human nature coincide for the most part with the laws of traditional religion. It may be blasphemous to some, but I believe that the laws of nature come before and lead to or activate the laws of traditional religion, and not the other way around.

This does not reject religion but it puts religion in the right balance with the reality of nature and human nature. We are not born with endless free choice to discover what best seems to fit our interests. We have free choice within a determined human nature. But human nature also largely harmonizes with traditional morality. Human nature has a constant nature but an ever-changing character, to adapt what Colin Gray said of war.

Human nature remains mainly kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection. I prefer the term “ordered evolution” to “ordered liberty” because it is more in line with the reality of human nature. We have choices within determined paths of evolution, like a boulder rolling down a mountain, as E.O. Wilson once put it.

I think the U. S. constitutional separation of powers and states is wisely in harmony with real human nature. I also think real human nature naturally needs to be seen as leading to ethnostates within an ethnopluralism---human nature certainly does not point to one world with all varieties of unlike people stuffed into one territory and told to all get along together.

But a series of Supreme Court decisions now allows almost any perversion of human nature, people are legally “free” to chose whatever sexuality, whatever odd version of marriage, whatever political structure that fits their short-term fancy. No such freedom exists within a largely determined human nature. The modern liberal principle of tolerance for almost everything with perversions of real human nature of every kind has all but destroyed Western civilization.

Personally I hate the Big Media. Oh, oh, is that “'hate speech?”

Presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are flawed but it will be the Big Media that decides the winners and losers, not their flaws, and that is way too much power for the Media.

The Big Media now rules our culture. The little media, Twitter, talk radio, even Fox News (which is neoliberal or neoconservative, not conservative) are no match for the Big Media.

The Big Media have won the cultural war. The swamp of modern liberalism and cultural Marxism, have eradicated the traditional family and community normalcy and replaced it with the love of the self, easy divorce, easy abortion, pornography, and on and on.

What can be done about the Big Media? “Nothing” you say? You make my point. Nevertheless, something has to be done about the power of the Big Media before cultural health can actually be restored.

The monstrous dream of turning all life into artificial life

Many transhumanists think that homo sapiens will be replaced by artificial life. They are talking about the death of life. There has got to be some catch here, maybe they don't want their own death, they want to stop their competitors, then they can realize their Nerd dream of controlling artificial life and the world!

But life and the evolution of life won't go down that easily. We will develop artificial life but it will be as an aid to the evolution of life and an aid to our own evolution, and not merely the designing of cyborgs and artificial “life.” In other words, life itself instinctively probably won't allow the monstrous dream of turning all life into artificial life. 

Conservatism and Ethnopluralism

I believe human nature inevitably moves in the direction of ethnopluralism, because human nature is essentially kin and group or ethnic centered, in spite of political ideologies that ignore this basic human nature. The reality of human nature affirms traditional conservatism as ranking higher than libertarian individualism.

The nefarious political correctness and cultural Marxism that has captured our county will need to be overcome, which is no small task, but the increasing diversity of the demographics of the United States can actually help in moving us toward ethnostates.

The transformation of regions and states toward ethnostates and localism can happen without radical revolution. This change will happen radically and with many social disruptions if it does not happen legally and constitutionally.

This can happened in the United States due to the constitutional separation of powers and states. Even if a few amendments to the Constitution are necessary, revolution and civil war need to be avoided. I would have the radical revolutionaries actually read Burke and Kirk who proved, at least to me, that revolutionary change to longtime tradition based in real human nature does far more harm than good.

I consider myself a patriot, I love the Untied States, and I will defend it and its real traditions as we transform legally toward ethnopluralism, well protected by federalism.

Why Trump supporters are wiser than Hillary supporters

It is true that a high IQ is required for doing graduate school research, but is intelligence defined only as the “capacity for abstraction?” When we test for IQ we also need to test for character and honesty, otherwise we get the Hillary supporters who include the brilliant monsters from the Ivy League Schools who have been destroying the Western world.

Trump supporters seem wiser than their candidate who is figuring out what a conservative is as he goes along---but at least he has courage. Trump supporters instinctively understand the basis of conservatism and real life without much abstract thinking about it: real human nature is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection.

And it is not only redneck dummies who believe this, the highest IQ's in the academic world of sociobiology affirm this view of human nature. Hillary and her brilliant monsters, with their capacity for abstractions, do not understand this at all. Trump supporters do. Who is biased, bigoted, and stupid in this reality?

The Big Media Shouts “Fire”

“Conservatives” like Joe Scarborough have been calling for Donald Trump to “pivot” from his more extreme positions, but when he did that with his immigration position they attacked him for “flip flopping.” Trump can't win with these people, but if even if he does manage to win they will go after him until they destroy him.

Has the Big Media become a fifth column in the West out to destroy what remains of the West under the cover of “free speech?” Are they not shouting “fire” in a crowded theater? Isn't that against the law? Is it time to think about breaking up Big Media monopolies into smaller pieces with many more owners? Or are we too far gone to do that? Didn't this same thing happen before World War Two?

Why I really don't like Hillary Clinton

First of all this is a woman whose mannerisms, speech and gestures are all phony. She is a bad B-movie actress. Then there is her political philosophy which is both culturally Marxist and neoconservative, which are bogus philosophies based in abstract ideas with no relationship to real human nature other than a greedy will to power. She and her husband, who also lies as he smiles, have transformed their Hippie leftist tendencies from the 60's into being intimate friends with Wall Street and the bankers, while claiming not to be. Then there is her feminism, which like all feminism (accept maybe Camille Paglia's version), has no basis in real biological human nature. And it is not gentlemanly to mention it but what does it say about Hillary's character that even when running for president! she doesn't have the personal discipline to lose the weight which is damaging her health and her appearance?

And Hillary is predicted to win! How messed up we are! Donald Trump is flawed but his instincts at least seem healthier than Hillary's. The people are just fed up with all of them.

.

How the alt.right is more legitimately conservative than Republicans and conservatives

Republicans and conservatives now want Donald Trump to purge the alt.right from his populist movement, but the alt.right at least has the courage to speak of the biological origin of social behavior, and Republicans do not.

Conservative English professors (all three of them) complain about the grammatical mistakes and fuzzy thinking of liberal professors, but conservatives don't complain about the denial of the biological origin of social behavior by the left, because conservatives are guilty of the the same denial---and some of this, if not all of it, is due to political correctness on the right.

Ignoring the biological origin of social behavior does not make it go away, it only confuses and complicates political discourse and offers at best temporary political victories.

Blacks and modern liberals (and all of the Big Media) say they will not support Trump because he is racist, but then blacks, modern liberals, and the Big Media loudly and continually promote blacks and other minorities by race, or by special racial preferences like "affirmative action," and they usually do so by attacking whites by race.

Although too often selfishly fascist, the alt.right is more legitimately conservative than Republicans and conservatives.

Just plain common sense yet alone real scholarship would see that real human nature is fundamentally kin and group-centered. Real human compassion, right and left, would allow states to be at least generally ethnostates, with the freedom to affirm the fundamental biological origin of social and cultural behavior. The U.S Constitution even more or less saw this in the separation of powers and states. Many of today's social disruptions would then go away.

Can we say replacing “grace” with “evolution” perfects nature?

Can we say replacing “grace” with “evolution” perfects nature? Almost. It is the activation within life here called the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood---which is material---that perfects evolution and nature, working along with natural evolutionary selection.

Theological materialism is based in continual material evolution, which is never really perfected since Godhood is an ongoing upward evolution that never really ends, even if it sometimes begins again.

“Truth” is not an abstract idea or mathematical figure, it is defined in living objects, and therefore the highest truths are embodied in the highest evolution within the material and supermaterial world.

The traditional Inward Path of the Twofold Path can retain the old abstract idea, or symbolic experience, of the inward God, which is transformed in the Outward Path of material and supermaterial evolution to real Godhood.

Why neoconservatives are cunning, nasty, and even dangerous thinkers

Neoconservatives claim that we are a “proposition nation.” But the neos build an abstract superstructure with no foundation.

Chilton Williamson recently pointed out that propositions are made by people, for example, it was the British ethos which developed our Constitution. I would emphasize that specific genes and environments are very much reflected in the propositions people make. 

Many neoconservatives tend to see a Nazi behind every corner, but then they go on to consciously (or unconsciously?) create propositions that advance those who create the proposition, almost with another form of Nazism. This is why I find neoconservatives from Leo Strauss and Alan Bloom, to the present crowd at the “National Review” journal, cunning, nasty and even dangerous thinkers.

Don't get me wrong, I am not criticizing the natural desire for survival and reproductive success which activates the behavior of group-selection, I am criticizing disguising and lying about it. If we were honest we would see the good sense in allowing separate states for distinctly different and competing ethnic groups, and protect that independence.

Unlike the neoconservatives, paleoconservatives like Mr. Williamson and Pat Buchanan are at least sort of signaling an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.