What good is it to become rich if you and your descendants die in foreign wars fought for commerce?

The free enterprise system was a great social invention almost miraculously driving up the standard of living for everyone, but as often happens with human inventions the free enterprise system has been hypertrophied into a monster of destruction. The saying “wars fought for commerce” says it all about where the free enterprise system and bloated capitalism have gone.

All religions said something like: “one's love for God must exceed his love for all material things.” Other than religious fundamentalists, and those who give lip service to the idea that wealth can further God’s realm on this planet, all religions have faded and the values of the money-making monster control everything---even Communists China has joined the money-making monster, although they operate more like the old Talmudic idea that interest-free loans apply only to loans made to other Chinese and not to persons who are not Chinese.

Modern liberals copy the religious idea that wealth can further God’s realm on this planet only they do it without God or religion and they make big government the distributor of wealth, with economists and bureaucrats as priests. Libertarians and Republicans consider the individual as king and allow individuals to seek wealth largely unimpeded by social scruples.

The global Wall Street “libertarians” have allowed and promoted open border immigration (which the global left also pushes for different reasons) because they believe that money-making is at the epitome of all social behavior.

Economic nationalism and tariffs, which President Trump has had the courage to promote, makes deeper sense on the biological level. We need to retain the great free enterprise system but what good is it to become rich if you and your descendants die in foreign wars fought for commerce?

Who really knows where we will go from here, but real human nature will have its way, and real human nature tends to lead naturally to decentralism, regionalism, localism, and eventually to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Ultimately our wealth is a means to materially evolve toward supermaterial Godhood, which is the transformed religious way to redeem and perfect the world.

Toward a deeper and more realistic conservatism

Real human nature is the real “wisdom of the species,” it is a wisdom deeper than the abstractions of religion, philosophy, or science, it is the wisdom that evolved the biological origin of our social behavior over many thousands of years.

Edmund Burke, T.S. Eliot, and Russell Kirk were superlative conservative intellectuals but they could have deepened, not rejected, conservatism if they could have affirmed the science of sociobiology.

The Darwinist science of sociobiology has basically found that throughout human history to this day human nature has been basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in. “The genes are like the keyboard on which the song of life is played, but the pianist is the social environment,” John Cacioppo said. “It helps determine which genes are turned on or off.”

Not long ago the great sociobiologist E.O. Wilson affirmed group-selection over individual selection---as the "Boston Globe" put it: “Wilson is not arguing that members of certain species don't sacrifice themselves for the benefit of their relatives. They do. But it's his position that kinship and relatedness aren't essential in causing the development of advanced social behaviors like altruism---that the reason such behaviors catch on is that they're evolutionarily advantageous on a group level. That socially advanced organisms end up favoring their kin, Wilson argues, is a byproduct of their group membership, not the cause.” Research backs up this position. I would agree with this as long as it is also understood that group-selection, altruism, and conservatism have favored ethnically related groups over more distant unrelated groups, social harmony and survival success  come from ethnic homogeneity, and not without it---there is a natural continuum of altruism, concern for the world comes well after concern for ones own people and ones own land.

The idea on the left of a "living Constitution" leans toward the evolutionary side of human nature, toward evolutionary rights---but not revolutionary rights which some on the left and the right encourage. And the left today, in contrast to the apotheosis of the individual rights by conservatives, tracks the rights of various groups or ethnic groups, which is in harmony with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection in human nature. But the left then goes on to champion multiculturalism and the rights of almost every kind of social perversion, like a gender-free world, which are not at all in harmony with real human nature, and many on the left don't even think there is a biological human nature believing human nature springs only from ones environmental upbringing.

The reality derived from the wisdom of real human nature points toward the political/cultural solution of the ethnopluralism hypothesis, often written about here. It is a conservative transformation---not revolution---which will bring about an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, the political/cultural structure most in harmony with the wisdom of real human nature. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could 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, and the ethnostates would have to be defended from marauding imperialists, globalists and supremacists, but an ethnopluralism of ethnostates will bring a deeper and more realistic conservatism for all groups.

Hollywood has been wildly successful in the destruction of traditional Western culture

It is more entertaining to the masses to attack a culture than to affirm a culture and Hollywood has become an evil genius at entertainingly destroying traditional Western culture. Hollywood has been very successful in promoting and establishing their own degenerate garbage culture in America---and getting very rich in the process.

Then that destruction was combined with the destruction of traditional Western culture in virtually all of our schools. A majority of our young people have bought it all. We can see why Hollywood is the most dangerous organization in America today.

Hollywood was very cunning to at first sell only wholesome patriotic movies and television before and just after World War Two; they took their time to get to the point to where they now sell only hedonism, sex, drugs, and revolution. When Hollywood does temporarily put aside its constant attacks against Western culture its favorite default worldview is cultural Marxism, which is just another more academic attack against Western culture. 
 

This quote from Joseoph Goebbels shows that Hollywood learned from its greatest enemy (or was it the other way around?): “ We shall reach our goal, when we have the power to laugh as we destroy, as we smash whatever was sacred to us as tradition, as education, and as human affection.”

Traditional Western culture is in serious trouble. What can we do about it? We could try to do to Hollywood what they did to us, destroy their culture; but in the long term it is better to just work on legally establishing ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in America. Hollywood might even then have their own ethnostate to pollute---New York? Los Angeles?

Future Politics

To expand on Burke and other conservatives, all men have equal rights, but all men are not equal, and all men do not have equal rights to things. All men have a basic inherited human nature which has been affirmed by tradition and now empirically explained by sociobiology as being basically kin-centered, gender defined, heterosexual, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other conservative things, with group-selection (the origin of altruism) as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

When left to be who they really all men and women prefer self, kin, and ethnic group over others, and do so to advance their own unique gene pools relating to the reality of the biological origin of our social behavior.

Human history, human nature, and human social behavior instinctively and logically lead to the cultural expression of localism, regionalism, ethnostates, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, with some sort of federalism to protect them from marauding imperialists and supremacists who always appear.  This can be done legally, conservatively, attached to such existing things as the constitutional separation of powers and states. It may not be an easy transformation, but it is the right transformation. 

So are we ready? (he claps his hands with enthusiasm) No? Well, okay, then we can work toward being ready; we have the natural flow of nature and human nature on our side.

Then we can get on with ongoing evolution, which is sacred, within the natural order of things.

Rising from dispossession?

Increasingly stripped of a real sense of identity whites are also losing their sense of place and time. Some of the blame for this dispossession goes to whites who did little or nothing to stop it, but most of the blame goes to the Mass Media and our schools who have played a bold and dirty game in the dispossession of white culture. It has become illegal, politically incorrect, or labeled “hate speech” for whites to object to being stripped of their identity. 

What is America doing about the dispossession of white culture? The Mass Media has recently given us three Black women as winners in the Miss USA, Miss Teen, and Miss America beauty contests. Yesterday at the decadent Met Gala, Pop star Lady Gaga entered in a pink dress, then publicly stripped to a black dress underneath, then another pink dress under that, and finally stripped to her underwear. Twitter was alive with the question “Who Left the Starbucks Coffee Cup” in the hit HBO series “Game of Thrones.” And good old white boys drunkenly cheered on millionaire black athletes.

Is it over for whites? Offense usually beats defense in these social games. We can't blame other races and ethnic groups for exercising their own wills to power when every cell in the human 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. Any existing social and cultural methods we try, including minority power organizations, as well as the academic brainwashing of postmodernism, come down to the natural drive to biologically and genetically advance ourselves, our kin,  related ethnic group, locality, and nation. So it's not over for whites, even though the Mass Media and our schools want it to be over.

Comparing evolution with cultural Marxism and traditional conservatism

It's not that the Mass Media can't distinguish between freedom and license, they support license or revolt in their desire to dissolve and destroy traditional America, although of course they never openly admit it.

The cry of liberty, equality, and fraternity of the French Revolution like the cry of the Mass Media today only works in regions and states with ethnically homogeneous people, and even then it is difficult since virtually nothing is equal. It is really a cry of the will to power of the promoters. Even Edmund Burke, whose writings probably kept the French Revolution from destroying England, did not emphasize enough the importance of ethnic homogeneity in retaining social order.

The problem when comparing the cultural Marxists with traditional conservatives is that conservatives are too skeptical of evolution and change, and cultural Marxists are too skeptical of tradition and order.

The biological origin of our social behavior actually ends the intellectual defense of postmodern relativism and the cultural Marxist ideologues. But it also takes some of the virtue-signaling away from conservatives. Group-selection, altruism, and conservatism have favored genetically related groups over more distantly related groups. There is a natural continuum of altruism, concern for the world comes after concern for ones own land and people. 

Change is as important as tradition and order but conservatives emphasize tradition and order over change. Charles Darwin and evolution had not yet had their impact on men's minds in Burke's time---and still haven't, for the most part, 137 years since Darwin died. 

This strongly suggests that real human nature leads naturally to the cultural expression of regionalism, localism, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by some sort of federalism. Given who we are this appears to be the best way we can optimize the gene expression we inherited from our human ancestors not to mention the best way to survive and prosper.

Then to ground this worldview as deeply as possible we need a religious philosophy to express the material evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood, as seen in the philosophy of theological materialism, with the cultural forms, bonding, traditions, and order which can enhance ongoing evolution for all of us. We can conservatively retain but transform the old inward God of the mind to the outward Godhood reached through ascending levels of material and supermaterial evolution.

Cultural Marxism is a mass psychosis promoted by the Big Media and by our schools

Cultural Marxism is a mass psychosis promoted by the Big Media and by our schools resulting in the abnormal condition of the mind having difficulties determining what is real and what is not. What an evil thing to do to a people!

What the mass psychosis of cultural Marxism does is cause the people to abandon what they are, and what human nature actually is, which is in reality kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. This human nature evolved over great time through trial and error because it was successful in survival and reproduction.

How long the mass psychosis of cultural Marxism can operate with behavior that goes against real human nature remains to be seen, but history shows that cultures are eventually pulled back (but sometimes yanked back with force) by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and people then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.

The degree to which you believe that the mass psychosis of cultural Marxism is consciously and purposely inflicted on the people to weaken, enslave, or destroy them, (and by whom) determines whether you will be labeled paranoid, a hate group, or merely suspicious. But the mass psychosis of cultural Marxism, mild or unhinged, is certainly related to the will to power of those who promote it, and that prominently includes the Big Media and our schools, or those who own or control these institutions. Borderfree globalists such as the neoconservatives also at least indirectly affirm this mass psychosis because when the people have difficulties determining what is real and what is not they are easier to exploit economically.

Minus ethnic connections, individualism and localism are mainly just words and ideas that do not bond well

It is not enough to advocate individualism and localism as the old Agrarians did, and as present paleoconservatives now do, to try to bring an alienated and fragmented multicultural multi-ethnic societies together again. Minus ethnic connections, individualism and localism are mainly just words and ideas that do not bond well. If literature and the arts are missing ethnic connections they are weaker than when they include ethnic identity.

Blacks and Jews identify with their ethnicity and it has made them stronger. For long stretches of their history ethnic bonding, even in religion, was all the Jews had, and they continue to successfully hold to ethnocentrism even as it has become politically taboo for other ethnic groups to do so.

The social experiment of trying to jam people together into one happy multicultural multi-ethnic space has not worked well at all; alienation, fragmented, and competition between ethnic groups has increased.

When people are allowed to recognize the natural social bonding advantages of affirming ethnicity, then the locality, the academic world, the arts, politics, and even science can better aid in ending alienation and fragmentation. Human nature just is kin-centered and ethnocentric, among other conservative traits, and humans create cultures that relate to their ethnically distinctive needs.

Each distinctive ethnic group deserves its own ethnostate where the academic world, the arts, politics, and even science can more successfully and naturally bond together and flourish. Human nature is biologically, genetically, and culturally kin-centered and ethnocentric because such bonding has been the most successful in survival and reproduction, and also helps in avoiding the alienation and fragmentation that we see today, especially in white societies which have been hit the hardest by the multicultural multi-ethnic experiment.

The renewal and transition needed in conservatism

Russell Kirk reminds us that American conservatism needs to continue to defend our culture which was substantially inherited from the British, our language, rule of law, individualism, customs, etc.. Kirk, and his mentor Edmund Burke, also saw that conservatism needs to be always renewed with original art and other political/cultural changes. I would call these changes "imaginative affirmations."

What we really are, what we choose as our social persona, what we culturally choose to conserve, and how we define conservatism, work much more harmoniously together the better we define real human nature. The vital renewal needed in conservatism of original art and other political/cultural changes---and even more desperately needed in modern liberalism---is to affirm human nature as empirically explained by sociobiology.

We don't want a phony conservatism. It seems to me that "phonies" are mainly bad actors who cannot make their social persona look genuine, they are putting on a social face that obviously does not reflect their true thoughts and feelings. Generally people who present themselves socially as they really are are only young children, acknowledged geniuses, or very old people.

Whether we all know it or not human nature is basical kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. When real human nature as empirically explained by sociobiology is included in the conservative renewal of original art and other political/cultural changes, then our social personas, what we culturally choose to conserve, and how we define conservatism, will work much more harmoniously together.

Then we will have a clearer picture of why we will need an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions established in the United States, legally developed from our constitutional separation of powers and states, to relate to the growing variety of ethnic groups in America with different genetic pools and different agendas. It will not be easy but it is far preferable to radical Marxism or Fascism, or political dissimulations based on flawed definitions of human nature that have brought us radically destructive civil disruptions, and even civil war, and which are now increasing across the world within unworkable multicultural (multi-ethnic) societies demanding that "we all get along."

What the Southern Agrarians overlooked

The free enterprise system is one of the greatest social inventions, with private business operating in competition and largely free of state control. It led to the highest standard of living in human history and the development of amazing technology, but it could not stop itself from hypertrophying into the rapacious border-less capitalism we have today.

The Southern Agrarians in the 1920's and 1930's tried to prevent this from happening, warning of the social alienation and dehumanization of industrialism and urbanism and advocating localism and individualism, but they could not prevent rapacious border-less capitalism from taking over America.

Industrialism during World War Two gave the fatal boost to rapacious border-less capitalism. It has been argued by a few brave people, like Pat Buchanan, that World War II could have been avoided if the Treaty of Versailles had not been so harsh towards Germany. Buchanan believes that if Churchill had accepted Hitler's peace offer of 1940, the severity of the Holocaust would have been greatly reduced.

The Southern Agrarians missed the social alienation and dehumanization caused in the post-war period by the declaration that natural ethnocentrism is evil, which has been at least as alienating and dehumanizing as the growth of rapacious border-less capitalism. Human nature, as empirically explained by sociobiology, remains kin-centered, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. The Southern Agrarians missed the idea that an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism.

The development of ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates remains a taboo subject, but it nevertheless needs to be understood and spoken about if we are ever to recover from the social alienation and dehumanization of industrialism and urbanism. Permanent revenge and resentment from WWII is not the behavior of noble people.

Dreams of assimilation don't take into account the biological origin of social behavior

Both Kirkian conservatives and modern liberals made the tragic political mistake in assuming, hoping really, that assimilation would take place between the distinctly different ethnic groups who were allowed to immigrate into America, based on the idea that culture, the British culture, is the main feature of the nation, and the faulty idea that the ethnicity of America is secondary. Later liberals developed the idea of having one multicultural multi-ethnic society where all would supposedly get along well together without all assimilating into one British culture and without all speaking English, as the Kirkian's insisted we do.

The problem with both political approaches is they don't take into account the biological origin of social behavior or that ethnic groups are made up of distinctive genes and genetic pools which develop distinctive cultures to advance those distinctive ethnic genetic pools. In reality it is a zero sum game where the gain of one ethnic group is offset by the loss of another ethnic group; they do not assimilate unless they are close ethnic cousins, even if there is some assimilation from interbreeding around the edges.

Blacks have been in America for several hundred years (forced here in slavery) and billions of dollars continue to be spent helping them assimilate without much success, although some of the lack of success comes from natural resentment at being enslaved. The advent of multicultural multi-ethnic societies only increased and affirmed non-assimilation. Millions of Hispanics too have naturally insisted on keeping their language and culture because ethnic groups are made up of distinctive genes and genetic pools which develop distinctive cultures to advance those distinctive ethnic genetic pools.

The last hope for those who want the whole world to assimilate into one group is to declare that interbreeding will make the whole world coffee-colored where we all get along. But that is not how the world works. Ethnic groups develop distinctive cultures to advance distinctive genetic pools in what becomes mainly a zero sum game of competition and survival.

Better to realize at last that the best way to deal with our deep-seated differences and our  ignorant immigration policies is to affirm a reinvigoration of the Constitutional separation of powers and states, this time in harmony with the growing variety of ethnic groups in America with different genetic pools and different agendas who could develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with real human nature... But these vital changes need to be done legally, constitutional, and not by radical revolutionary means which almost never work and cause great biological and cultural harm.

Hollywood lies to the common man and the academic world lies to the educated

Hollywood lies to the common man and the academic world lies to the educated, and we therefore have a culture of lies because Hollywood and the academic world virtually control popular culture.

One example: Movies and television now almost always portray whites as criminals and blacks and other minorities as heroes, which is a lie about real crime statistics. Of the approximately 660,000 crimes of interracial violence that involved blacks and whites in 2013, blacks were the perpetrators 85 percent of the time. This meant a black person was 27 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. A Hispanic was eight times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa.

These lies demoralize young whites, anger older whites, and embolden hatred of whites by blacks and minorities, which is what they are designed to do because the lies are the will to power of Hollywood and the academic world who have ridden to power on the backs of blacks and minorities.

The lies in the academic world are the lies of cultural Marxism which include the destruction of family, male against female, class against class, and concentration of power in a culturally Marxist big government. And of course the lies bring more power to Hollywood and the academic world.

The error of the French New Right regarding how to think about Christianity

French New Right philosopher Alain de Benoist made an error regarding how to think about Christianity by undervaluing the conservative predisposition in human nature. I made the same error for a time. It would have been better to take the lead of St. Thomas Aquinas: when Aquinas became aware of the superiority of the pagan Greek philosophers he conservatively and brilliantly synthesized Greek philosophers into Christianity rather than becoming a Greek pagan.

Human nature is fundamentally conservative which can best be explained by the science of sociobiology. Human nature remains basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, took hundreds of thousands of years---although genetic engineering may speed that up.

The revitalized conservatism I write about is, at its deepest point, based in an evolutionary interpretation of Christianity and traditional religions, which sees life evolving in the material and supermaterial world to ever ascending levels of real Godhood. Evolution is brought to Christianity based on the philosophy of theological materialism, which means materialism is unblocked and made sacred, since material evolution leads to Godhood. The God first seen or experienced inwardly as the God or Father Within of traditional religions is a symbolic mirror of the real Godhood which is attained through material evolution. And that Father Within of traditional religions is conservatively retained in the Twofold Path, the Involutionary Inward and Evolutionary Outward Paths, which brings together the old and the new understanding of Godhood. This can help prevent radical religious change in the West, and the negative biological and social consequences which usually happen with radical change.

Without this revitalization of religion the decline of the West will continue, which began way back in the European Renaissance, and may eventually destroy the cultures, societies, and people whom the religion's bonded and defended---although I suppose there could be a few coercive, science-hating, fundamentalist revivals.

Modern science can join religion. Theological materialism can help unblock the Great Spiritual Blockade against evolving to Godhood and provide the West with a solid foundation based in Pagan/Christian instincts, objective truth, and intellectual intuition.

By turning to the Traditionalism of Guenon and Evola, as many in the New Right have done, it just buries them deeper in the Inward Path which includes pagan versions of an anti-material spiritualism, the same spiritualism that has been destroying evolution and blocking the Outward Path of material evolution to real supermaterial Godhood.

From this foundation we can defend America, the West, and the people of the West, including the French.

Balancing the natural tensions between group-selection and individual-selection

The principle of "duty before love" seems to have been more a royal, aristocratic, or leadership principle. I've thought about it from the perspective of group-selection and individual-selection.

Sociobiologist E.O. Wilson has found that there is a co-evolution between group-selection and individual-selection with group-selection paramount in successful human survival and reproduction. It's the balancing between these two that causes the natural tension: “Individual versus group selection results in a mix of altruism and selfishness, of virtue and sin, among the members of a society.” And so, morals and virtues developed.

This behavior seems to have evolved classes and hierarchies, which Georges Dumezil described as tripartite or trifunctional: priests, warriors, and commoners (farmers, tradesmen) corresponding to the three functions of the sacral, martial, and economic---at least among Indo-European's, who developed Western civilization.

From this perspective the king, priest and warrior, or leadership, would tend to put duty before love and favor group-selection, the producer's would favor individual selection but lean toward group-selection, and the commoner's would tend toward individual-selection.

That whole hierarchical class structure allowed for both duty and love. I suppose the royals got around it by living and marrying for duty but then taking on lovers. Effective warriors would need to be more strict about telling the truth. And commoners would get on with having babies. In ethnically homogeneous societies the natural tensions between group-selection and individual-selection would that way balance out.

This may be why totalitarian leaders who try to be all things don't last long, and why communist systems trying to do away with class structures don't work---it takes a whole ethnically homogeneous class structure (although not necessarily monarchies) for successful survival and reproduction over the long term.

Political problems are at root biological problems relating to the biological origin of our social behavior

Political problems are not at root economic problems (Capitalism, Marxism) and are not at root cultural problems (customs, arts, social institutions), political problems are at root biological problems relating to the biological origin of our social behavior. Real tradition, real conservatism, knows this to be true, although it has become politically incorrect to say it, and that taboo, ironically, is itself the result of biological competition, consciously or unconsciously.

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

Even in advanced modern societies where survival is easier, the dangers of Marxism (demanding equality for the unequal), radical feminism (demanding biologically unnatural roles for women), homosexuality (demanding unnatural sexual life styles) and postmodern relativism (demanding an unnatural relativity of values) is behavior that goes against real human nature, which remains basically kin-centered, gender defined, heterosexual, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other traditional things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Given who we are and given what human nature really is, there should by now be politicians advocating ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with the growing variety of ethnic groups in America with different genetic pools and different competing agendas. We could, with the Constitutional separation of powers and states, develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, and we could with a light federalism protect the ethnostates from marauding imperialism and supremacism which always rear their ugly head.

Where are the politicians and intellectuals who should be trying to deal with political problems that are at root biological problems relating to the biological origin of our social behavior? They are not to be seen on Fox News. And the conservative intellectual journals won't affirm the biological origin of our social behavior either; perhaps they are afraid it will upend the idea that political problems are at root religious problems. Or it could simply be the desire not to be crucified professionally and personally by the corrupt Big Media etc., which I suppose almost justifies accepting the taboo. At least the "Alt right" will bravely discuss the subject---when they aren't singing the praises of Aleksandr Dugin and Russia.

Joe Biden's video today announcing his run for president in 2020 indicates what the emphasis will be on both sides of the contest

Biden will declare that President Trump is a racist and Trump will try to prove that he is not a racist, and so the corrupt Big Media will get what it wants, all the candidates falling all over themselves to appeal to minority and liberal votes. Nothing will be said on either side about the racism of minorities, which is every bit as strong as white racism, if not stronger.

Both sides will play dirty using demagoguery, appealing to the desires and prejudices of minorities, which only causes more race hatred, although Trump will appeal more to forgotten whites. No one will have the courage to tell the truth about race hatred: in 2013, of the approximately 660,000 crimes of interracial violence that involved blacks and whites, blacks were the perpetrators 85 percent of the time. This meant a black person was 27 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. A Hispanic was eight times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. ("The Color of Crime")

So it looks like nothing much will change, Western culture will continue to decline mainly at the hands of "leaders" who make false claims and promises in order to gain power. But real human nature remains genetically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, among other mostly conservative things. This being the reality, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates seems like the most humane political structure for all races, but it remains politically incorrect to say so.

A sort of dubious optimism regarding the destruction of America

I often write the line, as the people change the culture changes, and the people who have been most responsible for changing the dominant white American culture we inherited from our founders (who inherited it from white cultures of Athens, Jerusalem, and London) have been militant blacks, radical Jewish academics, "civil rights" advocates, brainwashed media-be-goggled students, the Big Media, Hollywood, border-less capitalists, corrupt politicians bought by special interest lobbyists, and suicidal white limousine liberals so ignorant that they don't even know they are suicidal. These are the people who have pulled down traditional white American culture---they are even demanding that science departments need to be purged because they are too "Eurocentric!."

I suppose this is more or less how all nations fall. I keep thinking it must be overdo time for people to realize that sociology and politics in reality are reduced to biology. Sociobiologist Edward Wilson suggested that we need to biologicize culture and ethics which will challenge other subjects in psychology and philosophy, including political philosophy. But virtually nothing is happening, the subject is blocked by the people mentioned above.

The reality is that cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against human nature---which is fundamentally kin and ethnic-centered---with such experiments as cultural Marxism, the favorite of all our schools, but all cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature (such as ethnostates or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates) and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in. For me that at least offers a sort of dubious optimism regarding the destruction of America.

How the United States could last another several hundred years, at least (reblog from 2015)

Sometimes it's disheartening to realize that even as “Affirmative Action” is slowly being understood to really be reverse discrimination---for example, giving 20 points to underrepresented minorities for admission to various universities, or one fifth of those points needed, regardless of their test scores---we do still nevertheless have the concept of “discrimination” even in the face of many years of evolutionary science, from Darwin to Edward Wilson's sociobiology, showing that human nature is kin-centered, and is ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection.
 

Rather than trying to force assimilation, which rational people can see is not working in the United States (and elsewhere), we should by now be gradually protecting unique ethnic cultures living within their own geographical localities and states. This would seem to mean a gradual acceptance of Black states in the South, Hispanic states in the West, White states in the Midwest, and even mixed states in the East, or some version of these, if any kind of peace and order will take place.
 

But with cultural Marxism now largely---and uncomfortably---in place in the United States, a natural geographical ethnopluralism does seem difficult to bring about. But if we could put this natural political behavior in place, over time, legally, in the United States---which already has a separation of powers and states on paper---we could perhaps last another several hundred years, at least. Perhaps it will happen anyway, given human nature, one way or another. It's what always happens when empires fall.

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

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

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

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

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

The biological or genetic origin of social behavior needs to be declared

"If a culture succeeds it may grow into a civilization." Russell Kirk

The Big Media, Hollywood, the public schools, and corrupt politicians will allow us to talk of high or low culture in terms of improvement of the mind, or the living standard of the people, but they will not allow us to define culture as the bonding together of people who share the same gene pool and ethnicity, they will not allow any talk of the biological or genetic origin of our social behavior.

When World War Two ended 75 years ago it also ended all discussion of the biological origin of social behavior, due mainly to the racial supremacism of the losing side. But the Big Media, Hollywood, the public schools, and corrupt politicians threw the biological baby out with the supremacist bath water. They say not that it is too early to talk about it but that the biological or genetic origin of social behavior should never again be mentioned!

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, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism and fascism 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.

In our crowded world real kin and ethnic-centered human nature negates supremacism, imperialism, and globalism as unworkable over the long term, but human nature does not negate decentralization toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in harmony with the growing variety of ethnic groups with different genetic pools and different agendas. With the Constitutional separation of powers and states we can develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates and regions, protected from marauding imperialists by a light federalism.

Contrary to the Big Media, Hollywood, the public schools, and corrupt politicians who demand that we never again mention the biological or genetic origin of social behavior, it needs to be declared and grow into a renewal of civilization.