RADICAL NOT CONSERVATIVE Or, why I am and am not a conservative at the same time

RADICAL NOT CONSERVATIVE

Or, why I am and am not a conservative at the same time. 🙂

My position is radical, not conservative. I’m not advocating retention of the status quo (the definition of conservatism), nor am I asking to return to the past. But insisting that we adopt institutions suitable to our people’s competitive needs, which are also as it turns out, man’s evolutionary needs – because of the uniqueness of our civilization.

Yes, we can learn from our past, in that we can learn what caused our success – resistance to the concentration of power (division of power), the division of labor, testimonial truth, and the common law.

Truth is inseparable from calculation, and calculation inseparable from action, and given the necessity and utility of action, all else is justification and deception in pursuit of competition within the existing genetic, geography, family, economic, and political structure. Or more clearly: while it is possible to calculate verbally, it is also possible to lie and deceive verbally. Where it is not so possible to lie and deceive operationally (calculatively).

The cost of this difference is meaning. The problem is, when we say meaning, how much of this is justification to the self, or justification to others? Is not all philosophy and argument merely political?

Until I started focusing on Neo-Reaction instead of the fallacies of libertine-libertarianism, I did not perhaps understand the full import of what I am doing. Is meaning merely a feeble attempt to connect the intuitive with the calculative? Can we instead of separating our mental activity into intuition and reason (verbalism), can we separate it into perception, intuition, calculation, and justification? Is reason but justification?

If this is true then human intellectual history is upside down.

I am not there yet, but getting closer.