Theme: Sovereignty

A QUICK REWRITE OF THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT PRINCIPLES

(Comment: Steve Sailor likes to pick on libertarians and “Aspergys” as socially clueless. I kind of reject that. The Rothbardians are just ‘wrong’. But the Rothardian movement is moral and ideological, not ratio-scientific. It’s a rebellion movement. And there are good uses for rebellion movements. The protestant movement is the best example. Fundamentalism is an exceptionally effective means of resistance in no small part, because like ideology, religion can be counter to reason and therefore uncriticizable.

LACK OF ECONOMIC CONTENT

Libertarians place economic capital ahead of moral capital. Conservatives place moral capital ahead of economic capital. And, as I’ve been arguing, I think that the conservatives are right. We may not have been able to prove that a century ago, but I think we can now. We have enough evidence from a multitude of studies of morality, trust and corruption around the world. And it’s pretty hard to argue with. Without the right institutions you cannot have the right norms. Without the right norms you cannot produce the right economy. Without the right economy you cannot MAINTAIN the right institutions. The circle is pretty challenging to maintain across generations, which themselves are cyclical.

So again, we see the illustration of the differences between the libertarians and conservatives, as placing different weights on different moral criterial.

THE CURRENT PRINCIPLES OF THE DARK ENLIGHTENMENT

This list is evolving. Conservatives are notoriously challenged because their arguments are even more morally loaded than libertarians. I’ve tried to improve it a bit.

And I’m reluctant for a few reasons. THe first is that conservatives are very leery of our rather analytical language. If we express their morals in propertarian terms they seem to feel like all meaning is lost.

That is the most interesting part of the problem of bringing conservatives into the rational fold.

LIST

– Rejection of The Cathedral. A rejection of The Cathedral in all it’s guises: Totalitarian Humanism, Universalism, Political Correctness, (or whatever other names it goes by, such as Universalism or Political Correctness).

– Particularism.

A rejection of sociological universalism, egalitarianism, equalitarianism, diversity as regressive, and destructive. And a preference for particularism, innovation, and excellence.

– Science.

The use of science and reason as compatible with particularism, as a contrast to the irrationalism of postmodernism that is necessary to provide cover for, and distract from, universalism.

– Evolution.

An acceptance of Darwinian evolution, shunning egalitarian political correctness both from the left and from the Trotskyite right.

– Biodiversity.

An acceptance of human biodiversity.

– BioPolitics.

Particular people’s have varied biological and demographic interests and imperatives.

– Incompatibility:

That human populations are not fungible. They are unique. And therefore, skepticism about mass Third World immigration.

– Political Institutions.

The recognition that there is no single best political order. As Aristotle notes in the Politics, some ethnicities are better suited for totalitarianism, some monarchy; some for aristocracy; others, for participatory forms of government such as the city state.

– Aristocracy:

Freedom and Democracy are Incompatible. Liberty is incompatible with democracy, and democracy leads to mediocrity.

– Uneven Progress: An acceptance of science and futurism as a means to improve at least some peoples’ lives. And a recognition that ‘progress’ will be available only to some, and not the entire human population.

– Religion: Atheistic, Agnostic and with a preference for Ancestral Neopaganism or a form of Christianity that is ethnocentric and particularist.

– Introspection:

The end of ‘White Man’s Burden’ as well as ‘Colonial Guilt’ and ‘White Guilt’. We dragged humanity out of ignorance and poverty kicking and screaming. And, they will never thank us for it.