Monday, March 23, 2015

Libertarian Bionationalism: An Ideology for a New Ascendancy

A free, prosperous, and glorious country that reverses dysgenic demographic decline and enters into demographic ascent could be ours.  If you’d like to be able one day to call such a place home, then I invite you to become a fellow soldier in the ideological battle for a new ascendancy.  There is an ideology that extols freedom, prosperity, and glory – and nourishes the genetic roots that grow the values it champions.  This ideology deserves a proper name. 

It is not conservatism.  Conservatism implies a backward-looking revival of former traditions.  As it’s practiced in America, political conservatism is little more than progressivism on a lag.  An American conservative today embraces most of what Progressives championed in the recent past – Social Security, Medicare, Voting Rights, Civil Rights, Disabled Rights, Gay Wedding Cake Rights, and other invented rights that require legions of federal bureaucrats to enforce.  Only a small segment of conservatives, who might be called paleo-conservatives, reject the progressive’s panoply of positive rights and favor returning government to its constitutional functions. 

Those who identify as reactionary or neo-reactionary might reject the entire Enlightenment worldview that informed America’s Founders.  Some neo-reactionaries favor returning to monarchy; others to some form of feudalism.  Some NRXers seek to install a social order underpinned by Orthodox Christianity.  Others look back even further, to pre-Christian paganism. 

How far back in history do you look for ideological inspiration?  How much of a reaction against modernity do you desire?  These are questions that presuppose conservatism as the operating paradigm.  But in my view, conservatism in all its subdivisions and degrees – from neo to paleo – is failed and flawed. 

An ideology of ascent should be forward-looking, not reactive – defined not based on what it opposes but what it seeks to achieve.  That doesn’t necessarily entail the rejection of traditions that have heretofore shaped our cultural and political institutions.  But it does entail the rejection of traditionalism as a primary ideological orientation.  We seek to chart a path to a future that is superior to both the present and the past.  We yearn to live in a nation of rising freedom, rising IQs, and rising standards of well-being. 

Computer technology and biotechnology will make such a glorious future possible.  But it won’t be realized without the ascension of a new kind of nationalism.  A nationalism that eschews authoritarian impulses and suffuses itself instead to the principles of liberty.  An enlightened nationalism that is validated in reason, guided by science, and informed by the biological realities of human nature and its racial variations.

Such an ideology deserves a proper name.  Unfortunately, there’s no ready-made, widely accepted term for it.  Rather than try to coin a neologism that lacks common currency, I’ll employ a compound noun that names the three most essential components: libertarian bio-nationalism (LBN).  The term libertarian bio-nationalism has the advantage of being precise (unlike vague left/right labels) without being tied to a particular time, place, or person.  Any country – from the United States to Sweden to Japan – can adapt LBN to its own particular bionational identity. 

I grant that the label “libertarian” is imperfect.  “Libertarian” has acquired some unfortunate connotations due its appropriation by left-libertarians, anarchists, and methodological individualists who dogmatically cling to a biophobic blank-slate conception of human nature. 

I believe that “libertarian,” which shares the same etymological roots as “liberty,” is worth reclaiming from the mis-appropriators.  A political libertarian seeks self-determination within a particular geographic area.  A nationalist seeks self-determination for a particular geographic area.  Thus, libertarian nationalism is a logical union.  I’d argue that libertarianism and nationalism are not only compatible, but mutually reinforcing and mutually necessary. 

Libertarians need nations.  No amount of theorizing about imaginary anarcho-capitalist legal agencies has ever brought down a government.  Nobody in power fears being overthrown by anarcho-capitalists.  But nationalists have overthrown governments.  Nationalists do strike fear into the hearts of the ruling elites of many countries.  Nationalism is powerful because it is more than a set of abstract ideas.  Nationalism harnesses the power of a population’s identity and concrete interests.    

Libertarian nationalism is freedom through power.  Without nationalism, libertarianism is little more than the weak pleadings of inefficacious idealists.  With nationalism, libertarianism becomes an ideological force with the tangible capability of sustaining itself. 

Libertarians need nationalism.  Nationalists need libertarianism.  And libertarian nationalism needs a biocentric metaphysic.  A nationalism based solely on faith or tradition or language or historical borders gives leftists the ability to posture as the champions of science, progress, and a better future.  In reality, so-called progressives are the arch enemies of a free and open society.  When it comes to the heritability of IQ differences among different sociobiological populations, progressives deny science and seek to ban its dissemination.  In the name of equality, they demand that Western nations genetically and culturally retrogress into Third World nations.   The ideology of human progression is libertarian bionationalism. 
I grant that a government constrained by libertarian chains would have less capacity to effectuate demographic improvement than an unchained authoritarian government.  A fascist dictatorship could institute coercive eugenics programs that would, in theory, raise the national IQ faster and more dramatically than any set of voluntary incentivizes.  But a government that treats its own people like domesticated livestock inverts the very concept of human ascendancy.  We don’t exist for the purpose of improving the gene pool.  We seek to improve the gene pool because it will make our lives better.