Atheist Conservatism and the Dark Enlightenment

Atheist conservatism/libertarianism is one of the fastest growing movements. Many of today’s smart young people, who grew up on Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman (and maybe hayack and Rothbard, although being anti-fed is anti-wealth in my opinion. Fed policy such as QE and low interest rates, while unpopular with some on the right, does help the best and the brightest), know that the belief that you can grow an economy by overtaxing its most productive and useful members is as delusional as believing there is some guy in the clouds watching all our actions. If ‘salvation’ does exist, it’s through IQ, wealth, and individualistic intellectual accomplishments – not good deeds, collectivism, or belief in a diety. Social Darwinism means that some people are not fit for survival in today’s economic environment, whether because they are not smart enough or other biological factors are holding them back. A couple generations ago a person of average intelligence could attain a comfortable, stable middle class income and retire in his 50′s. In the post-2008 era, where productivity, efficiency and intellect reign supreme, you cannot just get by being average; you must be exceptional. That’s the reality, and wishful thinking and appeals to a higher power to spread the wealth and reset the system to a more equal state will not change this, sorry. Biological determinism does not preclude the existence of free will. We have free will within our biological limits. A person with an IQ of 90 has the free will to choose between working at McDonald’s or Jack in the Box, but not to become a physicist, for example.

Part of the Dark Enlightenment is the un-egalitarian belief, which is backed by science, that some humans are biologically ‘better’ than others. This limits the effectiveness of the state though social welfare to create equal outcomes. A person with an IQ of 170 is a more valuable (economically, expanding the canon of human knowledge, etc.) person than someone with an IQ of 70, so policy should be implemented that benefits the smarter person (such as free higher education) instead of throwing good at the bad. In other words, a government by the financial & cognitive elite to serve the elite. This is the form of governance that most optimizes capital (cognitive and financial), ultimately benefiting everyone and civilization by raising living standards, boosting economic growth, and technological advancement.

Welfare liberals, the type of liberal that posts on NYT and other leftist sites, believe that people become exceptional at cognitive endeavors (stock trading, investing, coding, math, writing, etc) not through IQ or innate ability, but through some unfair environmental advantage and that costly and useless social programs are necessary to bridge the achievement gap, which is really an IQ gap. Anything that reminds liberals that some humans are biologically better than others drives then mad because it conflicts with their belief in the perfectibility of the blank-slate man through the state.

Even though I lean conservative, I think there is a role in society for people who put creativity and self-actualization ahead of having children – a position high-IQ, pro-science, atheist conservative millennials would agree on, and this could explain why millennials are either not getting married or putting careers ahead of family formation. Variation is why species don’t go extinct under changing environments, and such variation can include the desire to not have children. Perhaps ancient MGTOWs decided inventing fire, agriculture, spearheads, and written language was more important than procreating. Such inventions advanced the human race at the short-term cost of population growth, a worthwhile trade-off when you consider these inventions, such as agriculture, enabled more population growth. Perhaps one solution is sperm and egg donation, in that high-IQ people who choose not to have children can be paid to spread their genes. Surrogates can be paid to bring these embryos to term. Genetic engineering is another possibility assuming we find and isolate the allele loci responsible for IQ. This is an example of pro-growth policy that deviates from traditional conservative norms, but fits within the atheist conservative ideological narrative.

Related:

Anti-Democracy, Part 4
Irreconcilable Differences (Pragmatic Right vs. Paleo Right)
Bridging The Red Pill and Beta Male Conservatism

Comments are closed.