We are born and only later awaken to the possibilities of our lives. Our brains come first, then our minds grow within them. In this awakening process, we come to realize that an external world exists, and operates by consistent principles. If at that point we decide that we like being alive, we change our values to encourage the life process that produced us.
I. Nihilism
II. Integralism
There is no design superior to the natural ecosystem in which we exist. It is perpetual, self-correcting, and infinitely complex in execution but based on simple heuristic principles. Its energy efficiency is unparalleled. It has produced us and everything in which we find meaning. All that we know as reality is a result of this system and simultaneously comprises it. It is All.
This belief is Integralism, and represents the ultimate degree of reality. Because all belief systems and individuals have differing degrees of rationality, none are denied by an Integralist, but all are recognized as being ranked by how much of the objective world they have deciphered and anticipated with their value systems.
Singularity
Integralism deprives us of absolute truth, and replaces it with a complex reality in which absolutes are rarely found. The illusory world imposed by socialization is by its nature universal, since it must apply to every member of society, and thus uses a "one size fits all" approach. This creates a linear scale of degree of socialization which is an opposite to rationality, or degree of adaptation to natural reality.
The "progressive" view of society holds that all of past history culminates in the present civilization, which is inventing "new" values as from a primitive state of cave-dwelling it moves ever closer to a utopic state in which humanity dominates nature in both body and mind. This view is essential to both material and moral values systems.
In contrast to progression, or finding new things that bring utopia closer, is evolution, or higher degrees of organization of self independent of technology and social convention. Evolution is an increase in the rationality of an organism, as demonstrated by its more successful adaptation to its environment (the "whole"). Evolution is not invented through "new" ways but through application of timeless values and discipline
Impermanence
Often a surrogate morality appears which divides the "natural" from the "artificial." In an integral view, nothing is unnatural, but all choices have consequences, thus one should look to nature for an example of what works. Evolution is process, not a God with a personality and thought and intent of its own, thus most commonly it produces the bare minimum that works and develops it slowly from there.
For thinking beings, it is therefore natural to take control of their own evolution and to steer it toward things that their perception can find valuable. When we assert our will toward our own goals against the world, it is therefore natural, but its success depends on our rationality in understanding the entire system that is the world.
In doing so, we embrace the impermanence of the world. There is no objective, eternal truth, but our perceptions can find truth and create it in the world. Nothing will last forever, thus all deeds must be done for their own sake, as a means of forming this truth outside the subjective individual.
Transaction
Our universe operates by transaction, or by having elements within it exchange data and matter. This requires inequality between them, or there is no need for transaction, and thus energy exchange does not occur and there is no mechanism of the universe; this is a state we call "entropy."
This inequality is manifest in the different intelligences of individual humans, the power of the eagle over the mouse and the superior ability of the mouse to hide, and the uneven rainfall between different areas. To standardize all of this would be to destroy a complex system which is perpetual and self-renewing.
A powerful metaphor for transaction is conversation among several people. Each brings expertise and specialization in several areas to the discussion, and as these personalities are put into competition, conclusions are found. This eliminates the need for a single leader to invent all possibilities, and allows several options to be considered at once.
Similarly, nature is many voices in conflict, finding a greater harmony in their tendency to eventually arrive at working solutions. While some would argue that "harmony" would be every voice saying the same thing at once, this type of order is prone to subtle but conclusive breakdown from within.
Existentialism
Life threatens the individual with potential death at any time. Two courses of action wait on this knowledge; the individual can deny mortality and live in servitude to whatever (religion, material) explains away that inevitability, or the individual can accept that death will triumph in the end and make significant the time between birth and death.
The former course of action is what capitalism and materialism and supernatural religions favor, and the latter, what pagan and heathen religions worldwide have endorsed. This way does not deny the individual and its needs, but recognizes those as attempts to discover rationality through subjective value.
For this reason, the individual experience should be meaningful. Suffering will occur, as will boredom and angst, but if these are felt in the process of attaining a meaningful (rational) goal, they are easily transcended. Modern society (capitalism and materialism and supernatural religions) does not recognize this, as it believes correspondence to an "objective" standard such as money, social prestige or morality is most important.
Because of existential concerns, each task should have a practical meaning. Shuffling papers and adhering to form for the sake of earning money or social status alone is meaningless; jobs and wealth have gained too much emphasis in our society. From an existentialist view, money and social action and jobs should serve a higher goal, which, in the integralist case, includes both individual motivation (existentialism) and positive change and nurturing of the world (idealism).
Heroism
Overcoming fear for individual survival and the desire for comfort in order to assert values upon the world is heroism. Combat provides a metaphor: suffering and death occur, but when the battle is over, the human ecosystem has changed, as the victor has greater power and the loser is vanquished. Something is decided, structurally, by that.
This applies however to any area of life. Parents sacrifice their time and money and energy so that they may have children; farmers do the same to raise crops and feed people; writers do the same to spread knowledge; lovers give to each other without concern that they be rewarded. This is heroism in action.
In an egalitarian time, where every individual is considered equally important, heroism is destroyed by making it slavery to the moral judgment of equality. It is no longer important to achieve something, in this view, but to save lives and not disrupt the personal pursuit of convenience. Thus "heroism" changes from assertion of order to a passive preservation of the existing construct, negating itself.
Green
We are indivisible from our universe; without it, we do not exist. Integralism affirms that the whole is an order, and rationality nurtures this order, therefore it is illogical to in the name of preserving individuals destroy the whole. Actions which disregard our environment for individual convenience are contra-heroic, or cowardly.
The primary cause of ecocide is too many people. Regardless of how little meat they eat, or how small their living quarters, they take up land needed for the habitats required for natural species to reproduce. The six billion humans that inhabit this planet will become at least nine billion in the next generation.
No matter if all people recycle, drive electric cars, or use other passive means of "preservation," this consequence is inevitable. Further, even these passive means assume that all of humanity will conform to a single standard against the interests of their individual convenience, which history shows us is an illusory assumption.
Currently our planet is encancered by human growth. This human growth has not brought higher evolution to humanity, nor improved individual lives. Our overpopulation has disrupted every natural ecosystem and our climate. We have injected enough pollution into our environment as to permanently alter its course. Both industrialized nations and the developing world contribute waste.
This cowardice is enabled by a single assumption: that the individual and preservation thereof is more important than any goal oriented toward the whole. Integralism, as a philosophy of the whole, denies the callow destruction of our environment and seeks via any means to stop it, and undo its scars as much as possible.
"Greenism" and "environmentalism" and "ecofascism" are politically sensible starting points, but they do not create a system of thought which orients humanity toward a long-term method of existence which will not re-create the conditions of this environmental cowardice again. Thus integralism supplants greenism, containing as a logical extension of its philosophy a goal of nurturing the natural environment.
Eugenics
Evolution is the influence of external forces on a population to cause it to breed more well-adapted beings. In yeast, this means creatures which can eat and reproduce more quickly. In humans, it means people of greater intelligence, heroic character and physical strength as inseparable, balanced traits. When humans being no longer dependent on nature enforce evolution on themselves, it is eugenics.
If a society has poor values, it breeds people of lesser intelligence, character and strength. To breed someone of one trait excessively is to negate the others, thus a person of high intelligence but low character can be created.
A society with healthy values breeds better people in a balance of all three traits. This concept is frightening to most modern people as it presumes to rank individuals and threatens personal autonomy. It is thus a reminder of our mortality and inseparability from the whole. Once this pretense and its cowardice is overcome, the positive side of eugenics is seen: every generation exceeds the last, creating a better humanity as a whole.
Ethnoculture
Eugenics cannot be applied in mixed populations, as each ethnic-cultural group has different goals and attributes. An intelligent approach is to separate the groups and to let each group breed itself as favorably as it can. Any population which does not exile its invaders will soon become a new, hybrid population, replacing the old; thus, any population which wishes to continue existing will be ethnoculturalist.
Ethnoculturalism states that culture is what shapes the breeding standards of a population; that which is valued breeds more, and that which is seen as less desirable, less. This takes place over many generations and cannot be changed within a few centuries. Because of this, the converse is also true: any population with a given set of traits will set up a culture to support having those traits, and breeding so that they are more prominent.
In the ethnocultural view, it is suicide for any population to allow mixture of another into its bloodline, as this will confuse the carefully-bred ethnic and cultural traits of the population, and compel it to force what it can remember of its older tradition on its new hybrids, destroying the integrity of that tradition.
Caste
Eugenics involves three components: promoting the breeding of those who are more desired, discouraging the breeding of those who are less desired, and understanding specialization. The first method is accomplished by having a consensus as to what is desired, and by creating a meritocracy whose standards benefit those people. The second occurs as a natural consequence of the first.
The third is more controversial, as it involves use of a caste system. A caste system places people in traditional role groupings based on their specialization over generations. Someone whose father and grandfather and great grandfather were highly-esteemed farmers will in all probability make a better farmer than others; same for every other role in society.
Traditionally, in Indo-European systems, there have been three castes and none of them have had special privilege outside of what is needed for them to fulfill their function. The leadership caste are expected to lead austere lives and dedicate themselves to study and self-discipline such that they might lead; the warrior and artisan caste are expected to discipline themselves in perfecting their arts; the worker caste are expected to perform their jobs and enjoy themselves, as they do not suffer under the responsibility the other two endure.
In societies with insecure or passive leadership, another caste is created for people who are technically unwanted but tolerated as a source of free or cheap labor, but this is degenerate: these people do not belong in the society, and it is kinder to eject them than it is to subject them to servitude. It is evident that slavery as practiced in service of commerce was cruel and destructive, pointlessly, to African-Americans and Untouchables in India.
What is most important for a modern learner to know about the caste system is that it is separate from the class system, which is a linear rank based upon the wealth of each person, under the assumption ("Social Darwinism") that the "better" people earn more money. A caste system instead recognizes that there is no single scale for individuals, nor any norm, but numerous specializations which require intelligences and talents not found in any other specialization.
Fascism
Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. - Niccolo Machiavelli, "The Prince," Chapter 17
Machiavelli recognized the basic truth that people have differing capacities and only some are able to understand the issues required for leadership. The rest must be induced or forced to obey those who do understand leadership for consensus to exist. He realizes no society can solely induce nor solely compel, but must use both, relying primarily on the benefits of its leadership and therefore, respect of its people.
It is easy for us, as portable mappings of the world in our own minds, to ignore the common good and collective need of both humans and nature, and to do selfish things such as dumping toxic waste in rivers and pocketing the disposal fee. Even the most liberal societies oriented around such absolutes as "freedom" and "justice" have police forces which compel obedience in their citizens. Fascism is an honest recognition of this.
The fasces was a bundle of sticks used by the Romans as a symbol of power because individually, the sticks were weak, but together they were unbreakable. So should a society in health be composed, with the sticks benefitting from the works of authority and therefore supporting it.
Localization
Integralism rejects the facilitative society, in which individual convenience is most highly prized, and replaces it with a rational holistic approach. It replaces monetary ranking with specialization, and embraces diversity in a new form: localization.
While moderns have been taught that diversity means having a crowd of different ethnic backgrounds, all doing the same things and being assimilated into the same culture, integralism instead embraces localization, or the idea that while all communities are part of a general social consensus, ideas vary according to local population.
By nature, each town or city will be different from others in some way, from local standards of public behavior to architecture. Instead of having one policy for all, integralists support having variation among smaller, localized populations. The advantage is that people of the same ethnocultural group can embrace diversity of idea within that group.
Paganism
The Indo-European tribe has traditionally (pre-Christian) embraced pagan belief systems. Northern European Heathenism and Vedic Hinduism resemble each other in that as in occult belief systems, "good" and "evil" are not absolute classifications but methods of achieving goals. This removes the supernaturalist influence, which requires one absolute linear truth to be "objectively" real in order for consensus to exist.
Most religions assume an absolutist, universalist, inclusive view which says that eliminating suffering for all people is the only goal "high" enough to be important to all people, therefore religion must espouse this view as its overarching goal. Like occult religions, the ancient belief systems found this to be unrealistic, and therefore aimed instead to make the suffering count for something. If we must die, let our lives be meaningful.
This is not achieved through a one-size-fits-all standard as modern religions, including what remains of Buddhism and Hinduism, hammer home with their propaganda and emotionally-wrenching symbols such as martyrdom. Supernaturalism and this form of universal inclusionism rely on these emotions, but are based predominantly in fear. In life we must make often difficult decisions, and to avoid them on categorical grounds of method before considering outcome is like a teenager refusing to ask out a pretty girl because "she's never going to say yes."
The Vedic religions, on the other hand, were from a tribe of conquerors. To be a conqueror is to be both destroyer of existing order and creator of new order. Their religion, which is the origin of both Hinduism and Buddhism, did not make moral prejudgment its goal, but brought forth the meaning in life, focusing not on the material world but on the changes in the structure of thought and world that could be wrought through the material.
Idealism of this form, which recognizes the world of thoughts and conclusions as supreme over the permanence and tangibility of material form, is the domain of those who build and achieve, not those who fear that the creations of others will exclude them. It denies the low self-esteem required for supernatural religions, and frees the soul from being trapped between pure states of "body" or "mind" in order to see that our perception is mind within the world of body, thus what will matter to us is mind.
III. Blasphemies
IV. Changes - Personal
V. Changes - Society
VI. Conclusion
Resources for further reading:
The Iliad
The Bhagavad-Gita
On truth and lies in a nonmoral sense
Collection by Pentti Linkola
The FC Manifesto by Ted Kaczynski
Nihilism by S.R. Prozak