Utilitarianism

"Utilitarianism: The idea that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority" - Oxford English Dictionary 

Philosophies have two components: an abstract definition, and how they translate into reality. In the case of utilitarianism, the concept of benefitting a majority quickly becomes the concept of leadership by the majority, excluding the concepts of both the individual and the collective in favour of pleasing most of the people. Because individuals are different, the only ideas upon which a majority can be found to agree are those of the simplest and most basic values shared by that majority: the lowest common denominator. This creates an artificial norm out of a diverse society, and forces a judgment of the average onto all individuals.  

When this is applied to nations, it rapidly translates into liberal democracy, or the idea that if most people can vote on a topic, it will be best for everyone; as mentioned above, this excludes both the collective good as defined in terms of the whole of society, and the good of individuals who do not fit the average. Since the crowd does not directly act, strong central bureaucracies are created, because if one is addressing an idealised average person, one can do it through triplicate forms and fixed definitions of what the wants and needs of that average are.  

This is both soul-killing to the individual, and destructive to the nation, as it sets aside higher goals in favour of pleasing the lowest impulses of the crowd. If history is observed in this regard, it becomes clear that every nation goes from a period of leadership into an age of relative comfort, after which utilitarianism arises; from this comes an addiction to money as a value in itself, strong intellectual and social taboos, and other aspects that reflect internal division more than consensus; indeed, consensus is lost, and thus ideas themselves fall prey to the lowest common denominator, as there is no ideal to which one can point and illustrate that an idea fulfils it.  

In Integralist terms, this is the origin of passivity, in that one is no longer striving for a higher ideal both inwardly and outwardly, but is content to define reality solely by the terms of the majority, which tend to be crude and unreflective, and destructive of anything which might destabilise the individual. For this reason, "equality" as a doctrine rapidly follows utilitarianism, because with this concept one can defend the individual against all criticism: the individual alone determines what is valuable, and since consensus is lacking, there is no way to criticise it. In this way utilitarian states both benefit and breed low self-esteem individuals.  

Passivity is incompatible with the creation of a great nation state. At best, it creates a civilisation that is comfortable for unstable and neurotic people, and then disintegrates. We can see many examples of this, from Bolshevik Russia to the ancient Assyrian people whose society collapsed in neurosis and left its people landless, to the ancient Greeks who in a fit of moral self-righteousness, during the beginning of the end for their civilisation, crucified Socrates via hemlock for educating the youth in "subversive thought." All unstable civilisations become believers in authority for authority's sake; Integralism in authority for the sake of achieving an ideal.  

This ideal requires consensus, but not majority approval, as the majority are inactive in the formation of ideals; for this reason, all traditional educated societies have had a specialised leadership caste whose role was to understand the necessary ideals of the people and translate them into social form. Consensus is the root of any growing civilisation, and is felt most strongly when a civilisation is new, as its ideal is obvious: create a civilisation and rise above the mess of disorganised chaos that is proto-tribal existence. Our goal is to resurrect consensus, but to look toward the future and not the past, and to re-create a great nation again in the ashes of our current one.  

Possibly the worst aspect of utilitarianism is that it enforces a linear measurement on all things, from zero crowd approval to full crowd approval, and this linear system comes to dominate all commerce, politics and learning. At this point, excellence is no longer rewarded, but conformity is. Contrary to popular belief, Integralism is a revolution against this conformity, and addresses it by relegating leadership to its correct position and breeding a stronger society as whole, such that all other actions are liberated from having to conform.