Cladistics (cladism) – what is the question and what is the answer?

Cladistics (cladism)  only acknowldeges what it calls “natural” groups, but which is a confusion of mono- and holophyletic groups.

The question is which question this conclusion (confusion) answers. It appears to be “which is The Unambiguous Classification?”, and the answer flips between “my classification” and “our classification”, combined with a belief that these two aspects (i.e., subjectivity and objectivity) are the same (which they can obviously can never become).

Is cladistics (cladism) simply a matter of trying to hold the fortress “belief” against empirical science? Is it just a matter of a flat denial of facts? How can such an approach be sponsored with tax money, and on scientific universities? Isn’t it a clear case of a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothes, and also paid with sheeps’ tax money?

What will the wolf (wolves) do when he (they) has (have) eaten up the sheeps? Eat up itself (each other)?

One cannot be many.