1,109 words
America is no longer “Jesusland.” Only 63% of Americans now identify as Christians, down from 75% just a decade ago. 29% of Americans now identify as non-religious, an increase of roughly ten points since 2011.
Unsurprisingly, religious behavior has also declined. A quarter of Americans say they attend a religious service weekly, 45% pray daily, and 41% say religion is important to their lives. These figures were all higher a decade ago, when a majority of Americans said that they prayed daily and that religion was important to their lives. Now such people are merely a plurality.
You can buy Collin Cleary’s Summoning the Gods here.
Those who observe the noticeable decline of American Christianity come away with a variety of opinions. New York Times columnist Ross Douthat believes it augurs a “return of paganism.” The Catholic conservative says this paganism is “not materialist or atheistic; it allows for belief in spiritual and supernatural realities. It even accepts the possibility of an afterlife. But it is deliberately agnostic about final things.” He believes paganism could work if it unites “popular supernaturalism” with “highbrow pantheism and civil-religiosity.” He sees the first category in New Agers and witches, and the latter in “the social-justice theology of contemporary progressive politics.” This isn’t the paganism of Julius Evola, to say the least.
This claim is far-fetched, to say the least. While a fair number of Americans are getting into crystals and Wicca, they’re dwarfed by the vast number of Americans ditching the supernatural altogether, and the secular civil religions of our time have little to do with the state paganism of the Roman Republic. Social justice theology owes more to the Sermon on the Mount than it does to mos maiorum.
Catholic conservatives have long been obsessed with a return to paganism. For whatever reason, it’s easier for them to see goofy druids as the enemy instead of agnostic women in pantsuits.
A better analysis comes from another Trump-hating Christian conservative. David French argues that a post-Christian America is actually closer to Christian ideals than the old America:
I’d argue that a nation’s religious character is defined by the interaction between the individual faith of the citizens and the institutional expression of the nation’s values. A functioning “Christian nation” is going to combine both a robust private practice of faith with a government that is committed to basic elements of justice and mercy. In other words, when determining the identity of a people and nation, by their fruits you shall know them. . . .
America has become more just — and thus closer to the ideals one would expect of a Christian nation — as white Protestant power has waned. The United States of 2022 is far more just than it was in 1822 or 1922 or 1952 or even 1982. And while white Protestants have undeniably been part of that story — they were indispensable to the abolitionist movement, for example — the elevation of other voices has made a tremendous difference.
In the civil rights movement, the sad reality is that all too often the person wielding the fire hose and the person facing the spray both proclaimed faith in Jesus and both went to church, but only one of them was acting justly. And any account of American civil rights has to include the vital contribution of the American Jewish community.
The argument boils down to this: True Christian behavior is supporting racial justice. Since we have more racial justice than ever before, America is living up to Christian ideals. You don’t need to be a Christian to live up to these ideals. Just look at all the contributions from Jews and other non-believers! The treatment of blacks is America’s greatest sin, and rectifying that is the most Christian thing you can do.
French obviously ignores sexual morality in his argument that America may be more Christian than at any point in history. That would obviously undermine his entire article. But even that issue doesn’t seem to matter to French that much — at least not anymore. If he strongly expressed traditional Christian teachings on homosexuality and gender roles, liberals wouldn’t see him as the one decent conservative. It’s much better for his brand to pretend that Christianity only requires one to commit oneself to Black Lives Matter.
However ridiculous this argument may seem, it makes more sense than Douthat’s. There is no real alternative religion rising in the West. Indeed, more people like to dabble in Eastern spirituality, and maybe a few more might attend a neo-pagan gathering, but none of this really threatens to replace Christianity. It’s just a way to show you’re “spiritual, but not religious.” It offers eccentrics a way of showing how different they are from the rest. Most “paganisms” in our world today don’t really differ from popular Christianity. The only real difference is that the paganisms remove any sense of intolerance toward degenerate behavior — but popular Christianity is already far more tolerant toward this behavior than traditional Christianity.
“Post-Christian” America isn’t ditching the faith’s values; it’s merely modifying them to accommodate the zeitgeist. Democratic politicians such as Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez still refer to Christian values to explain why their policies are moral and just. They don’t appeal to crystals. Plus, our society is extremely moralistic. We’re not told to support Black Lives Matter because “live and let live”; we’re told it’s necessary for the common good. The same goes for COVID regulations, trans rights, gun control, and everything else our secular elite want enacted. It appeals to a morality that ultimately descends from Christianity.
That morality, of course, dispenses with demands of sexual abstinence and condemnation of homosexuality. It also doesn’t require belief in a higher power that can send you to Hell. The present order believes in a kind of hell, but it’s only reserved for racists, sexists, and homophobes. You don’t go there for rejecting God or his commandments. Thus, the spirit of the Beatitudes still lives loudly in our current morality.
French recognizes this and has come to terms with the new order. He’s no longer the Christian conservative who defends the Confederate flag or rails against gay marriage. He’s the friendly one with a BLM placard on his front lawn who politely asks for restrictions on abortion. Secular elites will still disagree with pro-life views, but they’ll tolerate pro-life Christians. The same tolerance won’t be given to those who continue to campaign against gay marriage.
Americans may have given up on Christianity’s supernatural beliefs, but they still adhere to the popular retellings of Jesus’ life. The message no longer exhorts them to believe he died for their sins or that they risk eternal damnation for not going to confession. It simply declares: “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.”
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
22 comments
It seems that, due to the peculiarities of the local culture, America has a unique trauma with regards to Christianity that does not resonate so much with Europeans, at least not in the same way. When figures are cited showing decreasing religious identification and increasing positive identification with atheism, you typically imagine a country like Estonia or Czech Republic and the embarrassing effort of their respective cultures to become just as hip and Westernized as Netherlands, presumably, through higher divorce rates, greater degree of corporate employment, and of course, gay child adoption (work in progress). While nihilistic tendencies were in the US present even in the heyday of Christianity, in Europe such tendencies pretty much go hand in hand with growing atheism, secularization, manageralism, economic prerogative, etc.
The place to start in a conversation between pro-Whites and Christians is by recognizing that pro-Whites are a separate ‘moral community’ and persuade Christians to recognize how we overlap and accepting the ways they don’t.
The real place to start is by demonstrating that Christianity and wokeness are antithetical, and that Christianity both allows for the measures necessary to ensure white preservation and even mandates them as a matter of true justice (though that is my unique position, very extreme, and in need of extensive theological demonstration). Christians who are also white race traitors look at the moral issues surrounding race and justice through the wrong end of the analytical telescope. Consider nation-wrecking mass nonwhite immigration. The brainwashed Christian thinks there is a moral obligation to admit aliens as a matter of “Christian hospitality” and “charity” and “universal brotherhood”. The insightful Christian looks at the matter the other way: that the aliens have a moral obligation not to inflict their disruptive presence on innocent peoples, whose cultures get diluted and destroyed by this alien selfishness.
You see, the issue is never viewed morally dispassionately, and certainly not from the standpoint of what’s best for whites, but always from the alien or [faux-]virtue-signaling “native alienist” (as Joe Sobran put in four decades ago) position. But that assumes an equality of moral legitimacy between the two positions which isn’t there. The alien is the disruptor, the aggressor. From a Christian moral theological standpoint, there is a rebuttable presumption against the alien and in favor of the native. If Christ exists and returns to Earth, He would not chastise us (at least not for wishing to keep alien invaders out, so as to preserve our cultures and physical security for our own people and descendants on this demographically exploding, but for whites, shrinking planet), but the selfish aliens and their bizarre, xenophilic liberal enablers for destabilizing healthy nations.
It seems that the tension here is between Christianity as an actual religion versus leftist politics with a plastic halo which takes on the language of watered-down ultracalvinism to weaponize our virtues against us. This crappy, phony righteousness gets mighty tiresome.
Yes, agreed wholeheartedly. Not enough people in our movement understand this and it frustrates me when people imply that this is always what Christianity has been. White Christian religion has been subverted and turned into another weapon used to harm us.
Thank you. A little bit of common sense is in order. The tactic of people like Hampton is so transparently asinine. He finds some vile race traitor like French, one who loudly proclaims that he’s a “Christian”; takes him at his word, both in terms of sincerity (ie, that David French really sees himself as a Christian, which is likely true), and accuracy (ie, that this is how a Christian properly thinks about racial questions, which is completely false); and then proceeds to try to drive wedges between Christianity and the prowhite justice movement.
As I have stated many times, the proper task for WPs is to deconstruct “Christian” anti-WP (ie, to show why Christianity is not theologically antagonistic to WP), and then show why true Christianity is morally compatible with at least some forms of WP. Does Christianity support white genocide, including passive genocide via coercive (state-mandated) alien demographic dilution? Of course not. That the heretic Pope and other prominent “Christians” disagree with me doesn’t mean they’re correct.
More broadly, as I’ve also stated many times at CC, Hampton is pushing an agenda with his coverage of race and Christianity, which is basically that Christianity is a declining force or presence among whites, as well as an increasingly hostile one, and that WPs thus should increasingly just ignore it, or even aggressively oppose it. This is wrongheaded on so many levels. The vast majority of those Americans who broadly think of themselves as being “on the Right” are also Christians. Most atheists/secularists are on the Left. Unlike many here, I tend to see rightist thinking as being all of a piece. People who are anti-left in some ways can be made anti-left in others. People who are left in some ways are usually easily made left in others. Go to a Trump rally. Most of the people are white, and most if asked will say they’re Christian. That is where we can win converts (to the cause of racial honesty and WP). And there is no other large group of white people we can win to the prowhite cause except those already on the Right, especially as leftism is today primarily defined by its antiwhiteness (even if some old Jewish socialist like Sanders really really wants everyone to lower the temp on intersectionality and focus on promoting economic marxism; it doesn’t happen, does it? – this fact itself being a further testament to our correctness on race).
The prowhite movement needs to reach out more to normal conservative Christians and patriots (people like my family) than to any other identifiable white group. They should be on our side as a matter of both righteousness and self-interest. If we cannot win them (and we can; rank and file evangelicals were among Trump’s strongest supporters, despite the cuckoldry and treason of many of their leaders), we will never become a majority among whites – or perhaps even a large enough minority to make the Ethnostate a real possibility.
“The vast majority of those Americans who broadly think of themselves as being “on the Right” are also Christians. Most atheists/secularists are on the Left.”
Yes. “By their fruits ye shall know them.” The vast majority of Trump supporters/conservatives whom I have met are basically good, decent people; imperfect certainly, but striving to do the right thing, and wanting to hold onto what was good in the past. Maybe they’re sometimes hypocrites, or stuck to a degree in what has become ineffectual “conservatism,” or misled by QAnon rabbitholes, but they usually have a good sense at least of morality, and they don’t like Conservative, Inc. fools such as French. They are people whom any sensible leader or thinker would want on his side. “Salt of the earth,” to use another Biblically-related phrase. The vast majority of leftists I’ve known are the opposite, with deep personal flaws which they claim to be virtues. As I recall, there was a lot of truth in the analysis that was termed Bioleninism.
[The Pagan Problem]
*The ancient method was semi-conscious. Compared with the modern scientific thinker it had something almost dreamy..
[The Christian Problem]
Ephesians 5:14
Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
*The Initiation-science of Christianity finds something else…Man then takes over in the period between death and re-birth his moral-spiritual quality-being, left behind in the lunar sphere, as the designer of his fate which he can thus experience in freedom in his new existence on earth.
[* Rudolf Steiner quotes]
The obvious thing is that the United States does not have a state church, therefore, there can be no “Christian nation.” This is a point the Left used to make once upon a time but appears to have gone down the memory hole.
David French confuses Christianity with something he hallucinates to be “justice.” The civil rights revolution of the 1950s and 1960s, where justice flowed as if a river, has led to a non-stop flood of mostly black criminality, rioting and general destruction of once great American cities. One can see “justice” in full force in the ruins of Detroit, Selma, Newark and South Chicago.
Is the America of today more “just” because transnational oligarchs can buy politicians and export vital industries? Or police are given stand-down orders in the face of rioters? Or the borders are thrown open to third world invaders? Or places of religious worship are vandalized by mobs flying the flag of “justice?” Or White people are systemically and institutionally discriminated against by the ominously termed policies of “diversity, inclusion, equity?”
The America of a century ago was more “just” by any number of standards. For one thing, there was a heck of a lot more freedom of speech, at least compared to 2022’s world of Orwellian speech codes, de-platformings and media-industrial complex monopolies. There was also back then an active labor movement, representing the interests of workers and the middle class. And a commitment to scientific truth, especially in the realm of physical anthropology. And leaders who, in the main, promoted the interests of the heritage American people.
What David French and his comrades fail to answer is why “justice” fails to deliver the goods. Seven decades of civil rights “justice” and we have seen more racial conflict in the US than ever. 20 years of gender based “justice” in Afghanistan and the Taliban swept into Kabul in a few short weeks. “Justice” for the Brandon Regime translates into federal police cracking down on parents who protest at schoolboard meetings. The realworld context of “justice” in regards to third worlders from South Africa to Rotherham has been a non-stop dispossession of White peoples.
That’s a real question, by the way. Why has equality failed so miserably? The “more just” America of today is sliding into dystopia.
For all his talk about “justice,” what French is pushing is just another ideological facade for the sect of Western suicide.
As Plato noted in the Republic and as should be evident from the social ‘equity’ fad, justice and equality are incompatible, for all men are not equal, nor are women equal to men, or the various nations to each other. Christianity asserts an absolute equality in the eyes of God, but since the time of the early Church Fathers the dangerous political consequences of this doctrine have been ablated by postponing matters until the hereafter. Radical leftism is inspired by a similar zeal but brooks no such temporising with secular authority: all must be torn down in order that the elect — the anointed minorities and oppressed — may usher in the ‘the republic of heaven’(*). Yet stirring up the greed and ingratitude of the wretched of the Earth is apt to produce a revolution that devours its own, not a durable dispensation. When the chaos becomes intolerable, then a reaction towards the traditional orders that proceed from human nature: family, hierarchy and nation, will be reasserted.
(*) To steal a phrase coined by the childrens’ author Phillip Pullman.
Slavery has existed from time immemorial, as higher functioning Homo Sapiens made use of lower types to keep the entire tribe functioning by growing crops, hunting, etc. It was ever thus. There are people who work, and those who do not want to. Thus slaves are made. In our day, Christianity, some variety of socialism, and labor unions have shaved off the rough edges, but it still exists. And the worst type is still in existence, which we now witness in vast areas as ‘people trafficking’ and it is happening right on our own Southern border, and Christians cheer on ‘helping refugees’ and close their eyes to the horrors of young girls being yanked into prostitution. It’s especially horrid in Europe, where Middle Eastern ‘refugees’ form ‘grooming’ gangs to entice young European girls into first, partying, then ‘being their girlfriends, and next step — prostitution — which is the worst slavery. When Christianity goes after that problem, it might regain some standing in my moral universe.
“Slaves be good to your masters…” -Jesus
I think this article nails it.
In my observation it seems that the DIE and CRT and other “Liberationist Theology” nonsense is hugely coming not merely from Bolshevist Jews and their dumb African or dirty Brown agitators, but also from the hugely fanatic (White) Christian “soldiers” of Justice.
And based on the numbers of Irish and Hispanic surnames in this regard, they don’t seem to be Protestants ─ although I could be wrong.
(And no, I am not ignoring the question about the you-know-whj0os, but Mr. Taylor wins the debate in my opinion.)
In the halls of education particularly, but increasingly every institution of note, unless one fits a BIPoC or GenderQueer category, any professional or semi-professional new hires are never locals with generational ties to the community. And only the “wokest” Whites need apply.
We have been instructed that we must “listen” to the plaintive voices (commands) of these “professionals” or risk sacral wrath.
Once the carpetbaggers arrive, the first thing legacy Whites do is profess a showy acknowledgment of “their” past colonialist sins. This is a daily affirmation.
We have now probably all seen these woke mantras at the bottom of every business e-mail that represents the new normal.
We are not simply allowed to ignore the reparations toll that must be paid. Every knee will kneel, and every tongue confess.
We are indeed afflicted by a pestilence, and I don’t know what can be done.
But I don’t think that we can ignore the Christian role in all of this.
🙂
You’re right, except in one regard: the “Christian role” you are referring to is sociological, not theological. Yes, a lot of people calling themselves “Christians” have played a huge role in subverting white America and the West. So have a lot of atheists. But this is not an imperative arising necessarily from the logic of the faith itself. Only fools (among whom number many confused Christians) think that Christianity is in any way at all compatible with wokeness or BLM, which are based on nothing but lies (which thus make them the very opposite of the Faith).
I think this is wishful thinking. I’ve seen research showing an increase in all things religious, especially given the influx of Latino Catholics.
I think this is wishful thinking. I’ve seen research showing an increase in all things religious, especially given the influx of Latino Catholics.
I don’t know if it’s wishful thinking or not, but it certainly is overstated. We are not seeing the end of religion, nor will we ever, but rather it’s further democratization, which started with Gutenberg.
There is very little reason for anyone to go to church anymore. Most of us don’t believe that the sacraments are necessary for salvation, nor do we feel the need to sit and be preached at for an hour. We’re the choir after all; the spiritually indifferent have fallen away. We know how to read our Bibles, and we have a wealth of other books, youtube channels, etc. now to keep our minds engaged (Matthew 22:37).
The fellowship of traditional church attendance is nice, but is it worth getting up early and rushing out the door on one of only two precious weekend mornings with your family? Remember, serious religious people have children, and all of the scheduling and social obligations that go along with that.
There is no real alternative religion rising in the West. Indeed, more people like to dabble in Eastern spirituality, and maybe a few more might attend a neo-pagan gathering, but none of this really threatens to replace Christianity. It’s just a way to show you’re “spiritual, but not religious.”
This is unfair. Globalization has reached a fever pitch in recent decades, and a certain relativization of religious doctrine almost always goes along with increased exposure to foreign ideas. People only want to show they’re “spiritual” if they care what other “spiritual” people think, and people who care what other “spiritual” people think usually care because they are “spiritual” themselves.
it’s easier for them to see goofy druids as the enemy instead of agnostic women in pantsuits.
Really? You’re going to blame women for the decline of Christianity?
I see it’s easier for you to see agnostic women in pantsuits (so you’re OK with skirtsuits?) as the enemy rather than a male-dominated academic establishment that has been ruthlessly hostile to Christianity for generations.
This is, fortunately, beginning to change, thanks to a number of brilliant Christian philosophers who have made theism intellectually respectable again, most notably Plantinga and Swinburne. Of course, it will take time for this to trickle down, but trickle down it will, unless the media start deplatforming smart Christians.
Christianity is declining qualitatively too. It’s less about moral virtues and more about anthropomorphism, as terms like devil, Satan, and demon have become more popular. Particularly what’s being lost in Christianity are terms to do with remaining steadfast in the face of temptation. Words like conscience have become less common according to Google Ngram. I blame capitalism and modernity for Christianity’s decline. It fared better in subsistence agrarian societies.
America has become more just — and thus closer to the ideals one would expect of a Christian nation — as white Protestant power has waned. The United States of 2022 is far more just than it was in 1822 or 1922 or 1952 or even 1982. And while white Protestants have undeniably been part of that story — they were indispensable to the abolitionist movement, for example — the elevation of other voices has made a tremendous difference.
In the civil rights movement, the sad reality is that all too often the person wielding the fire hose and the person facing the spray both proclaimed faith in Jesus and both went to church, but only one of them was acting justly. And any account of American civil rights has to include the vital contribution of the American Jewish community.
And there, ladies and gentlemen, we see the end result of color-blind, Buckleyite “conservatism.” Thanks for all those cultural victories, you civic-minded Patriots, you. This is what happens when your entire “philosophy” revolves around defending the existing order, whatever that order might be. Here’s to Reagan, writing in hell.
“the spirit of the Beatitudes” I believe was meant for initiates. For those who understood some of the concepts of ‘heavens’ or planes of consciousness. It has been taken out of context as being weak , however, in actuality involves superior strength and development. These are occult teachings.
First comment had formatting destroyed:
I’m working on the philosophico-theological justification Lord Shang mentions and its reconciliation with the biological, hereditary realities which must be addressed by any theology which is intended to survive the next century while being thought and elaborated by White people. (Name one original, constructive non-White philosopher or theologian of influence before 2016. Now name one White, no matter how gormless, in 2200. You’ll find the tasks equally difficult.)
Unlike earlier attempts which, while having in common with mine the failure to reach a large audience, came from an Identity perspective, I write in the Aristotelian Thomist tradition of high medieval, in James Russell’s thesis, “Germanized” Catholicism. It’s not strictly Aristotelian Thomist, as it incorporates Neo/platonist, Augustinian, analytic, and even Reformed Kinist insights, but is a constructive project that takes all of these seriously: the Denzinger, Scripture, philosophy, history, biological science, sociobiology, and Judaism. That trad Catholics can be acutely aware of the JQ in theological and cultural context is obvious to anyone familiar with E Michael Jones’s oeuvre. I hope to expand it in a more overtly political, Schmittian direction but it is already unwieldier than this post.
If anyone desires to help reading drafts or publishing, let me know. I’ve refrained from sharing out of both perfectionistic fear of criticism and the inhospitability to Christianity in Rightist circles. Especially now that even Kindle self-publishing is closed to any exoteric and overt work addressing the necessary questions, yet serialization on a blog hasn’t quite gained the heights necessary for a serious work of sustained argument to be taken seriously or to reach an audience large or small as a whole instead of in, perhaps, the quotably aphoristic soundbyte.
What is your academic background, if you don’t mind my asking? Interestingly, I will be rooting my own work in this area in the Thomistic (and more modern natural law) traditions, albeit also utilizing the resources of modern analytic ethics. The superficial issue (or one of them, anyway), as I have pointed out in past comments, pertains to the exact meaning of “Christian brotherhood”. Of course, it is a spiritual concept or aspiration; it has nothing to do with denying obvious cultural incompatibilities (and their underlying racio-biological origins), and then mendaciously using those denials to facilitate the physical dispossession of whites from their nations and societies.
The real issues, however, are far more complex than this, as they pertain not to justifying the rejection of imposed diversity and alien immigration invasions (which, however much the churches have been wrong in this politically, is relatively easy to do philosophically), but with developing the moral-theological justification for doing what comes next: for re-securing white homelands after we’ve experienced this coercive diversification.
Good luck to you as you pursue your approach, and I follow mine. May a hundred books appear challenging the faux-‘ethical’ racial zeitgeist!
White Christians are a large but shrinking group who have withstanding persecution at the heart of the community-founding narrative. Moldbug spent a tendentious amount of time to show how it lives on in the leftist West while Dawkins asserts: “I’m a cultural Christian”. Even in the diminished world of 2040, there will be millions of White Christians. The zeitgeist worked to converge the Church blindingly fast since 2016, but many Christians already acknowledge a problem of bowing to the Culture (itself secular Christian), even if the complaint is bowing to the Culture’s systemic racism. The twin tendencies of world-rejection and persecution and martyrism have the potentiality to become quite powerful when given a proper footing and direction. The Right complains about the world-rejection of Christianity, but the world has become anti-White, hostile and inimical. The same for the persecution narrative, but how can a group persevere against what the world has become if it seeks to accept and be accepted, and fears persecution?
There’s no inherent theoretical reason why the same energies can’t be redirected in a antiethnomasochistic direction, just only two centuries of cultural development. The foundation already exists, broken and split between a few different groups: the trads, the integralists, the kinists, the left social theorists, the Eastern rite, and the Marxian Thomists McCabe and MacIntyre. It’s simply never been brought together before because each tradition that has a brick of the foundation rejects the complementary bricks held by competing groups, and those groups themselves.
My background is in mathematics, not philosophy, politics, or theology. I’ve spent the last ten or eleven years inhaling the cross-section of philosophy, theology, history, and political theory, including the “Right Marxism” of some of the GRECE types, but regardless remain one of those characters beloved of academics everywhere, an amateur with no formal training in the subject.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.