Counter-Currents
Statue of King Olaf Tryggvason of Norway in Trondheim.
2,779 words
Since the original Alt Right was crushed by the government in 2017, the white identity space has been dominated by something calling itself Christian Nationalism. This is often a parlor trick to use the less controversial “Christian” identity as a euphemism for white.
Shortly before Christmas 2023, one of its leaders, Nicholas Fuentes, called for the execution of non-Christians and declared that stemming the tide of illegal immigration at our Southern border is less important than ensuring that the United States is populated only by Christians. We are losing something vital by failing to call out this outrageous subversion of the white cause and the blaspheming of true faith. Fuentes went on a pseudo-scientific rant that sounded like quackery from the seventeenth-century Salem witch trials:
So many of the people perpetrating the lies, the destruction of the country, they are evildoers. They are people who worship the false gods. They are people who practice magic and rituals or whatever. More than anything, those people need to be, when we take power, they need to be given the death penalty.
He then said he was “more concerned about such people than he was about non-whites and mass migration,” which is convenient for someone with a Hispanic lineage. He continued:
These are people communicating with demons and engaging in this sort of witchcraft and stuff. These people that are suppressing the name of Christ and suppressing Christianity, they must be absolutely annihilated when we take power. This is God’s country. This is Jesus’ country. This is not the domain of atheists and devil worshippers, perfidious Jews. This is Christ’s country.
Christian Nationalism has been a lackluster substitute for explicit and unapologetic white identity politics. For one, it’s a poor framework for dealing with the immigration crisis at our Southern border, where we arguably already have a Christian Nationalist immigration policy. The Central Americans and Africans streaming through our porous border are more likely to be devout Christians than most European whites today. In Europe, the effects of first-world education have dramatically decreased faith and religiosity. Outside of America, which is a bit of an anomaly, white people are becoming more atheistic, which has led to Christianity’s great bastions shifting to the dark-skinned Third World.
Tucker Carlson substituting “Christians” where “whites” would better apply.
For centuries, the great defenders of Western civilization were Christians defending Europe against Muslim invaders. Legendary warriors such as Vlad the Impaler of Wallachia in modern-day Romania and the Frankish military leader Charles Martel fought off invasions that might very well have brought the West to an end long before its time. We owe these great men a remarkable debt. But today, the situation is quite different. Today’s invaders at the American Southern border are Christians. Hearkening back to the Christian Europe’s legendary great defenders in the present crisis is an anachronism.
Even if we were to make color-blind utilitarian decisions about immigration, allowing only the most intelligent and least crime-ridden individuals into our country, the Christian countries would fare poorly. The most atheistic populations — whites, Asians, and Jews — are, generally speaking, the populations with the highest IQs and the lowest crime rates, whereas the most Christian populations — Hispanics and blacks — have the lowest IQs and the highest rates of crime.
Adult population identifying as atheist or non-religious:
🇨🇳China: 90%
🇯🇵Japan: 70%
🇨🇿Czech Republic: 64%
🇫🇷France: 54%
🇳🇱Netherlands: 42%
🇩🇪Germany: 38%
🇦🇺Australia: 30%
🇬🇧UK: 26%
🇨🇦Canada: 24%
🇺🇸USA: 22%
🇮🇳India: 20%
🇧🇷Brazil: 8%
🇮🇹Italy: 6%
🇵🇰Pakistan: 1%
🇹🇷Turkey: 1%
🇸🇦Saudi…— Jamil Baptiste Berglund (@JamilBerglund) June 5, 2023
After China and Japan, the highest rates of atheism and irreligiosity are in the Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands, Germany, and Australia — in other words, high-IQ, majority-white countries. On the other hand, the highest numbers of Christians are in non-white countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Zambia, Nigeria, Congo, and Ethiopia.
My purpose here is not to bash Christianity. There are many brilliant Christian artists, statesmen, blue-collar heroes, and stunningly accomplished scientists. Although Christianity’s origins are foreign and Semitic rather than European, there should be no serious doubt that white, European men of Christian faith have made an indelible impact on Western civilization. But based on current demographic trends, we must be honest about the fact that Christianity will have a diminishing influence on the future of the white race, and that its popularity in non-white Third World countries certainly makes it a poor euphemism for white interests.
You can buy The Alternative Right, ed. Greg Johnson, here
Ironically, I found the old Alt Right a more welcoming environment to explore Christian faith. Although there were many devout Christians in that movement, and while the Crusader memes were common even then, there were also many atheist and agnostic thought leaders such as Greg Johnson, Richard Spencer, Mike Enoch, and Christopher Cantwell. Personally, I was raised in a devout conservative Christian family and attended Christian private schools until the fourth grade. I nevertheless always found church to be painfully boring and the sermons irrelevant to my life and interests. When I grew older, the concept of faith in things that cannot be seen and which make little moral or practical sense became impossible to countenance and I stopped believing. I tried mightily to turn that around during the early years of my involvement in dissident politics. I could see how the Christian faith correlated with many of my political values, such as strong communities, big families, morals, and the importance of taking responsibility. I tried to thread the needle between skepticism and faith by choosing to anthropomorphize the Higher Power — which could simply be Nature — as Jesus Christ, the God of my kin for as far back as I can trace.
No one in the old Alt Right was pushy or demanding about my faith. There was certainly no one calling for my arrest and execution if I strayed from the dogmatic faith as practiced in organized Christianity. I thus felt good about easing my mother’s worries about her son’s lack of faith. An unexpected side-effect of the Charlottesville fallout was the diminishing influence of more secular figures, who ended up being eclipsed by a younger generation of religious fanatics. Many of the canniest charlatans, such as Baked Alaska, opportunistically switched from “full 1488” to calling themselves born-again Christians. This was the new optical smokescreen for hating Jews, but without the same connotations. Christianity was blasphemously used as a shield for offensive ideas. Many of these same figures ended up embracing the “Christ is King” mantra while doing hard drugs, sleeping with underage fans, and generally living a life of degeneracy.
As “Christian Nationalism” has become ascendant in recent years, “the movement’s” fanatical religiosity has careened into an extreme mutation of the 1990s Moral Majority, which was a Bible-thumping freak show of zealots who went around declaring what people could or couldn’t say while promoting strange, anti-scientific nonsense such as “gay conversion therapy.” If such a thing were real, I wouldn’t have a problem with it, but looking at homosexuality in the animal kingdom, I think a rational, scientific mind would have to come to the conclusion that, although sexual behaviors can be influenced by social pressure to a degree, there is a small but innate rate of natural homosexuality in human (and animal) nature. Whether I like homosexuality or not is beside the point. I don’t. But I can also evaluate root causes without resorting to superstitious nonsense. A gay man who goes through “conversion therapy” is just a gay man in denial (see Milo Yiannopoulos).
For a preview of how non-Christians would be treated in a hypothetical Christian Nationalist administration, we can ask the Gab AI bot that was created Gab’s founder and prominent Christian Nationalist, Andrew Torba. Torba programmed his bot to inform us that white non-Christians will no longer be able to vote or hold elected office in his hypothetical future state. Torba perversely distorts the American creed of “liberty and justice for all” by adding the proviso that it is only “for those who believe in Jesus Christ.”
Another superstition that has proliferated on the American Right since the rise of Christian Nationalism is the belief that “demons” are a part of everyday life and a sensible explanation for human behavior. We have even seen popular conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones claiming that the political elite’s behavior can be explained by “extra-dimensional demon” possession.
Another example is the oft-repeated social media claim that people who take hallucinogenic drugs are opening up a gateway to another dimension where they commune with and become possessed by demons. An individual’s aberrant behavior is therefore supposedly explained by demonic possession. Back in the real world, even those who have never taken hallucinogens know that it induces the subconscious to run wild with imaginations of all manner of lurid fantasies, from gnomes to space aliens to being eaten by giant snakes. No sane person who comes down from a trip thinks that he was actually eaten by a snake if he dreamed of it during an ayahuasca trip. As for odd behavior by those using drugs, does it really require demonic possession in order to account for it? Psychological studies have been very clear about the increased risk of schizophrenic and schizotypal symptoms in heavy users of hallucinogenic drugs, and even marijuana.
Aliens are just demons. They do not come from light-years away, they are the same disembodied spirits in the bible, but wearing a new narrative.
"For even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light."
You see this clearly with Ayahuasca. Entities shapeshift to lure you in.. https://t.co/W49MncJryJ
— Samuel (@thewizardofzen) December 18, 2023
Does Christianity deserve to be the center of a white-focused movement? It should be welcomed, respected, and protected, of course. But should it be the center? No. For one thing, Christianity is not the indigenous religion of the European peoples. Christianity originated in the Middle East and is essentially a heretical sect of Judaism. Christians are Jews who believe that Judaism’s messianic prophecy has already been fulfilled. I know that there are pro-white Christians who would vehemently disagree. They hold convoluted theories about how Jews weren’t Jews back then, but were actually white, and so forth. It’s about as scientific as the claim by blacks that Beethoven was actually black and that blacks built the Egyptian pyramids. It’s the “We Wuz Kangs” argument adapted for religious necessity rather than historical truth.
For a movement that sees Jews as its primary ethnic competitors, this is a conspicuously problematic fact. It accounts for Evangelical Christianity’s slavish philo-Semitism and devotion to Israel. Anti-Semitic Christians point to Europe’s history of persecution against its Jewish minority to “prove” that Christianity is an appropriate historical bulwark. But Jews of that time were not much different than other heretical persecuted sects of the Christian faith such as the Anabaptists, who were butchered and suppressed into oblivion. This is therefore an untenable and anachronistic belief in today’s America, where dozens of Christian sects proliferate, free of religious persecution.
The consequences of the pre-medieval Europeans abandoning their native religions, often at the point of a sword, could not be more profound. Although as a skeptic I don’t view Odin-worship or druidic practices as any more genuine than the popular modern religions, they were at least an organic and creative expression of a people. Odin was a god of the Nordic peoples. He was not a universalist god. It would not have made sense for an African to worship the Celtic god Dagda, any more than it would for a Gaulic chieftain to convert to a Zulu tribal religion. There is something deeply personal and subversive about the European peoples being forced to accept a foreign Semitic religion.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s White Identity Politics here.
Some have argued that Europeans “peacefully” and “willingly” adopted Christianity. This is simply not true. Perhaps certain ancient and medieval kings did so. But even in the rare instances where they did not use violence to convert their imperial subjects, coercion in the form of taxes, the withholding of food, and other punishments would have been unbearable for destitute farmers already living at mere subsistence level. And in truth, the most brutal forms of violence were regularly practiced against Europeans — often poor country folk who continued to worship the old gods.
The Norwegian King Olaf Tryggvason (963-1000AD) was known as “Christ’s best hatchet man.” The tales of his savagery toward his own people are voluminous. According to legend, he once invited a number of pagan holdouts to a feast, got them drunk, locked them inside, and burned them alive. He would tie pagans down on island beaches and wait for the tide to come in and drown them. Others were torn apart by dogs or had their eyes ripped out of their sockets. Among the most infamous forms of murder he used was placing a bowl full of glowing coals on a man’s stomach and heating it until it exploded, or allegedly prying open a non-believer’s mouth, placed a funnel down his throat, and then putting a snake in it after setting its tail on fire. The panicked viper would then chew the man apart from the inside as it died.
Charlemagne, the King of the Franks, undertook military campaigns to expand his territory and spread Christianity. In 782 AD, he ordered the execution of around 4,500 Saxons who refused to convert to Christianity in the infamous Massacre of Verden. The Northern Crusades from Western Europe into the Baltics in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries likewise involved violence and the forced conversion of the indigenous Slavic and Baltic populations of the Old Prussians, Livonians, and Wends.
The majority of organized Christianity today could in no way be seen as a bastion of pro-white politics. Many churches proudly fly gay pride flags and support Black Lives Matter. They also support queer and black liberation, and the fight against “white supremacy.”
During her 'sermon,' Michelle Higgins of The Truths Table fame blamed bad behavior on the 'white rapist' in her bloodline. pic.twitter.com/xsSopCbADR
— Protestia (@Protestia) December 18, 2023
Even the conservative Evangelical churches have been subverted. Nowhere on Earth are you more likely to see white couples virtue-signaling how anti-racist they are by adopting black children than in an Evangelical household, especially those involved in politics, such as the Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
Conservative Christian and presidential candidate Nikki Haley was overjoyed when her daughter married a black man.
There is also the fact that Evangelical and Christian fundamentalist churches have been subverted by the Israeli lobby. Far from being centers of pro-white resistance, these churches have actually embraced the Jewish identity and the Jewish struggle for geopolitical dominance over their own people. What a shame.
The false religion of Christian Zionism 'The Jews are better than us, you need to accept that' – Christian indoctrination of children #ZionismExplained pic.twitter.com/0ovRTGJg89
— Dick Mackintosh🌹#StopTheWar (@DickMackintosh) February 4, 2024
Neither of these expressions of anti-white attitudes in either Left or Right-wing churches are an aberration. They are rather the logical endpoint of Christian doctrines of universalism and “equality.” The emergence of Christianity unleashed the most powerful Left-wing revolution in history, as well as the most powerful force for globalization known to man. Prior to Christianity, European peoples such as the Greeks and Romans had democratic and republican political systems, but their conception of these systems had nothing to do with “equality” or universalism. The modern Western version of these systems, which have long since been deeply inculcated with Christian notions, are defenseless against foreign aliens who exploit our countries and ravage them with crime. Yet, our Christian heritage implores believers to view them all as equals: fellow brothers in Christ, or else those who are only a conversion away from being morally equivalent to the whites who built our nations. The pervasiveness of this false “equality” has nested itself so deeply in the Western psyche that even as our religiosity fades, the legacy of our religious past lives on.
Don’t forget that even as the great European conquistadors, explorers, and colonists set out in search of resources and riches, their moral rationale was to spread the Christian faith. This mission sent white men to the furthest corners of the globe: China, the Americas, and darkest Africa. Perhaps this was inevitable, you might say. Our need for trade always made exploration a necessity. This is true, but it was the desire to spread the faith that united Europeans with non-Europeans in a global community, and thus led to the belief that anyone from anywhere could be integrated into our societies. Christianity became an identity that superseded the ethnos and the concept of the nation. It made all men “equal” in a way that Karl Marx never could.
If we embrace “Christian Nationalism,” the religious element will trump the racial one, subverting it into mere Republicanism. Perhaps for some, that was always the point.
Follow Jason Kessler on Telegram, Twitter, Odysee and Gab.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else 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. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
139 comments
The foundation of future White Life is White Identity Nationalism.
The practical evaluation of any idea, posture or policy requires filtering the matter through the lens of ‘Is this good for Whites?’.
If the answer is not straight-forward – as it is not with ‘Christianity’ – then pro-Whites are going to struggle around it.
But, by its very nature, struggle over sub-racial issues is a form of anti-Whiteness.
My religion is White Nationalism.
My spiritual practice is loving White people.
So, IOW, even Charlemagne was an ISIS-like character: truly shocking!
”Saint” Boniface felled the Donar Oak of the Germans.
”Saint” Porphyrius (of Gaza fame, who the Israelis bombed his church) destroyed pagan temples.
The more one studies Christianity, the more one realizes how ISIS-like it truly was.
Saint Olga, Regina Rugorum, has burned Slavs in Iskorosten (today’s Ukraine) with incendiary weapons, and Saint Vladimir, the Baptist of Rus, has killed many Slavs in Novgorod and another cities, to make them “good Christians”.
Thx. I’m sure the list goes on. Iranian nationalists rail against the sanguinary introduction of Islam into ancient Iran. It seems Christianity acted similarly in Europe.
@Hairy Iranian Guy
Durood ber shoma,
That is an extremely mistaken comparison, Agha.
Hich mmbae tarikhi dar barey een vojood nadarey.
Any Iranian nationalist expression that doesn’t reserve an exalted place for Islam is bogus, period.
When it came into contact with Islam, the noble soil of Persia produced the likes of Hafez, Mowlana, Ferdowsi, Saadi, etc.
Name ONE pre-Islamic Persian figure who can come even close to these gentlemen.
At the beginning of 20th century when the poison of Zionism had not yet been injected into the region, approximately, 1/4th of Middle East still belonged to groups other than Islam (Zoroastrianism, Yezidism, Judaism, Christianity etc.). How did these groups manage to survive during all these centuries?
On the other hand, Europe was drenched in blood as a result of events like the “Northern Crusades”. Pagan symbols were violently erased. No such bloodletting occurred during the spread of Islam. Else, the faith too would’ve been diluted or vanished with the passage of time; just like Christianity faded in the European continent because it was violently imposed on a population.
Lastly, Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world, and, yet, Indonesians didn’t smash their pagan past. It still stands.
Regards
Khush-haal baashid
ba ehteraam.
Ba Darood,
Tabari’s monumental work discusses the invasion of Sassanian Iran by the Arab Muslims. It wasn’t a tea party like Buddhist monks proselytizing China and sharing sutras. There were battles and an empire collapsed in the process. Tabari’s work specifically mentions Khālid ibn Al-Walid (“Sayf-al-Islam” = “Sword of Islam”, named by Mohammed, not “teacup or rose bouquet of Islam”) and Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqās as major figures in the conquest. Tabari even discusses Hussein and Hassan’s mass murders in Tabaristan (modern-day Mazandaran), in addition, to Ali egging on Omar to invade.
The names you mentioned appeared ~six centuries after the Islamic invasion. Ferdowsi prided himself on writing a poem not using one Arabic word. He brought back the Iranian epic. Later in life, he eschewed Islam for Zoroastrianism like other poets: Hafez, was another, I believe.
Some pre-Islamic Iranian figures who were renowned were: Cyrus the Great, King Darius, King Xerxes, King Shapur (of Gundeshapur fame), Mani, Mazdak, and, of course, Zoroaster.
Islam completely annihilated Buddhism in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Christianity faded in the West due to “modernization” (Science, Technos, free thought, etc.).
The only extant Pagan remnants I know of in Indonesia are in Bali and the vastnesses of inland Borneo. The highly populated islands of Sumatra and Java have nothing but mosques.
Mochaker,
HIG
@Hairy Iranian Guy
Azizum, firstly, Tabari was not reporting the events like an embedded journalist. He collected oral transmissions two centuries after the event. I am sure you are aware that there is a method that rigorously checks the chains of transmissions to identify liars and fabricators. Please quote a tradition with its full chain of transmission.
Secondly, Arab invasions and the spread of Islam are two entirely different things. Islam does not equal to Arabism. Our ancestors knew the difference which is why they chose the path of Imam Ali (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him). If it was imposed upon us, we would’ve abandoned it when, after a century later, we deposed Arab occupiers and regained political power.
We never abandoned Islam because there is honor and dignity in being a follower of Amir ul Momineen (Peace and Blessings Allah be upon him). What we call in Persian “sharf”. Een raah sharf daarey.
Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes, etc. are prominent historical figures. They have their respective places in history. But beyond that, they do not give one a code of life.
As for Zoroaster, well, his teachings couldn’t respond to the intellectual challenges of Islam. Also, it wasn’t because of force that Islam triumphed. The Mongols ravaged Iranians lands but they couldn’t eradicate Islam from Khorasan. Why didn’t their system of metaphysics overcome Islam? Two generations of aggressive Soviet Atheism couldn’t do the same.
Thirdly, Islam didn’t “annihilate Buddhism”. The Buddhists of Afghanistan and Pakistan converted to Islam because the latter is closer to human nature than a lot of “isms”. And they also didn’t smash their pagan past after their conversion. A lot of that has been preserved.
Lastly, the oldest temple in Indonesia is in Java which is almost 97% Muslim.
Regards.
Howdy,
You can’t brush off Tabari’s monumental work to the realm of lies and fabrications simply because it’s not a Hadith. Now, since you brought up Hadith, Sahih Bukhari, dealt with Mohammed himself and clearly shows that he was a pedophile, amongst other very unsavory attributes. Every corner of Islam is sketchy, sorry.
The Muslim invasion of Iran, again not a tea party, was done by Arabs. You can divorce the two, but when Omar, the Muslim Arab, invaded Iran, he didn’t invade with Siamese Buddhists and Hottentots, but with Arab Muslims.
Iranians up north by the Caspian did resist the Arabs/Muslims and attempted to throw off the yoke of Islam, but Tabari is very clear that Hassan and Hussein went up to Tabaristan, modern-day Mazandaran, and massacred many Iranians to squash the rebellions.
There is no honor and dignity in being a follower of Ali – another pedophile, mass murderer, corrupt lover of wealth, very ugly, bald, and short (who gave one of his daughter’s, aged 7, to Omar, aged 57), who used Fatima as a baby factory from the age of 8 to 18, thereby leading to her death, who fathered Hassan (who married/divorced 300 women), and Hussein, who, for love of power, got his baby son and family killed.
You asked for one pre-Islamic Iranian worth note and now, after providing a goodly number, you change the goal post to “they do not give one a code of life” as if that’s the only measure of worth.
The intellectual challenges of Islam include the divine miracles of why Mohammed could have sex with his adopted son’s wife once the latter divorced her, why Mohammed’s wives weren’t allowed to remarry after he croaked, why only he could have more than four wives, and why only he could have sex with any woman who presented herself to him. In short, much of Islam’s intellectual challenges revolve around Mohammed’s golden member.
Sorry, but your attempt to reinterpret Islam into a tea party isn’t working. The Taliban is a fine example of an Islamic force destroying a Buddhist site: the Bamiyan Buddha. Barely nothing has been preserved of Buddhism in these lands. Buddhism is viewed as grossly idolatry by the simpleton Muslims.
Islamic jizya and quranic verses about the right hand taking slaves and concubines in war paint a different picture of the religion as does the hadiths and as does the Islamic world’s behavior when someone disrespects or mocks Mohammed.
You’re right about the Hindu temple in Java. This might be due to Indonesia being one of the only places where Islam was spread peacefully. IOW, it’s shockingly exceptional.
Let’s not continue this topic.
@Hairy Iranian Guy
I thought I was interacting with someone with appropriate knowledge of Islam. I was wrong. This is WikiIslam-tier stuff.
Please re-read the first part of the comment. Nothing is being brushed off. However, there are protocols that serious history readers adhere to when they delve into the subject.
Just because something is reported in a compilation doesn’t automatically imply that it is true.
Do you think we don’t raise questions when we read these narrations? We do all the time.
Anyhow, this is a comment I posted under another thread. It is also relevant here.
You asked for one pre-Islamic Iranian worth note and now, after providing a goodly number, you change the goal post to “they do not give one a code of life” as if that’s the only measure of worth.
I was being polite. I could’ve used harsher words for these figures.
What did they or their social order produce? Pre-Islamic Iran was an absolute social mess.
The glorification of ancient Iran is a pretty recent phenomenon. It is a silly attempt to create a rival historical trajectory.
Even the symbols that are projected (Sun and Lion) have no link whatsoever with ancient Iran.
Perhaps, it is the reason behind the pathetic state of Iranian monarchist and secular nationalist (whatever that means) “opposition”.
Mashhad commands a far greater share in defining Iran not Persepolis.
Tabari’s history of the conquest of Iran is one of the prime sources on the subject. You’re making excuses to bring it into question because it doesn’t make Islam look good. This behavior is found in all religious apologetics, so you’re not alone.
I read your link. Again, you’re making excuses and claims without backing. If we can’t trust Sahih Bukhari, which was rigorously judged for its accuracy, per your previous statements, to get Ayesha’s marriage age and bedding down correct, then we should question the hadith tradition as well as any and all claims in the quran itself, especially Mohammed’s claims which have absolutely no proof except Mohammed’s assertions. No rigorous testing, no eye witnesses, etc.
And your assertion that “we conclude” she was 18-25 is not credible. Conclude from what? Minor Shia hadiths? Sahih Bukhari is accepted by the overwhelming number of Islamic scholars. Again, you “conclude” anything that makes Islam look “good” and put in question anything which makes it look “bad”. And then, in typically insufferable Islamic fashion, you end with “khaaye maalee” of Mohammed and his character by saying it’s all a plot to make him look bad.
You’re jumping from one topic to another, making groundless assertions which are asinine; to wit, pre-Islamic Iran was a social mess.
Now you’re attacking Iranian nationalism. I’m not an Iranian nationalist.
If you were fair, without an Islamic agenda to make Moe and the Ahlul Beyt look wholesome, you would disparage the “pathetic state” of the religious in Iran, too. Their women look like walking trash bags, with their moustaches and breath reeking of garlic and onion and bodies of fetid sweat. No wonder so many of the religious youth engage in homosexuality.
In the Quran classes, the male teachers sodomize their students at alarming rates. The religious youth becomes corrupt at an early age and it, too, has a slovenly appearance: dirty and smelly.
Shia Islam has lost credibility in Iran because it bothers normal ppl and makes life hell. That’s Sharia in action. Iran is a softer-handed, more liberal version of the Taliban.
It’s exactly the problem: Mashhad > Persepolis,
Perhaps, it is the reason behind the pathetic state of Iranian monarchist and secular nationalist (whatever that means) “opposition”.
Maybe because Dr. Ali Shariati was killed by SAVAK.
@Hairy Iranian Guy
Asking to be reasonable when reading historical texts doesn’t amount to “making excuses”.
Why something is reported the way it is?, When was it reported?, and Who reported it? are also as important as What is being reported?
Providence has endowed each of us with a capacity to discern. Let’s behave like grown-ups and not suspend it when reading history.
I have spent some part of my life outside the pale of Islam. I know these type of “arguments” inside out. I too used to play this game. I have been on the other side as well.
I came back after Islam answered my criticisms and convinced me to the depths of being.
Do they not contemplate within themselves? (30:8)
Finally, as according to you, “Shia Islam has lost credibility in Iran…”, I think we should end this exchange at this point.
I am again so thankful to Tomris Khatoon that all this was and is kept far from our Great Steppe.
“Reasonableness” comes into play for you when something doesn’t match your roseate picture of Islam. Sahih Bukhari is one of, even not the, most important Hadith in sunni Islam.
These aren’t arguments, but facts: Sahih Bukhari makes a claim. If it supports your thesis, you’ll expound on the sagacity of the Hadith process and those involved. If it makes Islam look bad, you’ll hem and haw and put it all into question in the pursuit of “reasonableness”.
Whatever time you spent outside Islam wasn’t spent wisely. Any ideology in which all one does is sing praise should be put in question. Your flowery lauding of Islamic persons is not only tiresome and hokey, but raises alarm bells. The greater the praise, the bigger the stink.
If Islam “answered” your criticisms and “convinced” you to the “depth of being” then you’re indeed a fool.
You clearly don’t follow what’s going on in Iran. I do on a daily basis. After the death of Mahsa Amini, Islam took a massive hit. Stop reading IRI propaganda.
This is a clear sign, again, that you’re just puffing yourself up about a subject you have no idea about and that you only read/listen to one side of the matter.
I love my ancestors they live in me.
Love our ancestors they live in us.
I suppose in terms of morality and behavior we are all more or less Christian. My ethos might be epicurean Christian like Thomas Jefferson, or possibly some sort of Girardian Christian, but in terms of metaphysics, I’m an absolute scientific materialist.
I get the sense that some of the prominent Christian nationalist activists, especially those who converted or rebranded from other dissident right branding in the last couple of years, are feigning a belief in demons and in Christianity generally. Due to peer pressure and the threat of bullying from certain Christian nationalists, not to mention the incentive of being able to join already existing social networks and have an automatic “in” with thousands of new potential subscribers, some might see choosing the Christian nationalist path as easier and more lucrative. It does seem trendy.
Another challenge that pro-white Christian nationalists, especially those who are Catholic or in the LDS Church, might face is the issue of what to do when/if the leader or prophet of your church comes out explicitly against white nationalism or even white identity politics. Imagine being a sincere, devoted (and full-tithe paying), lifelong church member and also strongly pro-white while witnessing your church seemingly embrace the diversity agenda more each year. I know people in this situation, and it’s very distressing for them.
I say there’s no sense in continuing to pay a tithe to an organization that’s been subverted into carrying out destructive agendas. You can explain why you’ve stopped doing so. Besides, it’s not like you’re cutting a check to Jesus or something.
So the crux of this essay is really that Nick Fuentes has been allegedly retreating from white nationalism into Christian nationalism.
Certain points it’s important to clarify – third worlders are not more religious than whites. Statistics like baptism rates are just indicative of stronger communities, and when Latinos are given political power, like in the Catholic Church under Pope Francis, they undermine doctrine and veer practically into outright heresy, and are opposed by primarily American/English and Germanic/Slavic cardinals who stick to orthodoxy. Mexico for example, has been under control of Freemasonic atheists since the execution of the emperor Maximilian in the late 19th century. Entire decades of the 20th century were devoted to hunting down and executing faithful Catholics by the Mexican state. So to call Latinos as a whole very religious is a misunderstanding – they may get baptized and perhaps retain some superstitions, but their states are ruled by atheists and Jews, their laws non-Christian, as can be seen by the very crime rates and LGBT you mentioned. To this day the Catholic Church sends missionaries to South America as most of the people are quite far from the faith, I encountered such a missionary priest over the summer – he had been sent from Europe.
You seem to see the phenomenon of demons as something superstitious and to be discarded. Nevertheless, the fact remains many of our elites are explicitly or implicitly Satanic, and heavy drug users or key Democrats are “fucked up”. Whether it is an actual demon harming them or not, the fact remains they act in an evil and irrational way, in short, demonically. While on the other hand, active Christians in government (unlike say, Pelosi, who was denied Communion, excommunicated, by her bishop) cluster towards the Republican party and are more willing to listen to calls for policies like strong border security, freedom of association, and immigration reform, i.e. towards white nationalist priorities.
You mention Evangelicals – these are not part of our mainstream heritage. If anything, their intellectual origin might be found with the original Puritans, whacko nutjobs expelled from Europe for their heresies, and most of their theology and liturgy has roots in the 20th century (i.e. mega-churches, Scofield Reference Bible). The Episcopalian church is THE white man’s church in America, followed by the Catholic Church, and so I would encourage these to be used as benchmarks for the faith.
Odin is definitely universalist – in the pagan world there was no such thing as “only my race can worship this god” and tribes frequently borrowed gods from each other – this is most visible with the Romans adopting practically every Greek god, but also with the popularity of Eastern cults of Isis, Cybele, and Mithras in Rome. So the only reason Africans didn’t worship Thor and Odin is that they did not live in proximity to Odin worshippers and thus couldn’t syncretize/adopt the god. In short, that European paganism is somehow more racist is a ridiculous argument, yet many online make it.
Charlemagne’s massacre at Verdun was punishment for armed military rebellion against his authority, not for believing in the wrong gods. Again, this is a tired, oft-repeated yet inaccurate distortion.
The point that Greek and Roman concepts of democracy and republicanism had no concepts of universality or egalitarianism is again wrong, as any man with a basic Classics education would know. The hymn to Harmodius and Aristogeiton, sung to commemorate their murdering of a tyrant in 510 BC Athena, famously celebrates the return of isonomia – equal rights – to the polis. The pagan emperor Caracalla passed a decree granting citizenship to all residents of the Empire in 212 AD, well before Christianity had seriously reached the centers of power – how’s that for universality?
You also advocate for homosexuality and make fun of Milo Yannopoulos for “superstition”. In the Catholic understanding, one is only gay if one engages in depraved homosexual acts, such as sodomy or fellatio. So in order to not be gay, it is enough to abstain from gay sex, and Milo is to be commended for his attempts at moral reform. If the argument here is that abstaining from gay sex is superstitious, well let that speak for the moral character of the author.
Many White racists like to go on tirades against Christianity. The origin of this is to be really found in 18th century Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire, who were the first intellectual generation to reject Christianity. This Christianophobia then continues into Nietzsche, who also finds admiration among the modern right, despite the fact that his ideology is bankrupt – nihilist and flawed. It is supremely ironic and even unfair to have writers blame Christianity for what Enlightenment philosophies did to the white race, given that the Enlightenment was largely an atheist or deist anti-Catholic movement, and egalitarian universalist impulses in the West predate Christianity, as noted above.
In conclusion, it should not be the place of white nationalists to tell us which faith we should believe in, and Christian-bashing only alienates vast numbers of whites. I do not think efforts towards a Christian theocracy and an ethnostate are contradictory. Sure, the “Christian nationalism” of Torba, Fuentes, and mulattoes like Elliot Hulse exists, but so many other faithful and practicing Christians participate in the white nationalist movement as donors and activists.
“If you worship your enemy, you are defeated. If you adopt your enemy’s religion, you are enslaved. If you breed with your enemy, you are destroyed.”
— Polydoros of Sparta
Christiantiy is an enemy religion. Even the anti-semitic version of it that Torba and Fuentes perpetuate.
Only the “tolerant”, limp-wristed version of Christianity could potentially be acceptable in a future WN state. The hard line intolerant version is a cancer to our movement.
Ideally it should be abandoned alltogether.
If Christianity is to be abandoned then it’s imperative that another religion takes its place. The irreligious don’t reproduce.
I’ve been an atheist for > 30 years. Give me a little wealth, provide me with ten wives, and I’ll prove you wrong. Like the religious, I prefer vey young women, as well; virgins all.
You’ve actually proved him right, in fact.
I’ve been an atheist for > 30 years.
That’s because you are so far from Pasdaran.
Crux Cismarina wrote:
“If Christianity is to be abandoned then it’s imperative that another religion takes its place. The irreligious don’t reproduce.”
Replace one superstition with another superstition?
I don’t see how that is necessarily the case. What Christian sects have high birthrates today? I mean, besides the Latter-Day Saints, the Amish, or a Sedevacantist subset of Catholicism that heretically has not embraced race-mixing and homsexuality.
The Amish are Luddite Anabaptists, and their anti-intellectual economic model is not sustainable without their peasants whoring out their labors part-time to Gentile or “Englisch” factories like Walmart. How high in reality are their birthrates today?
LDS (Mormon) birthrates are pretty high because they place great emphasis on the Family. Most of the women are college educated. They do use birth control and they don’t have weird theories about divorce. The traditional Mormon Corridor is as much as 95 percent White, depending of how White “Hispanics” are (usually from 5-15 percent of the total that is 95 percent White). Idaho and Utah (plus Maine) are the only parts of the United States where the ancestry is majority English. This is because the LDS had great success in converting people in the UK in the 19th and 20th century, and they still have a higher than usual White fecundity.
I know something about this because at least 75 percent of my extended family are LDS. In formally breaking away from them several decades ago, I risked, I suppose, being shunned ─ but I think everyone respects my agnostic and racist views, which are well known. And I’m always up for a debate.
The LDS church is currently holding the line against race-mixing and LGBTQ for now, but the more affluent and Liberal LDS faithful are already deeply troubled by the appearance of bigotry.
Since I think Christians ultimately have feet of clay, the question is not IF but when the LDS will be ordaining Black Lesbians to the Bishopric. They will probably be the last Christian denomination to so cave ─ but will it be in fifteen years or fifty years from now?
White people have the right to decide their own matters of conscience. If that is Christians or Nonbelievers, then so be it.
What I find irritating is not Christians professing their Faith, but the notion that Chistianity somehow secures White interests. No, clearly it does not.
That being said, we don’t need massively high birthrates either. We just need to maintain more than replacement levels and to keep the aliens out of our homelands. We will reciprocate the favor and leave them be in their own homelands.
And we need to expose DEI ─ and the Marxists and Jews behind this ─ for what it is: anti-White Hate.
🙂
Traditionalist Catholics (i.e. Latin Mass attenders) have a fertility rate of over 3.0
In a 2014 Pew Research study, Pentecostals (which is one of the largest umbrella terms for evangelical Christians) were shown to have a fertility rate of 2.1. To be fair that was 10 years ago so it may have ticked down.
The institute for Family Studies recently published a study breaking down fertility of all religions by church attendance from 1980-2022. It showed that the fertility rate of those who attended a service at least once per week was at (2.1), less than once a week (1.8) & non-religious (1.4).
Total fertility is dropping for everyone due to broader social, technological and economic factors but the fertility gap is widening each successive year between religious and non-religious.
I agree Christianity does not secure the future of ethic Europeans by itself. And there are many instances in which it has been used as a weapon against white societies. However, devout White Christians are really the only subset of white people that have children above replacement.
And yes the purely rational mind can scoff at the “superstitious” but there is an evolutionary advantage to it. I suspect that religion is hardwired in our DNA to some extent. Perhaps the gene was selected for in our human evolution. I would argue that feminism/lgbtq/DEI cults are religions.
Speaking as a father of three, rearing children in a first world country is not economically advantageous. Not to mention the wider cultural landscape that discourages it, even if one can afford them. I often feel guilty for not having more. And that desire to have children is in part informed by my conservative religious practices and the positive social pressure of those in my circles that have far more children than I have.
My point is, like it or not, Christianity has been a part of European identity for more than 1,000 years. And it’s unlikely a new religion will be formed that is pro-natal because it would need some sort of deity/superstitious element to overcome the economic factors that disincentivize having children. I think reconquering Christianity is a more practical strategy but I fully understand that there is a wide range of opinions on this matter. I have no animus against anyone who chooses another path so long as we’re working together to secure the future of ethic European homelands.
So it’s not real Christianity when Latinos do it, but the Episcopalian church is THE white man’s church in America. They’ve even got their own Ali Alexander.
The “Latinos” usually don’t do it, though. That was the commenter’s whole point there. Catholic and other Christian missionaries have been going to the outback of South America for hundreds of years to save the souls of the savage tribes. Why? It is because after 500 years they’re still not Christian. They’re indelibly pagan, atheist, animist, or whatever, and use Christian objects mainly as magical amulets or decorations (e.g., Mexican gang members wearing rosaries around their necks, as necklaces).
Meantime we’re not sending missionaries to Luxembourg or Lombardy.
“Meantime we’re not sending missionaries to Luxembourg or Lombardy.”
No, just migrants.
Pagan migrants.
the fact remains they act in an evil and irrational way, in short, demonically.
Talks about a “fact,” implies that rationality exists, then dives straight into evil and demons.
Christianity carries the seeds of its own destruction. Who can read the OT and not cringe? Even my TradCath buddy looked embarrassed as he told me his church emphasizes the NT over the Old.
This guy hit the nail on the head.
This is true.
Literally all the DISGUSTING things that the Pagans who have sneered at me for, they themselves happily do and did, and let their women do and did.
Pagan Slavs sold their own blonde women into slavery to the disgusting East long before Christianity.
Evil Roman that I am? I never would do that to them.
Pagan Slavs sold their own blonde women into slavery to the disgusting East long before Christianity.
Not Pagan Slavs did this, but Pagan European Vikings, who ruled over Slavs, and sold them, both men and women, in the whole Europe and Mediterranean. Throughout history, Europeans have been enemies of the Slavs, viewing them as inferior, enslaving them and oppressing them. The Europeanization had catastrophic consequences for the Slavs since 9th century and untill now, when two Slav peoples (yes, with partially Finnish and Türkish ancestors) kill each others for the foreign interests.
When I was ten years old in Baptist Sunday School I heard of the Jews as “God’s chosen people.” It was all based on the “covenant,” blah, blah, blah. I never understood a single word of any of it. It makes even less sense to me now than it did them.
I have a three point manifesto:
My race is my religion;
My skin color is my uniform;
Go back and re-read No’s 1 &2.
People can believe what they want as individuals, but Christianity is not in the long term racial interests of white people. I think Christianity is a trap designed to lead people astray and distract them. White racial existence is the most important creed and is the standard against which all else is judged. If it harms white people=bad. If it empowers, strengthens white people=good.
Once one simplifies one’s views like that, it conserves energy, focuses effort and helps achieve moral and intellectual clarity. Just thinking about all the intellectual gymnastics and excuses and explanations I’ve heard used to defend Christianity ever since I was a child is exhausting. Enough of this pointless distraction. We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children. Nothing else matters.
That’s all well and good but that’s not enough to animate white people to form families and have children, especially within the framework of the modern economy.
You will never convince White women to have children with “muh IQ” or “muh bloodline” arguments. I’ve had that conversation. You will only create the opposite result.
While I take your point, all your points and have indeed EXPERIENCED being replaced by Non-Whites even in my own church culture environment which was very conservative….
What you dissident rightists don’t understand is that THE ONLY KIND OF WHITE WOMEN who will have children with you and be a good mother willingly IS… unfortunately going to be the one who believe in some version of the Christian narrative.
It may be all false. That doesn’t MATTER. But if you want more than 1.2 kids you are not going to do that with atheism or paganism.
My foolish mother had enough kids to populate a small town for generation…..and I’ll never be able to talk her out of the good feelings Buzz she gets from Christian things around her house.
You will never convince White women to have children with “muh IQ” or “muh bloodline” arguments.
Let me know when you find a woman who lubricates when you say, “Bend over—Christ shed blood for your sins.”
What kind of schmuck would try to woo a woman with either race realism or Christian doggerel?
Jim, Let me put it to you this way. In reference to your excellent speech where you asked why “whites can’t just identify with each other for being White the way Blacks can”……
Let me put it this way: I’m not going to get you money for being White. I will give you money if I think you are a GOOD PERSON.
That’s the difference between Whites and Non-Whites.
You’re going to fight islam with atheism? Good luck with that.
The Soviets managed that just fine.
@Greg Johnson
The “Soviet Union” is no more, whereas, Islam is well and truly alive in the erstwhile Soviet space.
Even the Caucasians, still under Russian occupation, adhere to the faith with utmost seriousness and protocol.
Yes, but that doesn’t change the fact that the USSR was very effective in keeping Islam under its thumb before it collapsed.
@Greg Johnson
I would respectfully disagree.
It was not was actually Islam which was kept under the thumb by the Soviet Union but a bunch of ethnicities for whom the faith was an integral component of their ethnic identities.
The Communists in Moscow did try to do with Islam what they had done with Orthodox Christianity but, in the end, failed in their venture.
They remained apprehensive. They had begun to realize that Islam was not like Orthodox Christianity. Unlike the latter, the former could withstand (had withstood) generational vicissitudes; and that, doctrinally, it was sufficiently decentralized to allow its adherents parallel mobilizations to repulse severe politico-bureaucratic repression.
The Islam clerics in Russia are totally under the control of the Security Service, just as Orthodox popes or Jewish rabbis are. They are only another tools in the state oppression mechanism, and no way potential leaders of national liberation movements, even in the Caucasus. The mollahs with their propaganda help Russian officials to get Türkic Muslims from the Caucasus, Edil-Ural and Siberia to the Russian Army and to front line to kill Ukrainians, who themselves are partially of Türkic origin, so they are traitors to Türkic cause and Türkic fight against oppression. And some of “Russian Islamic” clerics even proclaim the Russian-Ukrainian war as Jihad.
The Soviets managed that just fine.
Nice example. The most murderous dictatorship in the world history (OK, maybe the second murderous after Mao Zedong’s China) could manage anything by killing of millions. I would better take another examples. The secular nationalist dictatorship of Atatürk. Or religious tolerant monarchs of 18th and 19th centuries, who treated religion as personal matter of people, like Maria Theresia of Austria, or Friedrich der Grosse von Preussen, or Napoleon.
Yes, Ataturk is a better example. I wish he had lived a couple of decades longer.
White Identitarian Christianity is a contradiction, as the New Testament proclaims repeatedly that all races are equal before Jehovah (Galatians 3:28, for example).
Woden/Wotan/Odin was (and is) the progenitor god of the European peoples. I give my fealty to the gods of my Folk: my race IS my religion, without divided loyalty or convoluted twists of logic.
That said, I recognize that white nationalism and Christianity can coexist in the same person, and I bear them no grudge. It is disconcerting to find ourselves divided (again) over our loyalty to a foreign god.
Christianity can be compatible with white nationalism. Whites throughout the colonial period were extremely racially conscious and ethnocentric, as during the Haitian revolution when all sorts of Europeans helped one another to evacuate. The old south was both white nationalist and highly Christian, as are the boers still, I believe.
Christianity is probably too deeply rooted in the European cultural psyche to jettison at this point.
That’s basically what I think. I want to deport as many immigrants as I can get my hands on….but I’ll never bow to some jumped up arrogant Pagan from a small spoiled 2 child family who NEVER SUFFERED and paid for what I PAID FOR under Roman Catholicism.
We pay the price. We have the children. We get artificially CRUSHED into the gutter as a result of our Pro-life values.
Meanwhile you Pro-White types have 1 or 2 kids ( like Jim Goad who I do like and appreciate ) ….. And you think you all are in any position to sneer at the Christian? Lol.
Odin/Wotan was possibly a Scythian/Saka prince, as Britta Verhagen wrote in her wonderful book Kam Odin-Wodan aus dem Osten? Zur Religion der germanischen Fruehzeit. Mrs Verhagen argued, that Odin was a real historical person, who has come to Europe from the Northern Caucasus and the north eastern Black Sea/Azov Sea lands, from estuaries of the rivers Don/Ten and Kuban/Qoban. Thus he and his Ases were really Caucasians in all senses.
Cool deal. And did you know that Tengri was a British guy? It says so in a book 😉
Тengri was localized in Europe as Thor.
British guy was King Arthur, a scythian/sarmatian prince.
King Arthur was Sarmatian prince? And Cheddar Man-dem was black. So the first Brits really were black, says this guy.
About Sarmatian origin of Arthur, see Arthur, the Dragon King: The Barbaric Roots of Britain’s greatest legend, by Howard Reid. Interesting, that this book was big scoop in Russia after it was translated into the Russian. Some Russians said that Arthur was a Russian indeed, just because Sarmatian Steppes NOW belong to Russia. And in the Caucasus the book was very popular too, because both Ossetians on one hand, and Karachays and Balkars on another one, see Sarmatians and Alanians as their ancestors, so they were full of pride “because of OUR prince ruled Britain”.
Тengri was localized in Europe as Thor
This is incorrect. Thor is an Indo-European god and ultimately derived from his proto-IE cognate. It is much more likely that Tengri was brought to the Turks by Indo-European Aryan peoples (Sintashta and Andronovo cultures, Indo-European Scythians) who migrated to Central Asia and came into contact with the Turks. The Indo-European sky god Dyeus Pater was essentially localized in the territory of the Turks as Tengri.
Surrendering the religious space is the act of an idiot. A high IQ idiot, perhaps. But still abject idiocy.
We will not think, reason, or argue our way out of this. Violence is not only necessary, it is inevitable. And no one is moved to violence because they fell for this or that argument. In 2024 and beyond, Joseph de Maistre and Julius Evola are tits on a boar hog. Religious fanaticism is a precondition for White victory in North America.
Real elitists understand and accept the necessity of manipulating the masses. In North America, that means Christians. If the Christians are being led by cucked preachers, then those false prophets must be removed and be replaced by true spiritual leaders. True in this sense means pro-white.
If in order to win we must play Zionist Christians the way Khomeini played the Marxists, so be it. This is about winning. Fair play is a white thing. Which means it is an in-group concept. In the 21st century, losing clean and consistently is still losing. Winning dirty is always winning. And winning is the only thing.
A foolish consistency is not only the hobgoblin of little minds, it is a fast lane to defeat, as is the whinging of larpagans, libertarians, and atheists. These may have sanctuary in a new republic. But if their selfish individual concerns stands in the way of such a republic, then they too must be removed.
I think trying the rising cause of white advocacy to a dying religion is a self-defeating idea.
You have to admit, it annoys Jews greatly, though. Why is that?
That doesn’t recommend it.
It doesn’t annoy them nearly as much as saying, “There’s nothing wrong with being white.” It’s not even close.
There is nothing wrong with being White. There I said it, albeit anonymously. I’ll even go one further Greg…sure…there is nothing wrong with you wanting to survive.
The fact that I think the sort of men ( despite their huge flaws ) who I have encountered in Catholic and Orthodox circles ( as much as I hated them from my teens unto the present for personal reasons ) ARE WAY MORE HONEST than the creepy little atheists and pagans in your circles.
While I hate it when Christianity is used as an excuse to race mix….I find that generally by comparison they race mix LESS than the atheists and Pagans I have observed on the Far-Right.
And yet the loudest “Christian Nationalists” tend to be Jewish. If you don’t believe me just go on Gab and look at the profiles Torba boosts. Christian Nationalism is a bunch of Jewish carnival barkers.
I’ve read the original statement three times and I don’t think that is what Sgt is saying here.
I think the point that is being made is to see American Christians as a means, not Christianity as an end. That makes practical sense to me.
But then I am not as sanguine as some about how much time we have. A national divorce/slow cleanse is clearly the desireable outcome. But I think there is little or no chance for that happening under the present regime and none if that regime falls. There parasite tribe that now rules cannot afford to let white people slip the leash en mass. Even a break-up like the Soviet Union would be desireable, but I do not think that has much chance of happening, for much the same reason.
If the regime falls, then any racial divisions that occur will likely look more like the India/Pakistan partition or the break-up of Yugoslavia or both, happening in multiple places simultaneously. There will be violence and chaos. There will be no order to the process except that which is imposed locally with guns. And even then there will be violence. Possibly a lot of it.
I think national self-determination, as broadly defined as possible, is a necessary precondition to the establishment of ethnostates in North America. This means removing the current elite in toto. That is why I have always urged the use of the nationalist/globalist framing in situaitons where white/anti-white seemed too much, too soon.
The overlap between American Christians and White Nationalists over issues like abortion, homosexuality, drugs, and even homeschooling provide plenty of common ground. In much of the South and South-adjacent lower Midwest, the Christians are White and they are the Nationalists. These people are already on the land and they are already reproducing themselves, and many are sick and tired of liberal Christianity.
Liberal Christianity is as much a product of, (and dependent on) material abundance as is feminism. As conditions inevtiably deteriorate, more white people will turn back towards religion, while extant believers will begin to look for spiritual leaders that speak to present conditions, not the sort of suburban social signalling now dominant in many places.
The mainline churches are splitting over questions of sexual morality all around the country. Whipping up revulsion in these “Dissident Christians” over abominations like transgenderism and pedophilia and directing that energy at the enemy seems like a rather straightforward proposition to me. When you consider that the number of non-Christians in this thing who might actually be willing and able to fight would fit inside a single stadium, it does seem foolish not to try and rouse alientated believers towards the common foe.
The only serious challengers to Protestantism and Catholicism in North America are longshots like Orthodoxy and Islam, but here again I doubt the most likely timeline provides for them gaining much of a purchase.
I just don’t see an outbreak of Odinism on the horizon and agree that, along with atheism and libertarianism, these sorts of botique belief systems or non-belief systems are a distraction. On a short timeline, insisting on their representation in the face of white dispossesion is frankly silly if not self-defeating. They should be tolerated in the same way that homosexuality should be tolerated: on the margins and not the public square. Except for the libertarians, about which I agree with Z-Man!
That said, if the Sons/Soldiers of Odin can ever field a battalion on this continent with a third of the punching of power of Azov, and actually take the fight to the enemy, I will stand corrected and support them.
As far as “Christian Universalism” is concerned, if it were really as powerful as the anti-Chritians want us to believe, then how do we explain Belfast from 1969 to 1998? We can’t. I think much of the carping about the supposed racial diversity obliged by such “universalism” is a only a way to avoid thinking seriously about Christianity as such.
Christian Zionism is a bigger problem, but even here I can see a situation in which the Hagees of the world are either liquidated outright or relegated to the same irrelevancy as Alex Jones. If their backers are threatened, they will dry up and blow away. This can happen sooner if dissident rightists work hard to get White Christians thinking seriously about just who is beyond the evil all around them. Once that enemy is broken, the peaceful sorting of the nations may become possible.
Even if the dire outcome I expect fails to materialize, I think White Christians will still make up the main part of the new dispensation. Christianity may or may not be dying, but it is nowhere near dead, and will bury all of us commenting here.
All this aside, I think getting some solid polling data regarding what actually existing White Christians actually believe about questions concerning race would be useful.
Good article overall I think, with the exception of the idea that Christianity should be “welcomed, respected, and protected”. It’s a commonly expressed view in these circles that I suspect is erroneously held due to historic affiliation. But it seems self-evident to me that Europeans made Christianity great and not the other way around. Instead I think we should ask ourselves how much better it could have been without this ridiculous foreign addendum to our ancestor’s psyches, what role it plays in the white world’s current predicament and how best to cultivate the religious impulse that seems to be as much a part of human nature for some as tribalism is for others.
Good luck forming any pro-white movement that does not include white Christians. They are the the largest reservoir of people that would even be open to white nationalism. This antagonism between white Christians, pagans, atheists, etc. needs to stop.
This antagonism between white Christians, pagans, atheists, etc. needs to stop.
Tell that to the lunatics who insist that “pagans, atheists, etc.” need to be murdered.
I do NOT think Pagans and Atheists should be murdered.
I would however in my ideal “fascist” state JAIL Pagans for sacrificing animals or humans or drinking the blood of animals or humans.
I would also TAX atheists who refuse to have at least 3 kids.
That is my position. Evil Ex-Catholic though I be. I paid the price since the age of 15 with great humiliation to me, and I won’t be talked down too by people who pay no price and expect to be treated as “Alpha.”
Tell that to the Christian colonialists that hunted N. American wildlife to near or actual extinction. You know because the world isn’t actual real and doesn’t matter, it’s all about the after life so to hell with the planet.
The only subset of white people with birth rates above replacement in the U.S. (I presume this holds true for Europe as well) are devout Christians (Traditional Catholic, Evangelical, Amish, etc.). Religiosity (of any proclivity) at the group level seems to be the only incentive to combat the modern economic forces that disincentivizes the rearing of children in first world countries. North East Asians are more irreligious than Europeans and their birthrates are even lower. Pure rationality & reason does not anitmate populations to reproduce within the modern economic system. Ethic Europeans cannot survive without a religion. And while it may be poetic to pine for the pre-Christian gods of old, it seems rather far-fetched that ethic Europeans would ever return to them in any meaningful numbers. It’s more pragmatic to engage with white Christians and try to steer them in the pro-white direction.
Are we really so bereft of ingenuity that we have to embrace a dying, foreign-born religion with tenants that are explicitly opposed to ethno-nationalism, not because it’s plausible, but because it’s adherents are bit more fecund in the face of modern economics? We need new ideas for new problems, not cart-before-the-horse justifications for obsolete ones.
In short, yes. We can build nothing to compare with Christianity’s legacy in any sort of useful time-frame. Modern liberalism is just Christianity with all the life-affirming, transcendent and artistic elements removed. We need a transition back to the most beautiful and uplifting services in the most beautiful possible buildings BUT with the fourteen words in stained glass over the altar. In other words, away from Christian fundamentalism and towards European survivalism. There need not be a compulsion to believe in the literal truth of the resurrection but a return to strong social sanction to participate in the parish and to enjoy and be uplifted by its instrinsically meritorious ritual and architecture.
No
We can build nothing to compare with Christianity’s legacy in any sort of useful time-frame.
We can and we will. A man did it in 1933-1939, it wasn’t Christian.
Fine, but didn’t church-going actually increase? The there was Gott mit uns and all that. I won’t pretend to be an expert but I thought Hitler predicted, in private, a gradual shift away from Christianity for Germany. If so he was certainly right on that score.
All the NS pageantry was a souped up version of Boy Scouts for grown-ups. Scouting was proto-NS, preparing boys to serve the nation as straight arrows.
Jason fails to mention the time the Vikings nearly burnt down the Vatican
The great Heathen Army which used to rip men’s spines apart to form blood Eagles and most of the things he mentions of probably exaggerations by pagan propagandus
Also Charlemagne was no more brutal than any other military leader at that time Genghis Khan butchered entire cities of people and he wasn’t Christian
The Greeks would stick people and Brazen Beasts
The Romans used to have people fight to death for their Amusement so enlightened
And don’t forget the human sacrifice because it’s so white to practice mass human sacrifice to the trees and that was with the Romans reported before Christ.
Oh let’s not forget the Roman persecution of Druids
How is that relevant? Is he proposing replacing white identity politics with LARPing as Romans and Vikings?
In his essay, the author denigrates Christianity with such examples, and then brings up paganism (Odin) in positive terms, so it is very relevant to make that comment.
..good, honest article! Go to Toronto and see how it is a rapidly changing city! As the older white ethnics put, “House For Sale” signs on their front lawns, these house are not purchased by whites! In Rexdale, the white ethnics ( Croatians, Italians, Polish, Ukrainians et. al.) are giving way to East Indians/ Sikhs, Somalis, Syrians, Afghans..The Archdiocese of Toronto last year sponsored over 1,000 Afghan families into the GTA. and conveniently dumped them on social assistance, and “praise be to Allah”, Canada is Shangrila! The government of Ontario provincial health-care system is in shambles and the whole social welfare system is collapsing. A U of Toronto demographer recently stated that, “given immigration and demographic trends, Canada to become a majority Muslim country by 2050!”
..collapse of the West…?
I can’t imagine Canada becoming a Muslim majority country in 2050.
Do you mean white minority by 2050? That I’d believe.
Also, I never understood churches inviting non-Christians to Canada. It’s easier to convert irreligious white natives than Pakistani Muslims.
What’s there to gain from this?
The point is not growing Christianity but replacing whites. The churches are working for white genocide, plain and simple.
Do you have an inkling as to why this is? What do churches get out of it, if the intent isn’t to grow the religion? Why work for white genocide?
Hispanic immigration being supported by the Catholic Church makes sense in order to grow it. It’s the Great Replacement, but it can also be the Great Replenishment for congregations. This strategy doesn’t work when it comes to immigration from MENA countries.
Perhaps this is just Christian universalism meets white guilt.
Institutions are captured and corrupted/subverted all the time. Every institution has a purpose. Serving that purpose is the measure of its effectiveness. When diversity is set up as a goal, however, it inevitably competes with, corrupts, and subverts the true purpose of the institution. It is true of all institutions: hospitals, police departments, and churches.
Do you have an inkling as to why this is?
I have a theory why churches do this. They do this for the same reason that big business and the politicians in its employ seek to replace white people with non-white people. Non-whites are better at subordination, they are easy to make to obey, because they don’t even have the concept of civil rights and liberties, thus they are better at being manipulated, are willing to work for less money and to live in worse conditions. In short, they are better subjects and better employees than whites. In the same way, religious people are also generally better at obeying, are not inclined to fight for their rights outside of religious issues, and therefore are better worshipers, well governed and submissive. This is not a conspiracy of some Illuminati or ET-aliens with bad intentions, it is “just business”.
Thanks for the concise and quick responses. I don’t know why institutional subversion and corruption didn’t cross my mind.
The fact you replied in the wee hours of the morning exemplifies tireless dedication. It’s this kind of thing that keeps bringing me back!
Happy New Year!
I went through a short Christian phase and I’m so glad to be out of it. Thankfully friends around me were able to share information that lead me out of it.
It is a jewish psyop from thousands of years ago. To control our framing of spirituality.
As a North Western European, why should I worship a middle eastern faith? It makes no sense.
Throughout our history, Europeans have been successful with Christianity but that has not been because of Christianity. It’s harmful effects are clearer now than ever before.
I also see it as a de-radicalisation operation. I have seen pro whites turn into more civic nationalists after their introduction to Christianity.
Even for the sincere Christians if any of you are reading this, you should at least be able to admit that it your religion is being weaponised against Europeans at this point in time.
As other commenters have stated, I don’t mind people being Christian but we cannot have a movement or state that is hardline Christian.
To the sensible Christians in our midst, keep being you but you need to sort out some of your “Brothers in Christ” that are giving you a bad name.
https://www.instagram.com/blackbeard_travels/
This guy posts good content debunking and explaining Christianity.
Religion is inherently irrational- sometimes sub-rational in its degraded forms, and other times supra-rational in its proper forms. All religious arguments are post hoc rationalizations for what was already decided upon because it feels right. There are strong arguments for almost every religion along with strong arguments against.
Religious infighting and litmus tests are therefore pointless and will go nowhere. Few, if anyone will change religions due to logic, that comes afterwards to justify it. Economics can be rationally debated based on objective facts, and it is easier to accept and reject certain alleged economic facts. With religion, we are often derailed endlessly debating the underlying facts (miracles, magic, prophecy, scripture, a monotheistic God) without even getting into the analysis of those facts.
The best strategy is a live and let live attitude with religion. A Traditionalist perspective is surprisingly tolerant because like the Sufis we are not particularly focused on exterior forms and particularities.
The best strategy is a live and let live attitude with religion.
I’ve never once said anyone should abandon their religious beliefs. But then you wind up against superstitious psychopaths who want to annihilate anyone who doesn’t adhere to the fairy tales that get them through the night. They’re every bit as fanatically delusional as leftists.
That was a really great comment I thought. By far the best on this thread!
I honestly have an antipathy towards these 19th and 20th century, retarded, American “churches”. Just look at them, “pastors” dressing like commoners, even with shorts. Or those weird pentacostals who look like some hippie cult. Also, being a philosemite while also being a Christian seems foreign to me, @dear Americans.
Like a Protestant advocating for Catholicism, you know ?
I don’t see the point in alienating White Christians by bashing Christianity. Especially for some kind of neo-pagan revival that nobody actually believes in. Christians are always going to be a part of the Dissident Right and are a huge part of the White conservative population in America that the DR wants to reach.
Your narrative is the inverse of what actually happened. I kept very quiet about Christianity for years until around 2016 or so when the DR seemed to be suddenly invaded by loud and obnoxious Christians who made a point of bashing non-Christians. This behavior, and the endless pissing contests surrounding it, only confirms my suspicions that Christianity is being purposely used as a divisive wedge issue.
I have no problem with treating white identity and Christianity as totally different topics; it’s the Christian fanatics who refuse to do that.
There is actually a lot of truth to the “superstitions” of the religious right. They just aren’t understood well by such people.
Jason, I like you ( and Jim Goad ) but I don’t think for a moment any of the experiences you described qualify as devout.
( I had it far worse with religious restrictions and paid an actual genuine price. Thus I always feel incensed around other apostates who claim they had it rough just because they went to a Christian school until grade 4. )
And almost every single person in this space is functionally a social liberal with 1 or 2 kids at most.
That’s the Truth.