“Secularism is indeed correlated with greater tolerance of gay marriage and pot legalization. But it’s also making America’s partisan clashes more brutal. And it has contributed to the rise of both Donald Trump and the so-called alt-right movement, whose members see themselves as proponents of white nationalism. As Americans have left organized religion, they haven’t stopped viewing politics as a struggle between “us” and “them.” Many have come to define us and them in even more primal and irreconcilable ways.”
As if there is something wrong with whites supporting and promoting their own interests. Beinart then discusses Richard Spencer, Milo, and how secularization has lead to an increase in racial identity among both younger blacks and whites. He concludes:
“Maybe it’s the values of hierarchy, authority, and tradition that churches instill. Maybe religion builds habits and networks that help people better weather national traumas, and thus retain their faith that the system works. For whatever reason, secularization isn’t easing political conflict. It’s making American politics even more convulsive and zero-sum.
For years, political commentators dreamed that the culture war over religious morality that began in the 1960s and ’70s would fade. It has. And the more secular, more ferociously national and racial culture war that has followed is worse.”
Beinart is basically correct but there is more to this story. The two most basic forms of identity are racial / ethnic identity and religious identity. When the two intersect and form an ethno-religion, which is basically what Judaism is, the religion of Beinart’s co-ethnics, one probably has the strongest identity possible. (Most early pagan religions were also racial ethno-religions, and arguably someforms of Christianity are too.)
The problem, however, is that Beinart can’t just wave his magic wand and resurrect Christianity to police white people — as much as he may wish it. The irony is that mainstream Christianity today is on a universalist trajectory that would repel the very people that Beinart wants to police. As I noted in a previous post, “Is Contemporary Christianity a Suicide Cult?,” contemporary Christianity is becoming more and more effeminate and seems to repulse more manly men. For example, regarding the recent controversy to expel open-borders Russell Moore from his leadership of the ERLC, just take a look on Twitter at some of Moore’s most ardent defenders: Nearly all of them literal cuckolds or Christian SJWs.
In short, Beinart fails to recognize that Christianity had a greater hold on young white men when it was in fact more like the alt-right, when it wasn’t as extremely universalistic as it is today and didn’t eschew racial identity for whites.
Although I’m not very religious, religion interests me, especially the current trajectory of Christianity in the West. What I mean here is mainstream Christianity in the United States and Europe, not non-Western Christianity such as the rise of black or mestizo Christianity that one finds in the Global South nor the small pockets of Uncucked Christianity one might find. The Christianity I’m referencing here is mainstream and practiced almost exclusively by white people: We’ll call it Cucked Christianity.
As I and many others have noted, this Cucked Christianity is fast becoming a suicide cult. Here are some recent examples:
Christian cucks basically support the Third World immigration and refugee invasion of their own countries. Literally. Some of them even wear “Refugees Welcome” t-shirts and make SJWs look masculine. Granted, some of them, like hustler Russell Moore whose Evangelical Immigration Table is funded by George Soros, have economic incentives, but a good many of them are dong it just for the sake of empty virtue signaling. And all these people are inconsistent; as someone noted in an email list, “None of them would criticize Israel for building a wall, refusing Syrian refugees, or deporting African immigrants,” but they have no problem condemning their own countries to Third World status.
Cucked Christians have become obsessed with this notion of all people being “image bearers”. Their flawed logic goes that all people have the image of God so therefore it’s wrong to deport immigrants, refuse refugees,etc. By this cucked logic, anyone promoting self-preservation, in fact anything other than ethnomasocism, is wrong because it might hurt the person or feelz of an image bearer.
Cucked Christians recently have become obsessed with this Cultural Marxist notion of ‘racial reconciliation‘ which essentially amounts to whites promoting their own dispossession. You literally have white cucks criticizing churches for being “too white”; yet, these same cucks would never criticize Israel for being too Jewish or Ashkenazi, nor a black church for being too black.
Cucked Christians have recently tied the pro-life movement to the support of Third World immigration. In this version, to be pro-life one must support the Third World immigration invasion of his own lands. For example, cuckservative Cardinal Timothy Dolan recently told a crowd that unless they support the Third World immigration invasion of the West, they are not pro-life. Coupling pro-life with immigration probably signals the last gasp of the pro-life movement.
Cucked Christians are basically telling white people not to make white babies but to adopt black or mestizo babies instead. This is literal cuckoldry, which is unhealthy.
How did we get here? How has contemporary mainstream Christianity become such a suicide cult?
I mean, just over a thousand years ago when a Moorish invasion of Charlemagne’s kingdom was taking place, Christians do not hesitate to take up arms and repel the invaders. Today, Cucked Christians welcome the invaders. What happened?
Here’s my brief theory:
Women are more religious than men. For the past few hundred years, church attendance, for all denominations, has been higher for women than men. Nonetheless, the leadership of said churches was by men. And until recently, because Christianity still had prestige, you would get more normal men in church leadership positions. However, over the past 75 years or so, a selection process has been taking place. As Christianity lost prestige, more normal, healthy men have moved along to other pastures and forsaken any interest in church leadership positions. As a result, the entire apparatus of Western Christianity has largely been overtaken by beta girly men. Today you have a bunch of beta males, often literal cuckolds, who incessantly whine like little pansies: “Welcome the stranger.” “You’re deporting an image bearer.” “Racial reconciliation means for your next kid, consider transracial adoption.”
My hunch is that these new leaders have bad genes for self-preservation. In a normal, healthy society, they might have jobs as caregivers, but they certainly wouldn’t be given the keys to the kingdom or have any say in politics. The fact that these people now hold positions of power does not bode well.
In terms of sociobiology, the current trend of Cucked Christianity is not healthy, i.e. adaptive. And this maladaptive behavior cannot last forever. Does it mean that end of Christianity in the West, or will a newer, uncucked form of Christianity rise to replace it?
Something rotten is happening with the ERLC (Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, a lobbyist organization of the Southern Baptist Convention) and its president, Russell Moore. Throughout the latest presidential campaign, Russell Moore used the resources of the ERLC to viciously campaign against Donald Trump, while simultaneously, at least in the GOP primaries, to campaign on behalf of open-borders neocons Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio. Trump won, and now many Southern Baptists are calling Russell Moore to resign from the ERLC, thinking he has damaged their image. (Nonetheless, Moore still has a vocal cheerleading squad of largely whiney beta males.)
In an email list I’m on, I recently found some very interesting gossip about Russell Moore. For at least a couple years, Russell Moore has been criticized by many on the right. His theology seems not far removed from liberation theology (Christian Cultural Marxism). His real passion is the support of the Third World immigration invasion of the West and, it turns out, his open-borders Evangelical Immigration Table is actually funded by George Soros. Nonetheless, the media love Moore, largely because he agrees with them on nearly everything, so they’ll use him as their “go to” “religious conservative” for sound bites in favor of Third World immigration or any of their other pet causes.
People within the field of theology have said that Russell Moore is not very bright. One hundreds years ago, a Protestant theology professor would be proficient in Greek, Latin and German (German to fully understand the Reformation). Moore, I’m told, is largely historically and linguistically illiterate. Moore, it has been said, seems to watch a bunch of television, absorb the Cultural Marxist values presented on television, and then read these values back into Christianity. In some respects, he’s a more southern version of what Jim Jones was doing in the 1970s.
So, why was Moore chosen to head the ERLC?
This is where the story gets really interesting. It turns out that the chairman of the ERLC, Ken Barbic, is in fact an open-borders, cheap-labor lobbyist for the ag-industry. Furthermore, it seems that Ken Barbic was central in selecting Russell Moore to replace Richard Land as the head of the ERLC.
Let that sink in for a moment. The ERLC, which is supposed to be devoted to pursuing religious liberty, is chaired by an open-borders, cheap labor lobbyist, who chose, for its president, another open-borders fanatic. What does this have to do with religious liberty? Do most Southern Baptists even know about this corruption?
Perhaps the ERLC should change its mission statement to: “For the express purpose of driving down American wages, draining social services, and making the USA a Third World wasteland though mass Third World immigration.” This seems to be the real agenda of the ERLC.
As others have noted, the major divisions within Christianity are no longer Protestant vs Catholicism vs Orthodox, but rather Western Christianity vs Global-South Christianity. In Africa and Latin America, new, non-Western forms of Christianity are quickly arising and, in many cases, they’re explicitly anti-white. On the other hand, within the West, we’re witnessing the division between Cucked Christianity vs Uncucked Christianity. Cucked Christianity largely entails white beta males, and some females, constantly virtue signaling about the need for Third World immigration, transracial adoption, etc. Cucked Christianity, as you can imagine, contains mostly whiney, girly men. Representative of this trend would be Pope Francis and, the subject of this post, Russell Moore. Uncucked Christianity, however, entails Christianity at peace with reality, such as human biodiversity (HBD), ethnocentrism, and the ability for nations to repel the Third World immigration invasions.
Mainstream Christianity today is not only weird, it’s crazy. And it’s not only left-wing Christianity, it’s supposed “conservative” mainstream Christianity as well. The entire vessel seems to be on a course of collective suicide.
When surveying the insanity of contemporary Christianity among white people, it’s hard exactly to label it. There seems to be no precise label. “Cuckoldy” is probably the best label, but since others already call it “Christian Cultural Marxism,” I’ll stick with that term.
What’s the Holy Trinity of this new form of Christianity – Christian Cultural Marxism?
The Holy Trinity of Christian Cultural Marxism
You must support open-borders. White people must commit collective suicide and turn over their nations to the invading hordes of the third world.
White should avoid having too many white babies and adopt babies of color instead.
Fighting racism is one of the main priorities of Christians.
If you think I’m exaggerating, just look around.
Immigration. The entire Catholic leadership and a significant portion of Protestant leadership support the third world invasion of the West. The Catholic Church is the worst in this respect, but you have many Protestants (like Russell Moore and others) who also support the invasion.
Adoption. You literally have Catholic priests and Protestant pastors telling whites it’s their duty to adopt the unwanted garbage of the third world. This is not only maladaptive in a sociobiological sense, it’s also literal cuckoldry. Resources are finite. By adopting the third world, these whites are forgoing their own reproductive inclusive fitness.
Fighting Racism. Both Catholics and the Southern Baptist Convention recently held conferences saying that churches need to devote more of their resources to “fighting racism.”
So, basically, in short, Christianity today, even “conservative” Christianity, is basically a form of SJW-ism…
How did this happen?
Christianity 200 years ago certainly wasn’t this way. But was the momentum there? By being too universalist, is Christianity doomed to become eventually a suicide cult?
If you want to see something sad — actually look at these cuckolds adopting the third world. They’re pathetic. They’re barely even men.
Which raises another question of why masculine men aren’t drawn to Christianity today, although this tendency has been there for the past 300 years. Indeed, even 200 years ago, more women attended church than men. But today it’s even worse. Could part of it be that nearly all the pastors and priests today are cucked, effeminate weaklings that alienate any man with even the slightest bit of testosterone in his testicles?
A good friend of mine recently has become embedded in his state’s common core debate and, as a result, I’ve been been proxy to some of the chain emails among his friends. I’ve always thought common core a bad idea for various reasons but it’s never been something I’ve really looked into. Some states have recently dumped common core, as it has been attacked both by traditionalists and even some inner city districts. But as the ship is going done, it seems to become more and more radicalized. Based on the info I’ve received recently from a couple friends, one of whom is a professor of mathematics, here are some interesting facts I’ve discovered about Common Core.
– Common Core was originally packaged as standardized testing on reading and math, which was supposed not to involve content, but that quickly changed. The original intent, it seems, all along was to modify content.
– Common Core has radically changed the way mathematics is taught — basically the general trend from Newton / Leibniz to the present has been overturned. Most of the symbols, notations, descriptions, vocabulary, etc., have been discarded and are replaced by more “visual” approaches, often involving silly video-game-like graphics. A math professor I know said students who have learned math by this approach aren’t even able to comprehend traditional math because it seems like a foreign language to them. Apparently the unspoken rationale behind this approach is that blacks and mestizos cannot learn traditional math and Common Core is more “POC friendly,” although it seems to have made little difference in test scores. Nonetheless, at least trying to advance blacks is a worthy cause to discard two thousand years of accumulated mathematical wisdom.
– Common Core has dumped the study of grammar altogether. Literally, no traditional grammar. Grammar has been replaced by “feel good” unstructured expository writing and basic new-speak guidelines. There are students now who have no idea what an adjective, relative clause or diagramming a sentence is. Students who learn English this way would never be able to learn an inflected grammar-heavy language, like Latin or German, but maybe that’s the point. Rationale? Apparently the Schools of “Education” think grammar is racist because blacks and mestizos cannot fully comprehend it. Modern (as in post-Middle) English grammar must be discarded to make way for some new Third World hybrid language (Dindu-Spanglish?).
– Although Common Core was originally sold as “content free,” it quickly scrapped nearly all the European and other white writers from reading lists. Vergil’ Aeneid, Beowulf, Goethe’s writings, and Shakespeare’s plays have made way for bunch of non-white writers complaining about something — usually white people for their shortcomings. Defenders of Common Core say it prescribes no particular books. It’s about “how to read,” not what to read. It just so happens in learning “how to read” one shouldn’t read white people.
If these descriptions are true, and I really have no reason to believe they are not, as I’ve seen many of the source materials, what in the hell is going on here? Is it complete idiocracy or a deliberate ((( attempt ))) to sabotage learning and the accumulated knowledge of the past 2000 years? Both?
If you know kids in a public school, tell them to GTFO. The bitch is run by Upgrayedd now.
Last night on the Chris Hayes show, Rubio SuperPAC advisor Rick Wilson lost it and felt the need to attack the alt-right. Almost immediately afterwards, Jonah Goldberg and many others began attacking the alt-right on Twitter. In short, the establishment now feels threatened by the alt-right.
Interestingly, for a while, there has been a short memo about the alt-right floating about among “Conservatism Inc” warning people of the alt-right. I’ve read parts of this memo and surprisingly its description of the alt-right is not inaccurate, just too succinct. Here I’ll give a more detailed explanation of the alt-right.
The alt-right was first coined by Richard Spencer, as an intellectual alternative to the dry “Conservatism Inc” that then passed for right-wing thought. Since then, the term has really taken on a life all its own. As others have noted, the alt-right really isn’t a political movement per se but rather a zeitgeist. The big-tent alt-right includes identitarians and archeofuturists, race realists and HBD bloggers, European New Right (ENR), edgelords, neo-reaction (NRx) and reaction (Rx), trad Christians, neo-pagans, white nationalists, PUAs, etc. (Note, these groups are not mutually exclusive. For example, an alt-righter might consider himself an identitarian and race realist.)
One thing commenters have correctly noted is how young the alt-right is. While there is no objective way to determine the average age of the alt-right, I would place it in the early 20s. (Compare this with the average age of a National Review reader, which is about 65.) And this youth movement is different from, say, the “College Republicans” of the 1980s. These young alt-righters did not grow up reading National Review (a good thing). They grew up with /pol/, Reddit, Twitter and other social media, and were later introduced to sites like Radix Journal, AmRen, VDare, Occidental Observer, Heartiste, MPC, and The Right Stuff.
How large is the alt right? Really impossible to tell, but some estimates have placed it around 4 million people (mostly in the USA and Europe) and growing rapidly.
While the alt-right is a large tent that disagrees on some issues, one issue that really unites the alt-right is immigration. The alt-right is fed up with Third World immigration into the West and wishes to see most of these immigrants / migrants / refugees / invaders repatriated back to their ancestral lands.
The alt-righters usually are not free-market ideologues. They believe the health of the nation should supersede free-market globalism, which often leads to a deracinated cosmpolitanism. It’s why many on the alt-right are skeptical of free trade.
Philosophically, the alt-right might be called a rejection of universalism, itself a left-wing idea and product of the Enlightenment. Nonetheless, the alt-right does not reject all Enlightenment ideas, especially science. (And those trads who say they do are probably liars.) The alt-right might be thought of as archeofuturist which attempts to combine ancient relativistic and manly virtues with the findings of modern science, including those in human biodiversity.
Michael Brendan Dougherty recently called the alt-right “race obsessed”. A better phrase might be: race realists. Most alt-righters actually take Darwinism seriously. (If you are at a loss of what “taking Darwinism seriously” means, you might want to read this book.) Young alt-righters are comfortable with modern science which shows that human biodiversity is a facet of life. The fact that so many today in Conservatism Inc. want either to ignore or deny human biodiversity, shows how untethered from reality modern conservatism has become. It is living in a politically correct fantasy land.
Someone recently emailed a list of “popular college majors” of alt-right people. I have no idea how someone could determine this, but here’s the list: computer programming, mathematics, genetics, evolutionary psychology, evolutionary biology, economics, classical languages, Germanic studies (think Tolkien & Wagner), and philosophy.
The most successful alt-right meme to infect the general public by far is the cuckservative meme (roundup here), which I’m happy to say I played a part in. Other memes created by the alt-right: white genocide, ((( ))), the current year, dindus, and many more.
Some critics have asserted that the alt-right is anti-Christian. This is not true. What the alt-right is against is mainstream Christianity today where you have “Christian leaders” supporting the Third World immigration invasion of the West and telling white people that they should adopt non-whites instead of procreating and white babies. Much of modern Western Christianity has become suicidal and the alt-right is correct to mock and criticize it. But in terms of religion, the alt-right is quite diverse. Some are atheists and agnostics. Some are neo-pagans. And many subscribe to an “uncucked form of Christianity” that is not antagonistic toward Western Civilization.
Trump. Many mainstream journalists seem obsessed with the fact that many in the alt-right support Donald Trump. Yes, many (but not all) do. Nonetheless, the alt-right would still exist without Trump. And many in the alt-right are not even American and are more interested in leaders like Orbán, Le Pen or Putin.
Many journalists have labelled the alt-right anti-semitic, which is more a smear than an actual description. There is actually diversity among the alt-right on the “Jewish question” (JQ). Some like Jared Taylor do not discuss it. Others like Kevin MacDonald do. There is little dispute that Jews have disproportionally been involved in starting left-wing movements of the last 150 years: Marxism, Cultural Marxism, Freudianism, Boasian Anthropology, etc. Also, many Jews support Israel building a wall, deporting Africans and refusing Syrians while simultaneously supporting mass immigration for the West. Most in the alt-right would probably agree that a free and open society should not have a problem discussing this. Some younger Jews sympathetic to the alt-right I’ve talked to see more comfortable with these ideas being discussed, so there might be a generational divide on this.
Whatever happens, one thing is clear: The alt-right does not seem to be going anywhere. In fact, it seems to be growing very rapidly.