Regarding the recent discussions about the Dark Enlightenment, the positioning of traditional Christianity has come up, in particular, how unrelated it apparently seems to the rest of the nodes. Does it fit in?
Many Christian commenters, however, incorrectly state that the Dark Enlightenment is inherently leftist while Christianity is not. Many historians would disagree with the latter claim. As argued by Nietzsche, Spengler and de Benoist, there is a strong case to be made that Christianity is the fons et origo of all egalitarian / leftist thought. De Benoist has argued that it is the Christian concept of the “universal brotherhood of man” that perhaps is the origin of all egalitarian thought and political correctness. Right-wing skeptics of Christianity have argued that the step from Christian “universal brotherhood” to The Cathedral and Cultural Marxism isn’t very far, if the circumstances are right. (Of course, traditionalist Christians, like Thomas Fleming in the Morality of Everyday Life, make a strong case that this is not so. And James C. Russell has argued that Medieval Christianity was more manly and closer to Germanic paganism than the current more universalist Christianity in the West.)
I often wonder whether it is the pretense of this egalitarian “universal brotherhood of man” that makes it so hard for many Christians to accept HBD. (Of course, the more clear-thinking ones who aren’t afraid of inegalitarian truths, like the Generation5, Bruce Charlton, Orthosphere, Chronicles, Faith and Heritage, Thinking Housewife, or Pro-Western Christianity crowds, are the exceptions to the norm.)
Regardless, Christianity today is not only inherently egalitarianian but even maladaptive, at least as it’s practiced by Westerners. Look around. The vast majority of conservative Christian leaders support the mass Third World invasion of Western countries. You have major Christian leaders, like Russell Moore and Sam Brownback, telling whites to forgo their own inclusive fitness and, instead of having that extra white child, adopt orphan Haitians or Africans. People like John Piper have declared war on the biological family. (So much for ethnic genetic interests.) You even have Trotskyite conservatives who have invented a pseudo-science called “Intelligent Design” because they feel evolution is “too racist.”
This is the sad state we’re in, folks. Let’s just hope that Dark Enlightenment ideas catch on among influential Christian leaders. They need us more than we need them.
Of course, some Christians will attack me for delivering this message, instead of, say, attacking Christian leaders for supporting the mass dispossession of Westerns through Third World immigration. Imagine that?
I am not anti-Christian. In fact, although I’m not particularly religious myself, I think that the vast majority of people cannot live without religion and that religion is necessary for the proper ordering of society. I just wish we had an adaptive, pro-Western manly religion instead of our current sissy, sell-out form of Christianity, which, by the way, is quickly becoming a non-Western Third World religion (a cause of celebration for all our pathological altruist Christian leaders).
Here is a modified version of a previous poll.
What is the best way forward for Westerners?
Here’s a little nugget of HBD truth: ethno-religion is probably the strongest group identity that one can have. It’s done wonders for Ashkenazis.
Blowhard Mark Shea is not a fan of this post; Shea is an allegedly conservative Christian whose greatest worry is that the demise of Christianity will lead to the demise of egalitarianism. Notice how he criticizes this post and the commenters here instead of addressing the actual problem; for instance, criticizing all the Christian leaders that support the Third World invasion of Western countries.
Nick Land discusses the Trichotomy.
Foseti links to randoms from the Dark Enlightenment.
The blog Traditional Christianity references this post.