Below is an essay from Radix Journal, reprinted here with permission, about identitarian religion. Although the concept of identitarian religion is relatively new in North America, it has gained some popularity in Europe. One prefatory note I’d like to make is that identitarian religion can be pagan or Christian. (Some critics seem to assume that all identitarian religion is pagan.) For identitarianism (or archeofuturism) in general, some resources are: “Déclaration de guerre” (video in French with English subtitles), Identitär Idé (Sweden), “Remaking a People,” Markus Willinger’s Generation Identity, Archeofuturism: European Visions of the Post-Catastrophic Age, and “The Rectification of Names: Guillaume Faye’s Why We Fight“.
What is Identitarian Religion?
A long-standing “Trad Catholic” I know told recently me that he had left the Church. He, in essence, said that his “conservative” priest had become obsessed with promoting mass Third World immigration, peddling interracial adoption, speaking incessantly about various forms of “social justice” such as opposition to non-White abortions, and, of course, denouncing evolution because it’s “racist”. Contemporary Western Christianity, even in its so-called “conservative” guises, has become indistinguishable from the central values of Cultural Marxism.
As other commentators have already noted, two things are happening to Christianity today:
First, outside the West, Christianity is rapidly becoming a non-Western religion (e.g. African Christianity in Africa, Mestizo Christianity in Latin America, etc.). As noted by many scholars, a new, non-Western form of Christianity is being born, unlike anything preceding it. It has been estimated that within 50 years, Christianity will overwhelmingly be a non-Western religion, both demographically and theologically.
Second, inside the West, Christianity is becoming more universalized than ever—often substantially no different from the major tenets of Cultural Marxism. You currently have mainstream Christian leaders (both Catholic and Protestant) supporting the Third World immigration invasion of the West and cajoling White couples into adopting unwanted African or Haitian babies instead of birthing White babies. Pathological altruism and ethnomasochism rule the roost; in short, Western Christian leaders today are a bunch of girly men. Such maladaptive trends cannot last indefinitely.
Evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson and science journalist Nicholas Wade have both argued that religion, by and large, is adaptive, in that religion increases one’s inclusive fitness. In short, religion provides group cohesion and, when overlapped with ethnicity or race, religion maintains strong group identity, which assists in group survival. A textbook example of the success of ethno-religion would be Ashkenazi Jews.
What is happening with Christianity in the West today, however, is arguably maladaptive. This extremely universalized girly-man form of Christianity (unlike the more manly earlier Germanic form) seems to be an unholy suicide pact. Not only does it lack any grounding in biological reality but it seems to be hostile toward it.
And what is grounding in biological reality? When religion overlaps with and reinforces racial identity, it is at its strongest. In fact, ethno-religion might be the strongest group identity known to man. Religious identity and racial identity can be strong by themselves, but combine the two and you are in a different league. It’s little wonder that throughout human history ethno-religion has been the norm. The more extreme, deracinated and universalized religion of the past century is the historical aberration.
And that is the gist of identitarian religion, as I understand it: it’s ethno-religion, a rejection of universalism, a return to human normalcy. So, identitarian religion is something “new” in that it’s juxtaposed to our current universalized suicide pact, but it’s also “old” as it’s a return to older norms.
What forms can identitarian religion take? Is it exclusive to a particular religion? Short answer: No.
While Christianity has become nearly synonymous with Cultural Marxism in the West, it must not necessarily be so. Identitarian Christianity is a possibility, and one certainly sees instances of it, ranging from Pro-Western Christianity to the Anglo paleoconservatives, to Kinist Protestantism, to forms of ethnonationalist Slavic Orthodox Christianity. But since Christianity has recently taken on an extremely universalist trajectory, any battle for Identitarian Christianity will be an uphill battle, but nonetheless perhaps a battle worth waging.
Another option one sees is a return to Paganism, ranging from Asatru in North America to other forms of Germanic Paganism, Celtic Paganism, Roman Paganism, Greek Paganism, and Slavic Paganism throughout Europe. Paganism properly understood, i.e. historically and accurately understood, is a blood-and-soil religion, an ancestral religion, an ethno-religion, the very antithesis to deracinated universalist religion.
And, of course, there are other forms of Non-Western identitarian religion that would be appropriate for Non-Westerners. But the question here is whether competing forms of Western identitarian religion can get along. Within the larger framework of Western identitarian religion, can, for example, Identitarian Christians and Pagans coexist?
I don’t see why not.
And what of identitarian atheists and agnostics? Can they co-exist with identitarian religion? Since identitarian religion is not at odds with nature, and thus not at odds with evolutionary science, it does not threaten secular knowledge but offers itself as an additional societal glue. And perhaps a necessary glue at that, as it is unclear that society can survive, long-term, without religion. While some individuals can function without religion, can society as a whole? Has it ever?
As Western Universalist Christianity wanes tepid, and as identitarian ideas continue to spread, now is a good time to outline a larger framework for identitarian religion as a guide for various Western religions. Hopefully this brief outline will help with this endeavor.
I agree that identitarian religion is a return to an older, pre-Cultural Marxism form of religion.
Someone should set up a website promoting Identitarian Christianity
Do you mean like this?
Alfred links to a Swedish website. Well, let me tell you about “identitarians” in Sweden. They are a small group of leftists who like to spend a lot of time online and who realized that hey, if you bring in mass immigration you have to share the loot with them. So they joined the “national movement”, which consists of forums and groups in Sweden. But rather than doing any work, they like to talk in forums. And the only reason they call themselves identitarian is to avoid the word nationalist, which sounds too much like nazist. They think they are being clever by changing to another word. This in the national(ist) movement. But of course, they are mostly forum visitors so they are not really part of the movement.
Also, by talking about “identity” instead of a PEOPLE they can include immigrants and non-Whites. In particular, they want to include Jews as being “Swedish”, because “they have lived here a long time and they are part of Swedish culture”. This is of course a lie. But that’s what you hear from people who know that the media are dominated by Jews, and who want to lick their boots in the hope of being accepted by them. Which of course never, ever happens.
It’s pathetic. Plus, at the same time they talk endlessly about leftist welfare parasitism as the best thing ever. They never include any actual facts in what they write, they just constantly invent new -ism words for what they like and for what they don’t like. Leftists think that calling something an -ism makes it real, that’s the extent of their intellectual capacity. It is telling that these identitarians act exactly like the socialist parties.
They have no role in actual nationalism.
I approved the pingback, but I have no idea to what it points.
Neither do I. And this has happened before. Why was my about page linked in this post? I don’t even see where it is, actually.
Good stuff. Linked and quibcagged here:
Religion: Identarianism Vs. Universalism.
I’m amazed at how White Catholic clergymen agitate for an increase in the crime rate… I mean agitate against abortions for blacks. Plus adopting Haitian future criminals. Pathological altruism indeed. No wonder no-one goes to Church any more.
Apparently this is a perennial issue w/ the Christian church generally, to say nothing of it’s moral-high-ground-seeking partitioners.
God loves a sinner come to his understanding… 🙂
I find it quite fascinating that they are depicted, in 1965, as “Swedish Missionaries”, given the exceptionally depraved situation in Sweden at the moment; even by Scandinavian standards.
Here is the link to the part I was referring to: http://goo.gl/zE6Dja
For some reason it won’t embed at ?t=50m58s. It this one doesn’t work, feel free to edit or delete this post. Apologies.
The focus ought to be on biological identitarianism. The atheistic genie is out of the bottle, and secularized people as a group are never going to suddenly start taking seriously some old Germanic opera fodder or Norse gods or runes or tall tales about the Israeli descent of the English (a view actually espoused by Zio-catamite Glenn Beck of all people). It’s fine for people who get turned on by this stuff, but it’s limited in its crossover appeal or its power to proselytize. I don’t see spirituality as necessarily being a divisive issue, however. As a secular neoreactionary, I’m perfectly willing to accept as allies conservative Catholics, pagans, or even eccentric whites who imagine themselves to be the genuine descendants of the Israelites of the Bible. More immediate rallying cries are safety and racial continuity – ideas with which any sane Caucasian can be led to identify.
The atheistic genie is out of the bottle, and secularized people as a group are never going to suddenly start taking seriously some old Germanic opera fodder or Norse gods or runes or tall tales about the Israeli descent of the English
I don’t think the goal of identitarian religion is to proselytize secularists, it’s for people who have a desire for religion.
Although it seems to me a bigger focus would be on finding the identitarian aspects of existing religions. The problem with Asatru or Norse mythology, etc., is the question of, do its practitioners actually believe it to be true, or is it just a version of being a Trekkie?
Finally, as a believing Christian, I think that the focus for Christians should not be to create a non-universalistic Christianity, but to insist that Christianity not ignore the existence of nations. In other words, Christianity is not limited to a specific national identity, but it is consistent with its practioners being identitarians of their respective nationalities. Anyone of any race can become a Christian, and that identity supersedes all other identities, BUT it does not negate those identities, and outside of things that are done as a body of believers, believers still have the national loyalties. In other words, I am a white Christian, and I believe that Christianity is the proper religion for Haitians. That doesn’t mean I don’t think they should be practicing Christianity in Haiti instead of the U.S.
Amen! In the earliest days when Christians spoke of the church they were referring either to the church in their city or to the entire Christian church. If the former they identified it as “the church in Rome” or “in Corinth” or wherever it happened to be. The term “catholic” was adapted to refer to the entire church. It meant “whole” or “universal”. That a believer was part of the “catholic church” did not negate the fact that he was supposed to be a good citizen of his city. Quite the contrary. Cultural Marxism may have infiltrated the church, but it is hardly an extension of Christian catholicity. It is as opposed to everything that is historically and traditionally “catholic” in St. Vincent’s definition of that which is taught “everywhere, at all times, and by all” (in the church) as it is traitorous to every local identity.
Most of the identiarian Christians I’ve seen are either Reformed/Calvinist or Orthodox.
In the case of the Reformed, I assume that’s because Calvinism is very in-egalitarian. If there’s inequality in election among individuals, then inequality/differentiation among peoples doesn’t seem problematic.
I assume the fact that the EO generally have national churches makes idenitarian religion more natural for them.
I think it’s more difficult for Catholics because of their claim to being THE universal church.
The Scriptures say that God established boundaries for nations. They also say that, in the end, God will raise up people from all nations indicating the existence of nations in the end times. We know what “nation” means and that nation isn’t synonymous with “state.”
Ethnicity/culture isn’t synonymous with race but it includes race so if ethnicity/culture is something of value, then race is something that matters. Race at least parallels and carries culture even if it doesn’t (completely) determine it.
For a Christian anything (except God) can become a subject of idolatry but that doesn’t mean that everything except God is valueless.
Thank you for treating (non-leftist) Christianity respectfully.
Pingback: This Week in Reaction (wherein the ostensible “Death of the Manosphere” is examined) | The Reactivity Place
Christianity was plenty muscular and protective of its European host when the host was muscular. Ask the moors of Spain or the muslims at Lepanto whether or not Christians could fight and protect their identity.
The will must exist in the people and the society at all levels must promote Western, traditional, Christian values. Those same values prompt pride in a society’s identity true identity is always ethnic/racial. Anyone looking at the art of a united nation sees and recognizes it.
It’s when a society loses that muscular pride and surety that we get where we are now. We existed for nearly 200 years as a majority white, Christian nation. We could afford a small black minority, tiny Indian minority, we could even have a place for all especially their talented tenth because we were a country that had a place for all. We were growing, strong, traditional, Christian. Anyone who wanted a job, respect, a place could have it.
Even a poor black man who was willing to work could be useful, have a respected if lesser place. Now our country revels in depravity, lauds literal minstral shows and tries to lower us to the lowest standard rather than raise us to the highest.
Respectable minorities wanted to assimilate, wanted to be unashamed by their fellow co-ethnics before whites. Marxists told them their work was ‘demeaning’, told them their efforts to assimilate made them ‘uncle tom’. The left destroyed and undermined Christianity worldwide. They imported millions of peons who had no alliegence to America.
Maybe there is no return to that world but any attempt to restore a identarian nation needs to return to core historical Christian values. The father is the head of the household, women are valued as mothers, and volunteer in the community, sex is for marriage. Restricting sex to marriage forces women to think about who they will sleep with.
And it is a win win for all except the degenerates and perverts. Is the current situation good for whites or minorities? While many will kick and scream if forced to traditional Christian values, in the long run all will be better off.
Now the challenge is to restore that confident, strong, identity Christanity that conquered half a world. Along with a traditional society that respects self control, values work, and says all members who play by the rules and support their nation have an honorable place.
Pingback: Lightning Round -2014/04/23 | Free Northerner
Pingback: Is Mainstream Christianity Dead Set on Destruction of Western Peoples? | Occam's Razor
Pingback: Christianity becoming more left-wing | Occam's Razor
…told *me recently that…
Pingback: Will Catholic Church become an African wasteland? | Occam's Razor
Yesterday i spent 300 bucks for platinium roulette system ,
i hope that i will make my first $$ online
This article describes (at least a part) of how I — a first generation (California native born) American, son of a “Yugoslavian” defector– have transitioned from Church of Christ, to my fathers Serbian Orthodoxy. Adding you to my blog roll. Love the site.
Hi Scott. I’ve enjoyed your comments on Dalrock’s (and other similar blogs). I checked out this article based on your recommendation from your blog.
I am a “lifelong” member of the Church of Christ. I’d be interested in corresponding with you on what prompted you to transition to Serbian Orthodox if you have time and interest.
Absolutely. It is quite a story, I can tell you. I grew up in the same faith tradition. My master’s thesis (from a Baptist seminary) was all about the Stone-Campbell movement. I was a song leader, a youth minister, the whole thing. The best way to reach me is to go to one of my 2 blogs and post a comment. That way, your email will come up and I will have it. Sort of eases into to breaking the anonymous blind safely.
See you there! Scott
or for a more orthodox Christian approach
Pingback: The Left wants to use Christianity to police the Alt-Right – AltRight.com
Pingback: The Left wants to use Christianity to police the Alt-Right – Occam's Razor