Last week, Catholic University hosted a showdown, of sorts, between David French and Sohrab Ahmari. Their dispute started when Ahmari posted this piece on First Things, declaring jihad against Frenchism, which he described as a passive-aggressive approach to the culture war with the Left. It got a lot of attention in conservative circles, mostly because they were happy that anyone was talking about them at all. Here is the video of the show down and here is a summary from American Conservative.
The event itself was typical of the pseudo-academic culture you see around conservative politics at this level. There is the superficial collegiality and the carrying on like this is a meeting of two intellectual giants. An essential element of this culture is the displaying of credentials, as well as the recognition of those credentials. That’s why the opening was like dogs sniffing each other’s butts at the park. Ahmari brought a gift to signal his submissiveness to French, who he considers a superior.
This is, of course, why French agreed to the thing in the first place. He was certainly told that Ahmari is a light weight, who could land a few punches, but was incapable of delivering any hard blows. Ahmari appears to be a guy, who has sampled dissident writing, but is not well versed in the arguments against Buckley conservatism. As a result he was left to flail around while French was able to safely keep the conversation to theoretical topics, rather than the failings of Buckley conservatism.
That is, of course, a game the Buckleyites learned from libertarians. When the conversation is about practical issues, like fighting the Left over cultural turf, they shift the focus to theory. When confronted on theory, they take a deep dive into the weeds of some narrow policy topic. That’s what French was doing with Ahmari. He kept shifting the topics to legalism and constitutional theory, in order to avoid talking about the fact that conservatism has been a colossal, multi-generational failure.
That’s what was a bit disappointing about Ahmari’s performance. A better equipped debater, a dissident for example, would have turned French’s arguments back on him with relative ease. His claim that the Founders wanted a neutral public space, for example, is laughable nonsense. The Founders were white Christians, who assumed they were founding a white Christian country. More important, they were practical men who understood what was required to maintain their people.
Think about it. These were men who revolted against the prevailing order, against centuries of tradition, in order to impose their way of life on their lands. Not only were they willing to overthrow centuries of tradition, they were willing to kill their countrymen in order to found their nation. They were also quite explicit in their motives. They founded a nation for their people and their posterity. By the definitions of today, definitions David French supports, the Founders were white nationalists.
Of course, the neutral public space argument is a justification for not fighting the Left over cultural turf. By claiming a principled claim in support of an open and neutral public space, it rules out doing anything that could actually win the fight. After all, defending the public square from complete domination by the Left, means pushing them out of some portion of it. That would violate the sacred principles of principled conservatives, so they not only refuse to do it, they prevent others from doing it.
Something that never gets mentioned by dissidents is that this line of reasoning contradicts basic Christian teaching. To cede the public space on principle is to agree, in advance, to not proselytize. To preach and proselytize means staking out space in the public square, regardless of the consequences. The very founding of the Christian faith was on the bones of those, who martyred themselves to spread the word of Jesus Christ in the face of violent opposition.
That of course, raises the question as to just how sincere David French is in his religious conviction. He waves his Christian faith around almost as much as he waves around his military service, yet he is not willing to risk much for it. The Gospels are pretty clear on this point. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Jesus instructed the rich to give away their riches and follow him. Surely, salvation is worth some principles.
This is where dissident Christians can find a niche in dissident politics. There is a long tradition of Christians preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in the face of fierce opposition from authority. To be a dissident is to reject the authority of the prevailing orthodoxy. To be a dissident Christian is to know the source of all authority. The way forward to a society built around natural association is also the path to a society where Christians can proselytize and lead their fellow man to salvation.
This is what the backers of Frenchism fear. A militant, optimistic and aggressive Christianity would be wildly attractive to disaffected white youth. Imagine young guys in camo flash mobbing public events, while reading Scripture. Imagine them employing the protest tactics of the Left, but in favor of faith. That’s why millions are poured into Christian groups to advocate the surrender model. Their leaders get very rich while leading their flocks away from the public space.
None of this is new material, which is why David French has become the clown nose of Buckley conservatism. It’s not about ideology or theology with this guy. David Frenchism is about celebrating the choices of David French. From his adoption of an African to his JAG service, it’s always about his public acts of piety. That’s what jumps out from the video of that event. Watching him in action, the line from Emerson comes to mind. “The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons.”
For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!
Would you call The Nazis “Bismarckian Germans”?
Or Junckers?
Then do refrain from calling Frenchists and neocons “Buckelyites.”
FFS its complete defamation of the dead and totally inaccurate.
Buckley was not conserving Galibraith.
Other than defamation of the dead by confusing them with the living and now with then your analysis of the present is correct.
“dogs sniffing each other’s butts at the park” with credentialism- TBF that’s all our elites, all academics. Still LOL
To be helpful – call them what they are- Frenchists or Lowryites …or cucks.
There’s really no gains in our dissidence descending to the level of the Spanish Civil War and digging up dead nuns to put them on trial.
Catholic Poland leads the way, a boy waving a rosary against a gay pride parade had to be subdued by globalist agents of the law.
not to mention the relatively impressive nationalism on their holidays.
the spirit of Jan Sobieski lives on, hope it spreads
“Hope it spreads.”
So do I. Two of my great concerns: are they consuming the same types of media we are? Do their elites, a product of liberal democracy + capitalism (like our elites), have the same incentives ours do? Ireland was a bastion of relative tradition and nationalism up until 20 years ago, and they’ve since collapsed into liberal disintegration (right after the end of internal strife and a great rise in economic growth, notably). Another example of this would be Spain, which has similarly transformed since the death of Franco/Francoism in the 1970’s.
I hope you mock this “debate” in your podcast. This is kind of thing I hate about the Right. The endless obsession with political theology, with lots of hot air about “Freedom” vs. “The Good” – and what about Edmund Burke. You even have idiots re-fighting the Reformation. Catholics vs. Protestants – Round 10,203. Meanwhile the Left is focused on the real world of TODAY and interested in one thing: gaining power to destroy the Right.
There is plenty of fruitless and stupid debate out there, but keep in mind that the Left’s power lay in contaminating peoples’ minds with their ideas (via mass media and education). That’s how they maintain legitimacy even in the minds of whites as the left liberal elite/system is working diametrically against their interests and the interests of their offspring. The elite, the system that has empowered and incentivized them (liberalism), and the ideas that drive/justify the whole process (our contemporary left-liberalism (and contemporary right-liberalism is no true opposition or threat to them)) all need to be delegitimized in the eyes of our people, and it will take ideas to effect this.
Even an economic catastrophe would, in my opinion, only lead most whites to beg our elite to get the plantation, the machine of Western extermination, up and running again, to get the stores restocked and so on (we’re not farmers anymore, consuming local or near local goods. The functioning of the global economy is vital to supplying the needs and wants of the peoples of the West).
We need ideas not just to delegitimize the elite and their liberal system, but to internally fire, cohesively unify, and correctly direct our people to take advantage of any and all opportunities for escape. It takes collective effort and mass self-sacrificial determination to effect major change in the world, “Providence is always on the side of the big battalions” (there are exceptions/qualifications to this I know). As conditions deteriorate, white people will become more open to new ideas, and the spread of those new ideas can bring our people to effect greater strain on the liberal elite and their liberal system, producing cracks, openings, opportunities for our collective escape (again, if we’re comprised in such a way that we can take advantage of opportunities. You cannot exploit an opening, fill a vacuum, if everyone is hiding in their basement in a state of confusion).
Ideas, irrespective of the truth in them, can unleash power. In this world, power and ideas very much go together. Look at the history of Islam as one prime example of this. It exploded on the world, and it’s still here and quite strong well over 1 millennium later. This is because it was/is a propitious system of ideas for its time and place.
If David French believed in a “neutral space” he would fight for KKK story hour at his local library. And make sure it was funded and supported, with little kids dressing up in white robes and hoods.
After that, he would fight for Neo-Nazi story hour at the library, with all the costumes and literature.
No, David would fight for Muslim story hour and open borders story hour and every other story hour first. And condemn even Pat Buchanan story hour……
Exactly. David French is just FakeCon. The Washington generals. The Controlled opposition. For the last 3 years he’s tried to pose as some sort of “moderate” between the LIberal/Left and the Trump-Right. He’s no different than an American Tory in 1776 who didn’t like the British, but spent all his time attacking Washington and Adams because “we need to win independence in the *right* way” by respecting the Conservative value of Obeying the King.
Well his name is David “French”. Being a gentlemanly cuck even when the enemy is massacring his family and society is his style. Maybe he should change his name to David Cheese Eating Surrender Monkey.
Yet this True Conservatism end times grift has been a boom for French, no? Who knew of him prior to his narcissistic posturing on behalf of the infallible faith of Never Trump? Hell, this Muslim convert to weak Christian dissident may have gotten a cut for taking the fall.
Someone from Conservatism, Inc., had to suck the last dollar out of the dwindling faithful. It seems fitting that French, with his warmongering Elmer Gantry act, could be that man.
Even disregarding his politics, David French is such a complete wanker. The constant talk of his Ethiopian child. The constant -exaggerated- talk of his military service. The bald head and elitist, dull manner. The constant Lawyer jargon and bullshit. Frankly, even if changed sides, I still wouldn’t like him.
Everywhere I go, when I mention the Great Replacement, the whites (and nonwhites!) strongly agree that our elites hate us.
Today, a Western gal said, “I believe in both God –and– Darwin, and that there are more than one.” She could respect others’, but her own came first.
That is exactly right. Without us and what formed us, this world collapses into darkness and savagery.
The “dispensationalists” or millenialists, seeing the New Testament primarily as a guide to the End Times, have always had a great deal of cultivation and shekels from the proto-Zionists, who have a similar vision of Jerusalem.
Scofield’s wildly popular Reference Bible, and modern political evangels such as Falwell, Graham, Roberts, and Hagee have received, well, huge amounts of shekels and media support. The same was true of the Vatican ll crowd. After all, the original authors wrote and edited the Book for the same reasons. Ancient politics were no different from today.
Or they wrote and edited the Book because they were inspired by God.
“Their” God. And they will admit this openly.
The Zman’s subscriber count reference model, Paul Joseph Watson, just uploaded a scathing rant along similar lines:
https://youtu.be/gK_0Yo-0r08
I wonder to what extent the underclass has been further demoralized by globalism, mass immigration and the welfare state? (Along with the general societal break-down.) Work hard to get ahead no longer applies when they can force you to train your third-world replacements and subsidize them at the same time.
National Review is on death watch with under 90,000 print subscribers. Most of them likely retired Octogenarian political science teachers.
People like French don’t move the needle anymore and it kills them. Expect them to joint the Democrats as the new “moderate wing.” For the Democrats this will be like getting the blankets with small pox.
There is a FASCINATING connection to Buckley and the JFK assassination. The book Final Judgment is a MUST READ!
Remember that the 90k subscribers includes the ones where they extend the subscription for three years for 50 cents (because extending for free doesn’t count in the “paid” subscription rolls). Also the people that autopay their renewals and have somehow disappeared. I figure the full-boat subscribers at under 10k. And how many for union offices, democratic HQs, the other pubs like WP and NYT, and the various libraries and university pol sci departments?
It was always a Mockingbird operation.
The entire right wing establishment survives on autopay these days. A bankrupt legacy system.
Z wrote:
A militant, optimistic and aggressive Christianity would be wildly attractive to disaffected white youth. Imagine young guys in camo flash mobbing public events, while reading Scripture.
That would be fine in 1980.
If Christians did that today, they would beaten and arrested by the police and have the book thrown at them by the DA and ADL. Make no mistake the Jewish community would come after us with everything they have. Overnight laws would be passed making public expressions of Christianity a felony.
And if the SWJ and Anti-fa get wind ahead of time, they’ll be waiting to beat these Christian men to a blood pulp while the police stand by and laugh.
That’s what we’re facing.
What’s that supposed to be? The “but it might be haaaaard” critique?
“Behold, I send you out as a sheep among the wolves”.
Then that’s the way it’s gonna’ be. It’s the way things often have been for those before us — look at the reception Isaac Jogues and his companions ultimately received in what is now Canada and US. Along with millions of others over two millennia. These “laws” mean nothing.
Rules of law written on paper are only effective if there is raw power to back them up. There must be a sufficient number of people who care about respecting a rule of law, who can field sufficient power (they must be willing to sacrifice their well-being or their lives for these rules of law, and have the material means to bring sufficient force). If people have been rendered too muddle-headed or ignorant to care, too cowardly and materialistic to sacrifice, too materially weak to bring sufficient force to the table, then the rules of law, and those who seek their defense in them, will be overthrown by those who find them an impediment.
Let’s have some fun. Let’s expose them. Post your questions that you would have asked in a debate with either of the (Uni)party members.
I’ll start. To David French: How many kids (including babies) were available for adoption in the US when you sought an overseas child? And why did you do that? What made you opt for overseas adoption? (I already know the answer.)
From mythology…
A man in deep prayer discovered a truth.
Mara’s attendant asked what was discovered and Mara (the Devil) replied, “A piece of truth.”
“Doesn’t this bother you when someone finds a piece of truth, O Evil One?” his attendant asked.
“No,” Mara replied. “Right after this, they usually make a belief out of it.”
Honestly, I am so sick of it all. The fact that they have fairly successfully pushed a man cutting his own dick off as a basic civil right shows how close to the end I think we are. I heard an interview with a fellow French cuck from NRO where he made the statement that Ilhan Omar is a quintessential American story. I sat in the car and couldn’t believe what I heard. It’s like we are not even on the same planet with these people. They are not just cucks, they are ENEMIES!!! “France is no longer France.” That one statement from President Trump is literally worth more than 50 years of a NRO subscription.
“They are not just cucks, they are ENEMIES!!!”
I came to that conclusion in the early nineties. It was liberating.
I’ll say this, whatever other criticisms you have, Trump has ripped the masks off these people. There’s no going back in my opinion.
They ripped their own masks off, threw them to the ground and stomp them into shreds. Trump just drove them nuts enough to do it.
A response to the neocons, churchians, Christcucks, and the civnats that is beginning to boil is simply this-
You’ve failed to preserve or conserve anything. Not your religion, not your culture, or your country. Why should any of us allow you to speak for us, propose solutions, educate our children or exercise moral authority over us?
Touché!
Don’t forget that you’ll need to get a great number of them at least marginally on your/their own side if any real change is to be effected. You’ll need to change their thinking, and that takes thoughtfulness and tact (I don’t have faith that some sort of collapse will spontaneously effect it). People are not rational, and propaganda works, and modern Westerners live their entire lives submerged in an ocean of it. We must remember the audience, the context, the situation. I wish it weren’t this way, but I’m afraid that it is.
I met a lady recently who had done missionary work in Guatemala for the past 30 years. When she learned I could speak a little Spanish (very little), she asked me to accompany her missionary group next year. I asked her why she had spent 30 years going back and forth to a Spanish-speaking country without learning to speak Spanish. Her answer revealed a generous portion of humble bragging: “I spend so much time at the medical dispensary handing out pills that I don’t have time to learn Spanish.”
Sad that Guatemala appears to have a shortage of people capable of passing out pills, and must bring in foreign workers to get the job done 🙂
Why pass out pills when you can have los gringos pass them to you in America whilst you get lots of other free stuff?
Guatemalans don’t need to come to America to freeload – stay in Guatemala and the do-gooder gringos will come to serve them.
I have a good friend from church who became fairly jaded after a missionary trip to the South. Our church would go down South and with their sister church down there, have volunteer congregants build housing and such for the local population.
It took just one trip where he and other good-Whites labored and built housing for families that sat on the ground and watched. Yes, they smiled and said thanks and waved goodbye at the end, but they did nothing to help with such efforts on their behalf.
He (and I) then volunteered our time and effort on this side of the border—he now patrols along the border and calls in illegals and drug mules to the BP. 😉
My sisters kids drive me nuts with mission trips and the request for support of such. I’ve noted that these “missions” invariable target destinations with good beaches.
Talk about a Habitat for Human Bio-Diversity.
Proselytization becomes a tough issue where the faith claims a higher authority than the people. As I noted yesterday, Jews neatly solved this problem by making themselves God’s Chosen and thus effectively uniting their people and God. Their myths of golden calves and Yahweh’s wrath notwithstanding, there is no functional behavioral distinction between even secular Jewish tribal interests and the moral judgments and requirements of Jewish religion. They’re functionally the same. Unless Christians affect this convergence, they’d be subject to the Prager trap of disloyalty to the people in the interests of a higher moral authority. In that we are not “the state” right now, it’s an issue we can defer, as their proselytization just undermines the Empire. However, for the future’s sake,tt would be a good idea to start planting some doctrinal seeds & re-adjusting theological interpretations and priorities to be fully compatible with ethno-states based on HBD sooner than later.
Indeed. That question has been bouncing around in my head forever (it seems). How do we enlist the ranks of Christians when a fundamental aspect of doctrine—we are all equal in Christ—is interpreted that we are all equal, period.
We change the interpretation. Chesterton would have fallen off his chair laughing if you proposed to him that Africans were equal to Englishmen. Check out https://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2019/05/being-progressive-yesterday-race.html as well.
This debate and others like it are a sideshow; they are meaningless, a waste of time.
It’s like arguing with your neighbor in April 1945 Berlin what color neckties should be worn when the Russian Army is about to launch their final offensive to take the city.
Guess what, the Russian Army could give a shit; you are a dead man.
While these talking heads attempt to demonstrate how smart they are in front of their minuscule (as compared to the number of folks who vote) adoring crowds, we have a bunch of Stalinist wannabes vying to become president of the USA.
And if one of these demokrats becomes president, this nation will be totally F’d.
Just reading what folks like Warren, Sanders, et. al., propose, makes it clear that the US economy will literally collapse if they or their ilk are elected. It’s clear they abhor the Constitution, capitalism and the USA; and particularly the PEOPLE of this nation.
They simply hate our guts.
You may despise Trump , but he is a billion times better – for the PEOPLE – than any of the Stalinist wannabe demokrats vying to be president.
The present line up of demokrat nominees make Obama look like a neo-Nazi , right wing fanatic.
What’s more stupid than watching a French/Ahmari debate is actually debating/discussing the merits of what they say.
Nobody gives a flying F what they say or who they are.
They are nobodies , zeros, non-entities, meaningless, invisible in the real world scheme of things.
Yep, I will confess that I have never heard of Ahmari or French and I have no intention of learning about them.
It would be wast of time.
I am concerned that if a Warren or her ilk get elected, it will definitely and detrimentally affect me economically, it will do likewise to the vast majority of the citizenry and will set the USA on a downward spiral that will take decades, if ever, to reverse.
(Think of the govt. bureaucratic paradigm established by FDR in the 1930s; the USA is STILL hostage to that neo-fascist model of govt. Indeed, Mussolini himself as well as the official news outlets of Hitler’s Nazi Party approved of FDRs New Deal).
Honestly, if any of those dems get elected, let’s hope that right thinking deep state folks or whomever – e.g., the military, etc., – literally, find a way to remove them from office.
Accelerationism may need to be put into overdrive, should things go a certain way next year.
I have no idea what is Accelerationism.
I just know that the more powerful and overbearing government becomes, the more the citizenry loses their individual rights. .
The founders of this nation were aware of this and thus established three branches of government as well as the electoral college voting system , all in the effort to minimize the chance of a tyrannical form of govt.
The system of Federalism they established, but which has become greatly diminished due to the Civil War, the establishment of the federal income tax and the direct election of US Senators, was the ultimate “tool” available to curb the power of the Federal govt.
But over time. the Federal Govt. has now become a monster, despite the best intentions implicit in the US Constitution.
Unfortunately, the SCOTUS too has become an enabler of greater Federal Govt. powers.
We must face reality and deal with the hand we are dealt.
Wasting time listening to debates betwixt talking heads showing off their verbal and intellectual skills does nothing but take our eyes off the ball.
The immediate existential threat are the Stalinist wannabe presidential hopefuls and their supporters; a bunch of power hungry, egomaniacal leftist wackos; and they are very, very dangerous individuals indeed.
Accelerationism, in this context, means don’t fight the system or the overreaching government. The authorities are so incompetent, that the sooner we let them run everything, the sooner they fall apart and the system gets rebuilt into something better. Pushing back along the way, once government gets to a certain point, is counterproductive because it prolongs the agony of dealing with the present system rather than letting it fall from its own contradictions.
Unfortunately, we won’t know if accelerationism is worthwhile, in this case, until after the fact.
Note that waiting to allow things to fall apart gave the Bolsheviks 70 years to F things up and produced about 30 million killed.
The Cuban people have now been waiting over 60 years
for the “incompetents” to mess up, and the citizens in Venezuela have now been waiting about 10 years.
The BIG problem with allowing the “incompetents ” (by the way, leftists are NOT incompetents; they know exactly what they are doing) time to destroy themselves is that they destroy everything else as well, including the livelihood and lives of the citizenry.
Further, once in power, they find means to disarm (take away their guns) the public and financially ruin any “dissidents.”
The internet now allows the latter to be accomplished rather easily; one IRS email to an individual’s bank, place of employment, etc., and bingo, you are broke and your wages are confiscated.
If Accelerationism is what you state it is, it is suicide and demonstrates an ignorance of history.
It’s like telling those marched into the Gulags/ gas chambers, that, hey no problem, eventually Stalin / Hitler and their adherents will fall away and then we can start anew.
Sure; after you are long dead
The leftists seeking power must be stopped now, in their tracks, before they take down everybody with them.
And if it means eliminating them – existentially – then so be it.
If Hitler, Stalin,Castro, Mao, Chavez, Maduro had been taken care of at the right time, the entire world would have benefited.
Letting these sorts of folks obtain power is suicidal.
100 million died in the 20th century when leftists ran the show
Warren, Harris, Sanders, Biden, et. al., must never be allowed to obtain power. And if they do, let’s hope that right thinking folks take the necessary action to see them gone – permanently – them and all their supporters.
The vestiges of my CivNat roots try to remind me that everything should work out alright, over time, if I just play by the rules and vote. Then I get real. I remember that the Facebook/Google Panopticon is very efficient, but the people tasked with the midnight door knocks less so, and that will need to be taken advantage of. Things will be ugly, but there is only so much a person can do to change the direction of things. Work within your limits when the SHTF, and that is some combination of proactive and going grey, depending on the situation you find yourself in.
Awesome comment. History is littered with the defeated, and with the extinct, and I see no reason why we’d be exempted.
I tried to edit this comment but couldn’t. I wanted to add that I used to lean toward accelerationism, but I’ve come to view it as being too optimistic. I don’t believe events can be relied upon to spontaneously make the needed changes in thinking.
It reminds me of orthodox Marxists confidently asserting that workers would one day spontaneously become orthodox Marxist in their thinking, and that the workers of the world would unite as cosmopolitan Marxist revolutionaries. Men like Gramsci had the intelligence to see-through this, and set about attempting to effect the changes they desired by other means (after making a more clear-eyed study of man and the world).
We need to do what we can to effect the required changes in thinking, thoughtfully, prudently, taking a clear-eyed stock of the circumstances we’re confronted with. Deteriorating conditions will contribute to opening minds, but they cannot be relied upon to change minds in the needed way, or to the needed extent.
Listening to GNR Civil War amusingly enough
The economy can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent or live for that matter
Outright Communism lasted 75 years or so in the USSR and I suspect the US can manage quite a lot more ruin, many many many decades of mass immigration and confiscatory taxes just getting worse along the way
In the end, if the Actual Right wants the nation to be a certain way economically and ethnically they will have to make it that way, probably by force
Itis worth trying to above board stuff for now , maybe we won’t have to do the unthinkable and frankly we need to develop an identity , an ideology and to figure out how to organize and pay for it but long term, simply put waiting for collapse is a cop out for cowards.
Get hard, get good, get organized or lose.
There are two ghosts haunting the Amari/French dialog: Joseph McCarthy and Martin Luther King. As far as people like French are concerned, MLK is more important than Jesus. And, of course, any talk of driving the enemies of Christianity from the ‘public space’ is ‘McCarthyism’. The Zman is right, of course, when he says that Christianity was never intended to be a navel-gazing affair, but a revolutionary cause (which is *exactly* how the Romans interpreted the behavior of the Jesus cult). While the Zman bring up martyrdom as an example of the ‘aggressive’ nature of Christianity, I tend to focus on the fact that the most common ‘miracle’ in the Synoptics is exorcism. Jesus gave no quarter to the spiritual enemies of the human race.
Including the tax collectors, the money changers, and those who would cast stones at hoes.
Had the pleasure of attending my sister’s modern, millennial church recently. You know the type, lots of soft blue lighting, rock-n-roll band playing before the service, hands in the air, and a young, dynamic preacher who made everyone feel real good about themselves, etc, etc. Basically, self-help group therapy dressed up as Christianity. They are all very, very full of love and acceptance for everyone, especially those who would destroy their country and their families. Their version of Jesus Christ is basically John Lennon without the music career.
Trust me, this type of “Christian” is (if I recall correctly) the most popular type in America. They are also very definitely NOT on our side. They are the David French types and they are modern American Christianity. We can only hope that the next generations, if they embrace Christianity at all, find a more orthodox version.
Very full of love and acceptance for everyone, except for those who do not toe the line on the socially approved leftie laundry list of things. Those rotten people get two minutes of hate, thrown right into the middle of the service. Part of the fun is to predict when the gears will change and the two minutes will kick in. Usually about five minutes before the end of the sermon. Just to tie the bow up tight and send everyone out to brunch and Costco fully filled with angry righteousness, masked by enthusiastic ephemeral “love for all*”. The asterisk representing the exception, which is the non person that you and I represent. As predictable as darkness after sundown.
Agreed Dutch. My brother-in-law is a very strong believer in that type of “Christianity”. He goes to church, is involved with it, holds Bible studies at his house and all that other good stuff. Yet, he spends a lot of time on Facebook ranting about Trump and the “haters” who support him. The rest of the family have simply learned not to talk politics near him, or try to correct his NPC sputterings.
He’s typical of the liberal members of his church, and the Trump supporters at the church are typically quiet about it, so as not to have to deal with the “love” and “tolerance” that will come their way if they’re not.
We church-shopped after moving to the desert a few years ago, all non-denominational (hence not formally and officially leftist) Protestant congregations. The closest I ever came to walking out of a service was when one preacher said, “There is no room for racists in heaven.”
That’s funny, my understanding was that Judas Iscariot will be in heaven if among his final thoughts was repentance.
Watch the video: add the mannerisms on top of the sterile arguments and what you see is why the Progressives have had a free hand for so long. These are the palace eunuchs.
At first, I had no idea what “Frenchism” was. Then I read the First Things article that, among other things, said that David French also promulgated the Russian collusion conspiracy against Trump, like so much of the left, even though this acquisition was obviously bogus from the get go. So, I still have no idea what “Frenchism” is, other than I think David French is full of shit.
I watched for a couple of minutes. Three cucks in a row was all I saw.
Remember the three monkeys?
“Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil”
Boy, would i love to hear a blood-sport debate between Zman and one of the NR cucks French/Goldberg/Lowry. Won’t happen, they would sooner drink drain cleaner.
David French is a passive agressive ankle-biting lapdog begging treats from Mx. French at home and dancing for J-right donors at work, a Last Man in every sense. Z’s nailed French’s principal motive before – peacocking pride. What’s more, it’s a very feminized sort of pride, emblematic of the modern feminized Christian Church – the pride of virtue-preening and gossipy snark about status, appearances, social graces, motives and intentions rather than manly deeds and accomplishments. I recommend Dalrock’s blog for good critiques of this from a Christian perspective, definitely not “Our Guy,” but Heartiste/manosphere adjacent, and he nails this topic daily.
I know a lot of Christians, both Prots and Caths, and there is a definite growth niche for re-masculinized Christianity. It’s not that far past to begin with. Just before Holocaustianity became a thing, Father Coughlin’s muscular super-J-woke Catholicism was pulling radio audiences of up to 30 million in a country of 130 million who were 80%+ Protestant. For more modern exegesis, The Godcast on TRS Sundays bi-weekly is worth a listen on this – warning, will very much offend pagans and other heretics. Myles of that pcast is one of the better speakers on TRS in general. As much as his hard monotheism grinds my anti-in-fighting gears, he’s a very effective spokesman for authentic, non-Judeo-Christianity. Here’s hoping our descendants will fight with honor over the souls of our ethnostates after we’ve settled all non-White issues first.
The cross on which Judeo-Christianity/Holocaustianity has again nailed Christ is tikkun olam (every single time). In Father Coughlin’s day, it was mainstream Christian belief that the world was a place of limitations and imperfection where fallible sinners helped those they could and we all patiently awaited Christ’s Second Coming. Only then would the battle to “perfect the world” even begin. Holocaustianity’s foreign injection of the Talmudic concept of tikkun olam (heal/perfect the world) moved up the timetable for all mankind united under Christ kumbaya perfection to the here-and-now. As is their wont, Jews were not content to patiently wait for God and preferred to perfect everyone according to their own standards now. Via the Scofield Bible and other Talmudry, the usual suspects weaponized the peacocking of Yankee-church-lady busybodies and turned the scolds loose on their most hated and feared of Christians, the White man.
To see cucks like David French LARP Christian leadership while begging for shekels and atta-boys from both muscular Zionist supremacists and their amazon Fish Speakers in Woke Holocaustian Wahmenanity makes hearts sing and hands rub all over Manhattan. Well worth a few shekels to Rich Lowry’s grift. Conversely, the idea of J-woke White Christian men bringing their wahmens to heel & casting the moneychangers out of their temples (again – E.S.T.) haunts their nights like cossack hoofbeats.
Exile, that was truly epic! Made my day.
Dutch, excellent observation.
Two things brosef—
1) Another slam dunk in content. You should consider starting your own blog. Your comments are prolific and on point most of the time.
2) I see you mention CH quite often. You weren’t Exile there that I’m aware of, what alias did you use? I’m certain I would remember a writing style like yours.
The Artist Formerly Known As Jay in DC (TAFKAJID, sounds Muslim 🙂 )
-Apex Predator
I was a lurker only at CH, alas. Don’t know whatcha got til it’s gone. Appreciate the props, working on content for blog rollout in a month or two.
Stay with Z. You two have a synergy, a balanced load, and this way I get TWO daily delights.
Fish Speakers!
Frank Herbert was so far ahead of his time.
Exile….you have the give of observation and the gift of converting that to inspired salient writing by a quick and agile brain. Thanks Exile…I look forward to my Exile Brain Stretch.
I got about 2/3 of the way through this post without reading the name at the top and thought, this must be Exile. Sure enough. Thanks for the entertaining read.
I get the sense that the shark-toothed Exile intends to WIN.
Re: ” In Father Coughlin’s day, it was mainstream Christian belief that the world was a place of limitations and imperfection where fallible sinners helped those they could and we all patiently awaited Christ’s Second Coming. Only then would the battle to “perfect the world” even begin. ”
I’m not going to claim to be a “Christian” – but that is exactly how I have viewed the world for quite some time. It has been my experience on a personal and almost daily basis – that the world is NOTHING BUT a place of limitations and imperfection – and pain.
A while back – I ran across a video from Jordan Peterson – that had me saying YES – somebody who is finally elaborating on what has been my life experience :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLvd_ZbX1w0
” It is not an accident that the axiomatic Western individual is someone who was nailed to a cross and tortured. It’s like YES … RIGHT … EXACTLY….. ”
” There’s a deep idea in the West too. It’s like “pick up your damn suffering – and bear it – and try to be a good person so you don’t make it worse”
I don’t see anything like this coming out of Christians these days. I must be stuck in the old world – because my view is elaborated upon pretty accurately by Peterson. Maybe it’s that Jewish and female influence you referred to.
I’d have to imagine that if somebody like Father Coughlin arrived today – he might well get a good audience. At least among white men.
The fact that Peterson says the things he does above – and has the ear of a lot of young men – is good evidence of this.
Dissident Christians can bring a “ ought to be” foundation to a movement. My father went to church maybe once a year and the rest of the year he avoided Christianity but he was surrounded by a Christian “ought to be” small town culture.
Therefore he grew up with some common sense.
Now we are like the Spanish landing in Central America and we are met by a ignorant population of people with tattoos and nose rings.
“Now we are like the Spanish landing in Central America and we are met by a ignorant population of people with tattoos and nose rings.”
And they appease the weather gods with child sacrifice, too!
On the other hand, I stongly support RU-486 instead of antivirals for Africa, Bangladesh, and greater Arabia.
That’s why God gave us RU-486.
The stray cat nations with 100 mile slums aren’t a benefit to anyone, especially themselves. The girls are right about this.
“A militant, optimistic and aggressive Christianity would be wildly attractive to disaffected white youth.”
Change “would be” to “is.” This is happening now in certain quarters. The husk of enlightenment Christianity staggers toward its inevitable resting place, while green shoots of vibrant orthodox remnants spring up here and there. At the risk of sounding like a broken record: WHO IS REPRODUCING? Theirs is the future.
“Change “would be” to “is.” This is happening now in certain quarters. ”
I’m not a believer myself but I’ve heard multiple times in the media that the under 40/under 30 Catholics are noticeably more traditionalist and conservative than Boomer or Gen X Catholics.
You have to be careful when discussing under 30s in America. Millenials are majority white, but barely so. Gen Z is half white for now, but the generation is still being born. A traditionalist hispanic is not our guy.
i just read a survey recently that the average number of children for Traditional Catholic women is six.
Is there anyone out there actually listening to Klown#1? Or is he just barking into the void, in order to keep getting paid?
“This is where dissident Christians can find a niche in dissident politics. There is a long tradition of Christians preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in the face of fierce opposition from authority.”
————————————————–
True enough, Z, as far as it goes… but… you first! 🙂 You’re telling me to go out into the public square where I will get martyred by social justice warriors, queers, socialists, and other degenerates. I can legally be arrested, fined and jailed for speaking of God to the wrong person in the wrong place. No thanks. How about you post your face on the blog, and invite French to a moderated debate on our turf?
We aren’t there yet. There are too many fake Christians like French kicking around, too many cucked or pozzed churches, and too much fallout from the disgraced television evangelist hucksters of years past. Throw in the endless problems of the church with pedos and gays… I just don’t think the timing is there for either of us to go mainstream.
Yet.
No doxxing, Mr. Smith, you are correct that we’re not ready. (Please note you’re part of “we”.)
Stalwarts like Zman, Saml Adams, and Dutch are *our guys* behind the lines. Let the marxists and cucks stick with the truly important business of denouncing each other.
A militant, optimistic and aggressive Christianity would be wildly attractive to disaffected white youth.
The key word there is not Christianity, but militant. We have to secure our rights as a people. But genuine rights are really just power in one of its aspects–real power, meaning, backed up by violence and the threat of violence. No violence, no rights.
(As for the Christianity part…well, you either believe or you don’t, and I just don’t. But I do accept some kind of religion or religion-substitute is crucial in pushing forward a political movement.)
Western civilization is inextricably entwined with Christianity. You don’t have to be a believer, but you have to accept it as part of the core Western and American identity. Putin, for example, understands this. That is why he is a booster of Orthodoxy in Russia. I do not think he is a devout Orthodox Christian, but he knows that Orthodoxy is an essential part of the Russian identity. Their civilization cannot be whole without it.
Interesting that Putin seems to accept the Orthodox Church for what it is, rather than trying to convert it to something else for his own ends. Would that those in the West would treat the “home” religion in a similar “hands off” fashion, rather than trying to bend it to their selfish secular practices. Putin strikes me as a real adult in the room, despite his dark background and scary behind-the-scenes activities.
I am a horrible person but I believe Putin is a man in the room because he is willing to do whatever is necessary for his people.
I can’t imagine how wonderful it must be to have such a leader.
No homo.
It always amazes me, if we have figured it out, do you not think that both Putin and Trump know the score and who is “really” running things. FFS, even Joe Kennedy warned his son about it. These people know the real history of the 20th century, just like we do. Now are they out their screaming “gas the kikes” or some nonsense. Nope, they are taking the Stalin approach. The only strategy that can win.
“Putin strikes me as a real adult in the room, despite his dark background and scary behind-the-scenes activities.”
I agree with Jonathan Bowden:
“The current estimation is very much that civilization and barbarism are mutually exclusive, but I believe that you cannot have the one without the other.”
https://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/bowden-why-i-write/
“I am not preaching anti-intellectuality, but extolling the licentiousness and chthonian violence of re-integration. The affliction which Indo-Europeans suffer from is entirely mental and subjective; they are chronically afraid of their own shadow in Jungian terms. If the civilization which their ancestors created has any future at all then they must overcome their resistance to barbarism; they must o’erleap it on the altar of high culture. They must dispel the cloud and lay out a future where Arthur Butz’s credo doesn’t have to be true (or not).
“Truthfully, in this age those with intellect have no courage and those with some modicum of physical courage have no intellect. If things are to alter during the next fifty years then we must re-embrace Byron’s ideal: the cultured thug.”
— Jonathan Bowden, “Why I Write”
There is a growing recognition of the game the
Catholic chatterers, pro-life leadership, etc. are playing. My favorite guy on this topic is David Wemhoff, author of a book on America’s manipulation of the Catholics’ understanding of their own doctrine through media power (titled John Courtney Murray, Time/Life, and the American Proposition). Virtually every Catholic media outlet, push comes the shove, has fallen in with supporting the American ideology.
Wemhoff is probably the best bang for your minute when it comes to understand this. I always try to point other Catholics to this guy.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RS5wvWhdP3s
Also, Amintore Fanfani’s “Catholicism, Protestantism, and Capitalism” (free from project Gutenberg) should be mandatory reading for anybody who wants to understand how the liberal/capitalist spirit is so good at taking over and using institutions and social causes for its own ends.
American priest John Courtney Murray’s teachings being adopted at Vatican II to overturn Tradition and transform the Catholic Church into a wing of the Revolution is a prime example of the liberal contagion at work in the world.
I’ve had that book for some time, but only read the first 10 or so pages. George O’Brien’s ‘An Essay on the Economic Effects of the Reformation’ and ‘An Essay on Mediaeval Economic Teaching’ (the latter available at archive.org) I would say are similar titles. There’s a vast world of Right-wing anti-capitalism to be explored, and not just the Catholic economic thinking of Aquinas and Medieval Christendom, Distributism, (Catholic) Corporatism, and Guild Socialism (among others), but expanding outward into Werner Sombart and non-Catholic Corporatism, for example. It’s easy to appropriate the ideas of certain Leftist anti-capitalist thinkers into a traditional Right framework as well.
Capitalism is not neutral, it is inherently globalist (it provides the economic incentive for it), and has massive ramifications on who the elite are, what their incentives are, and brings social changes (like female employment, low fertility, demands for cheap labor, …) and cultural changes (the drive for consumers, advertising, a culture of materialism/hedonism, as well as ever more indebtedness). Capitalism yields economic centralization as well, and more wage slaves/fewer owners of the means of production (ever fewer family farms and businesses). The struggle to acquire and maintain a middle-class existence is requiring people to move ever more and ever further away from each other, breaking family and community ties, breaking rootedness. The old guild system represented a source of power between the individual and the state, thus checking the power of the latter. This was destroyed, and the state, under liberal democracy, naturally comes under the power of Money, the tiny class of obscenely wealthy who own/control the means of production. It’s not a good order of things; in the long-run it’s an engine for obliterating the West, and beyond.
“Imagine young guys in camo flash mobbing public events, while reading Scripture.”
I’m trying to, really, but I keep busting into laughter.
Cracking me up.
“That’s why the opening was like dogs sniffing each other’s butts at the park.”
Flash mob scripture readings sound like an excellent idea to me, right in the middle of costal blue cities.
I bet a youngster (*cough* like allsup *cough*) could really do great things with events like these.
“Imagine young guys in camo flash mobbing public events, while reading Scripture.”
I can imagine such an occurrence but I KNOW that it would not only NOT be a Christian act but it would unquestionably be an UNCHRISTIAN act. Such confrontational tactics directly contravene direct orders from the Creator.
In Romans 12:18, The Creator, speaking through the Apostle Paul, commanded, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.”
Again in First Peter 3:15-16, The Creator, speaking through the Apostle Peter commanded, “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.”
So, you see, an action such as you describe could only be perpetrated by scripturally ignorant or willfully disobedient “Christians”.
True. God never intended Christianity to be confrontational.
That’s why Christ never insulted anyone.
Then I am a “disobedient Christian.” Couple of things that conjure up cowardice in the face of the enemy, hypocrisy, and failure:
“Principled Conservative” and “Evangelical Christian.”
Spare me the hollow self-righteousness of both.
Carl B, I don’t know about anyone’s “hollow self-righteousness”; nor do I really care. I certainly belong to neither the “Principled Conservative” camp nor the “Evangelical Christian” one. All I know is what was delivered to in the Bible as we have it. In both cases we have what (at least some believe to be) are direct orders from The Creator of the universe. After 4 solid semesters of NT (κοινε “Koine”) Greek I can confidently assert that the verbs in both selections are in imperative mood and thus are COMMANDS; as opposed to mere suggestions. I also know that forgiveness is impossible without repentance which is utterly at odds with deliberate disobedience. What you or anyone does with respect to Christian scripture is totally between them and ultimate reality however they conceive/consider him/her/it to be.
Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. “It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.’” –Matthew 21:12-13
Peter was not a wartime consigliere.
“Peter was not a wartime consigliere.” Neither is David French.
Jesus was the Son Of God, Z. He also famously said, “Render unto Ceasar….” I am only the merest outhouse Christian and I can swap Scripture with you all day long. Sorry, Bill is largely correct. There are no real biblical grounds for something like that save for a direct command from God himself.
For me, for now, it is enough to render unto Ceasar, but I will not bow down to him. If my enemies choose violence against me on that context, the gloves come off and the guns come out and no bones about it – God can sort out the bodies afterward.
As I said elsewhere, Z – the Christians will not be goaded into doing your dirty work for you. Until you are prepared to enter the public space, with your real name and real identity – you can’t ask me to. I don’t like any of this either – but we are in this together, or we aren’t.
Jesus instructed his disciples to pick up a sword. And I’m paraphrasing but he basically said he comes not to bring peace, but the sword to mankind. This cucked POS “Churchianity” is a disgusting warped view of what the Bible actually teaches.
We can not win by allowing our virtues to be used as a weapon against us. The tactics and rules of the conflict are to a great extent set by our enemies. Whatever tactics were laid out by Paul were for a time and place and situation long past. Indeed, the Christian Church would not have been expanded to its current extent were it not for conflict and struggle.
The discussion on the table now is not one of expansion, but one of survival. Chose your course of action wisely.
If people followed Christianity this way it would died soon after Jesus did. Because those passages turn Christianity into a suicide cult.
Charles Martel would not have been able to fight the Saracens at Tours or those other Christian soldiers who fought over the centuries to protect their lands from the Saracens.
Wow. The Bible commands unilateral, preemptive surrender to violent anti-Christian atheists. Who knew?
When I first read about this scuffle between Ahmari and French last May, they (American Greatness) made it look like Ahmari was the fighter and French was the effete parlor room conservative tea sipping talker. So, I sided with the former and was so pleased with myself that I cancelled NR at least five years ago.
After reading this blog and interjecting some vitriol over at Crisis Magazine comment section yesterday against French, I’m going back to reading military stuff. At least Ahmari, at first, seemed to try to put up a face that said conservatism needed to have some muscle and fight in it. I agree with this blogger.
It’s probably true that a “militant, optimistic and aggressive Christianity” would be an effective force against the Left. It’s certainly worked for Muslims, and to a degree it’s working today for conservative Christians in America, who seem to be having more success in defending their values against the Progressive onslaught than anybody else.
The problems though is that in order to recruit all those disaffected white youth to the cause you have to be able to make a decent argument that Christianity (or any religion) is…, um…, actually true, and as far as I can see no such argument exists. The Muslims solve this problem by keeping their youth ignorant and credibly threatening to kill anyone who tries to expose them to the counterarguments against religion. But that option is only open to you if you already are in a position of power.
And frankly I’m not sure it would do any good. There is nothing in Christianity that even suggests one should care about race, and a great deal that says we are all of us brothers. Even more frankly, if I was convinced that there was a world beyond this one where everyone was going to live forever, then why would I care if this world goes to hell? Seriously, why would it matter? The only reason I care about what happens in this world is because I believe it’s the only world there is!
“Even more frankly, if I was convinced that there was a world beyond this one where everyone was going to live forever, then why would I care if this world goes to hell?”
Because possibly your place in the next world depends on your actions in this one.
The Bible openly acknowledges and approves of the existence and separation of races. This theme is acknowledged casually throughout the entire Bible.
Most Christian thinkers are willing to stand behind historical evidence for claims of Jesus’ divinity. See Evidence That Demands A Verdict.
I made exactly the same argument you did in your last sentence when I was a young, college freshman atheist. Hopefully you will also realize how wrong you are.
I’m pretty sure the Bible never makes a big deal out of the existence of races, but I would be open to seeing quotes that suggested otherwise. In any case though, I am quite sure that the “love thy neighbor” theme in the New Testament is much stronger than anything having to do with race.
And as far as arguments for the truth of Christianity, I’ve been listening to such arguments for decades and have never heard anything remotely persuasive. All of those arguments demanded that I give more credence to a handful of 2000 year old texts of uncertain provenience than I would give to this morning’s New York Times. Why would I ever do that? If I don’t trust the Times (and I don’t), why would I trust the Gospels, when I know so much less about their authors and the circumstances under which they were written?
you have some good points about the failure of conservatism and the tactical dodges employed by the pundits involved in perpetrating that ideological fraud upon working class whites…but the rest of your post here is just the usual tripe…for one, the founding fathers were actually the founding plutocrats, and plutocrats in politics back then were just as evil as they are today…and the gist of your entire argument, as presented by you in most of the posts that you have written, is that there must be a new Boss, a ideological Boss, and this next one will be oh so much better than the old Boss…no, you fail to grapple with fundamentals, and perhaps deliberately so…
fundamentals, then…. first principles, Clarice, from whence does the power of the white working class arise? It springs from the coherence, clarity, and unity of the common interest…and that coherence is inversely proportional to the size of the voting district and the heterogeneity of the populace…
secondly, it always comes down to labor vs capital…always…
now downvote me, stone me…dunk me in water, burn me at the stake, instead of engaging in discussion, discussion of which you are incapable…
In a multiracial country, which force is stronger, racial tribalism or labor vs. capital?
In a homogeneous country, how to address the labor vs. capital divide? A 20th politician with a distinctive moustache had programs to mitigate this issue.
No need to down vote a reasoned comment made in good faith. However, you are simply wrong and have not thought all of your points through. The Founders were indeed the natural aristocracy, but far from modern plutocrats. All the evidence needed for this statement is found in the model of government they chose and the models of government then in current use they could have chosen.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Bullshit.
Friggin commies can’t see the world thru anything but a red lense.
If I open my own business and work for myself – am I “labor” – or “capital” ??
Or do you just kill me because the situation does not compute?
I’d kill you because up have no business opening your own “business” when the State will take care of you. Impertinent bastard. 😉
LOL.
You will die Kulak – because you do not fit into our glorious well thought out plans for equality for everybody……..
Make him hold out his hands! Feel them! Pol Pot taught us how to deal with these plutocrat schemers!
Something that never gets mentioned by dissidents is that this line of reasoning contradicts basic Christian teaching. To cede the public space on principle is to agree, in advance, to not proselytize. To preach and proselytize means staking out space in the public square, regardless of the consequences. The very founding of the Christian faith was on the bones of those, who martyred themselves to spread the word of Jesus Christ in the face of violent opposition.
I encounter this a lot. I am called a religious bigot simply for stating that Christianity is the truth and that therefore other religions are false and don’t deserve equal respect from me.
I feel no more obligated to respect Judaism than I do flat Earth “theories.”
To say that all religions are worthy of equal respect, to endorse those “multi-faith” prayer breakfasts and similar blasphemies is to set the truth on equal footing with falsehoods.
I don’t expect everyone out there to agree with me, but for pity’s sake, if you believe something is true — act like it. Otherwise you show that you don’t really believe what you say.
The same holds true for political beliefs.
Jews and Muslims have no problem with this concept. I worked in Israel for awhile. The general feeling of the very nice Jews I worked with was that Jesus was a hippie troublemaker who betrayed his faith, and deserves no thought whatsoever.
They relish the suffering He went through.
French hammered Sohrab with the question, “What legal tools would you use to oppose drag queen story hour?” and Sohrab had no answer.
French is correct when he said that if we want to preserve our vast, multi-racial and multi-faith country, then we can’t weaponize the judiciary because it will be used against us. Which is already what is happening.
The only answer to French’s statement is to deny the “if” part of his conditional.
As I wrote, French only agreed to do this because he knew the Persian was a light weight. Ross Dualtwat was there to make sure it was going to be the David French show. The Left always likes picking the leadership of its enemies. In this case, the cucks plucked out this goofball as the face of their enemies.
Wee Benny will only debate college kids despite even “credentialed” people lining up to debate him.
Isn’t “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” still a criminal act? All the tools we need are there but our “leadership” refuses to use them.
Which legal tools. Hmm.
Has to be a male librarian in his 50s or 60s somewhere in the midwest who’s willing to start purchasing and stocking dissident right books (I’m spitballing here, be charitable) such as BAP’s Bronze Age Mindset.
Sit back, watch how he is attacked, defunded, and removed from his job — all legally. Take notes.
Would this have been so difficult to come up with on the spot? Might not work, but if nothing else, the way out might be the same path as the way in — or as Heraclitus said, the way up is the way down. Use the same legal tools they use. Or at least give it a shot to determine what’s possible, and what is not. This one’s probably in the latter category.
And it is good that it is. French, of course, is all about the “legal.” Never the political. But it is the political — polemos — that will be the way out of this. We may not live to see it. It will involve struggle, not footnotes in law review articles or dozens of city council struggle sessions over “the children” and public libraries — now nothing more than banks of computers, anyway, in most places.
Exactly. Accepting the premise of “rule of law” in Current Year conditions throws the fight to French. Every element of our “Rule of Law” is a Gordian knot now, requiring an Alexandrian solution. No one unwilling to concede the critical premise & play-act for the rubes will be allowed within 100 miles of David French.
When only one side plays by the rules, there are no rules. Maybe when he is attacked in the street, French can defend himself with a rolled up copy of the constitution.
French thinks that the judiciary hasn’t been weaponized yet?
A militant, optimistic and aggressive Christianity would be wildly attractive to disaffected white youth.
Seriously? Pat Robertson is going to save us?
Imagine young guys in camo flash mobbing public events, while reading Scripture.
Yeah, I can see that catching on…
Pat Robertson tried to save us, but we wouldn’t listen.
That’s Pat’s fault… how?
I wrote “militant” not “milquetoast.”
Father Coughlin was on the right track. Up to 30 million listeners in a country of 130 million. With around 150 million White Americans still identifying as Christians, we’d be foolish to simply write the whole lot off as hopeless cucks. The Left turned American Christianity sideways in basically a couple of generations. Turning it back is hardly impossible.
Z means something like the Legion of the Archangel Michael, not the 700 club.
The problem with that battleplan is, that the moment you start spouting scripture, some wiseguy (why are you looking me?) is going to come along and quote verse from the Septuagint, and then it all goes downhill.
There is one good thing about the Septuagint. Whenever a lefty Christian uses the OT verses concerning immigration, I make them squirm with the parts about stoning homosexuals and men wearing women’s clothing.
When the nature and future of American public life is being discussed by a creature named Sohrab Amari, it is clear the ship has already been sunk. If something with a name like that has a respectable say in what America is or what America should do, then it means that America has died and gone to the Pet Sematary.
To be fair, he converted to Roman Catholicism in 2016, but he’s still from Iran.
It’s always very interesting to me that guys who converted to Christianity, or switched denominations a couple of years ago, like Amari, Rod Dreher, and Adrian Vermeule always know EXACTLY what it is that their new denomination/religion should do. Presumably no one in Catholicism or Orthodoxy ever thought of any of their ideas until they came along. New ideas are certainly always welcome, but a little humility might also be in order. In addition, I’m sure that Amari’s heart is in the right place, but anyone who can be beaten in a debate by David French needs to engage in some serious self-reflection.
That “creature” is doing more to educate the ignorant white American normies on how their country is being stolen from under them than incel losers like yourself. The only thing that you and your kind have to offer is sitting in your basement screaming RAHOWA and racial insults. Pathetic.
I think what you previously said about dissident politics needs to also apply to people who want to be real Christians. Since Christianity is illegal in America (its central doctrines on homosexuality, etc.) the Christian needs to view himself not as someone who needs to shout in the public square, but someone who needs to start building in the shadows. We’re day-walkers. Let the Israel-worshiping hucksters like Robertson or prosperity hustlers like Olstein fleece their flock with the jumbotron, and instead think local. Think ichthys drawn in the sand or scrimshawed on a wall.
“central doctrines on homosexuality” Never really seen it expressed to bluntly, but yeah, some “Christians” have reduced “Christianity” to divine sanction for their personal sexual morality. As Alan Watts said, we know that “living in sin” doesn’t mean baking adulterated bread with your wife.As for me, I’m with Zman: follow the words of Christ, who said on the topic …..um, …
It seems that for Evangelicucks, all you need to do is say “Jesus is Lord,” support Israel and oppose abortion, and you’re in.
Ye cannot oppose abortion and support Israel.
Everyone sees what you are doing. Stop trying to backdoor degeneracy into this.
If religious proscriptions against homosexuality aren’t your thing, try science, specifically medical science. When you look at the CDC data, it is still incredibly physically destructive and spreads all kinds of diseases that have massive external costs to the society as a whole. A lot of people who weren’t homophobic previously had their children killed by transfusions of blood from HIV-infected men who lobbied the ACLU in the 80s to not have to disclose their status (this is still a strong font of “activism” for the left; see Douglas Starr’s “Blood: An Epic History of Medicine and Commerce”). I can be pretty tolerant, but people take it personal sometimes when you murder their children with your sin and stupidity. In more basic terms, the purpose of the end of the alimentary canal is to expel waste from the body, not to insert things.
The triumph of the gay rights movement really is astonishing and disheartening. It’s been said for years that for the first time in history, a fatal disease (AIDS) had civil rights. The victims are ignored.
Homosexuals are the probably the most disease-ridden people on the planet due to their promiscuity, general hedonism (high rates of drinking, smoking and drug usage) and the fact that the human anus is a poopshoot and stuff is supposed to come out, not go in. One of the reasons for the breakdown of sexual self-restraint in general is effective modern-day medical treatment. A century ago, the promiscuous would have darwinized themselves out of existence.
The transgender rights movement is an outgrowth of the gay rights movement. Like the Energizer Bunny, the Left keeps going and going, growing more and more insane.
I’ve argued with some Christian acquaintances that they were going about their opposition to homosexuality all wrong.
The Christians in my experience – all approach the homosexuality question as if these people can be saved. And they seem to utterly refuse to take what the homos say – and use it against them.
I was around during the 80s when the homos really started becoming “loud and proud” – and I remember very distinctly what they did when confronted with the AIDS “crisis”:
They blamed it on everybody else but themselves.
Here’s what I’ve noticed about the homosexuals:
– the refuse to take responsibility for the things that happen to them because of their behavior
– they want to claim they are normal, and want to enforce that thru the laws – as well as proselytize it to the children
– they hate the ‘breeders’
– they wanted marriage not so much out of any REAL belief in equality , but because it was another avenue into the world of free shit – and it also allowed them to wave their dicks in front of the normies
– “gay culture” has no real positivity to it. It’s simply a celebration of perversions and disfunction.
– homosexuals are LIARS
When the gays started yelling about how “normal” they were – the Christians (and all of us in fact) – should have said: “Ok – we’re going to take you at your word and start treating you as you claim to be”.
All the laws around adoption of children and birth assistance (IVF , surrogacy – etc) – should have been written to include a clause that only allowed their use by persons “who might normally be able to produce children of their own accord”.
And the marriage laws should have been rewritten to actually punish those who married “outside their stated normalcy”. What I mean by that is: if you want to claim you’re homosexual and “normal” – then you will be prosecuted if you marry a female.
Cut the homos off from reproducing – and FORCE them to stick to their claimed state of “normal” and you’d see them start dying off in a generation or two.
Society has forced homosexuals to “live undercover”. Because of this – homosexuals are still around – because they’ve been reproducing. I know homosexual men who have done this seemingly on purpose. They marry women – have kids – and then “go gay”. Gays want to live in out in the open? Fine – let them. But make sure there are consequences to that. Disbar them from access to “breeders” or the technology that has grown up to help breeders have children.
Don’t allow them to continue lying their way into continued existence.
Honesty = extinction.
It strikes me that the Christian approach to homosexuality is roughly analogous to the conservative/David French types approach to leftism.
They claim to oppose it – but their actions actually enable it.
I remember that Pres. Reagan was blamed for the AIDs epidemic.
The modern-day emphasis on equality, individual rights, liberty and the pursuit of happiness makes it more difficult to defy the gay activists. Religion did so in the past, along with the limits of medical treatment and the practical necessity of forming a traditional family.
I understand what you are suggesting – that if a man says he is gay, and being gay is normal, he will not be allowed to marry a woman. I don’t know how you can enforce that law.
Mayor Pete Buttplug postures as a churchgoing married guy no different than you or me, except that he’s gay. He even said that he and his “husband” plan to have the baby. How will you do that, Cupcake? Adopt? Hire a surrogate? One-half of the equipment needed for making a baby is missing in your “marriage.”
The Soviets decriminalized homosexuality in 1917, but recriminalized it in 1933. The official culture of the Soviet Union in general became more socially conservative and remained so even in the 1980s, when the Commies were still tough on gays, lesbians and junkies. The reason for this was that the Commies emphasized the common good over individual happiness.
At this stage of the societal game – it’s probably impossible to enforce any of it thru legal means.
It doesn’t mean though that we can’t – on a more personal basis – call them out on their bullshit.
For some reason women seem enthralled by the gays. There’s an awful lot of the media that really pushes the idea of women and gay men being “buddies”. And from what I’ve seen – that carries thru into real life as well.
My wife knows a number of gay men. Over the years – simply by pointing out their bullshit – I’ve been able to get her to recognize that they are a bunch of liars – as well as point out the insanity of some of the things they say. In the case of the men she knows – every…….. single……….. one of them – was married to a women before – had kids with her – and then left her for gaydom.
Women hate this shit. But the culture tells them that gay men are supposed to be great. Start pointing out their (the gay men’s that is) – horseshit – and all of the attraction starts to fade away.
Women talk too – so they tell their friends.
I’ve found that pointing out the insanity of the “normal” claim by gays – is one of the more effective arguments to crowbar’ing some sanity into those who are enthralled with the homos.
You’re right. At this point, nothing legally can be done, only social disapproval. Popular culture idealizes gays while in the real world they are generally a bunch of self-indulgent lowlife liars. Red pill people to the reality of believing what they witness with their eyes and not watch they watch on tv and the movies.
Isn’t this lovely. Show this to your wife:
https://caldronpool.com/lgbtq-activist-transforming-schools-admits-were-training-school-teachers-to-completely-smash-heteronormativity/amp/?fbclid=IwAR2RtxzZTG_3uGq_NZ-GxYg08Ld5qmNnr7l0bpLAjBYGLnIQE7M-ukCwpxg
The Soviet Union and modern America are propaganda states. These always feature certain glorified human ideals that are constantly on display in public spaces. We have our jumbotrons full of smart, hip, well-adjusted, “normal” gays that are strangely divergent from the actual ones we meet in real life. The Soviets had their robust and heroic workers and peasants proudly marching into the glorious Future that were a bit different from the drunken, miserable factory and farm hands known to the average Russian.
“The Christians in my experience – all approach the homosexuality question as if these people can be saved. And they seem to utterly refuse to take what the homos say – and use it against them.”
The problem isn’t that they try to save a sinner, its that they forget the verse about shaking the dust ftom your sandals if they don’t listen.
You can’t force someone to change, they must to change themselves.
Correct. And that may be part of the problem that perplexes our esteemed blog host. Honest to God real Christians fly below the radar as a matter of course. Nobody notices the well adjusted families and communities – why should they? They are never a problem and therefore do not attract attention. They’re courteous and polite as a part of their culture and will go to lengths to avoid confrontation. Anger and rage are quick tickets to sin. They create good communities for themselves, and unlike other religous groups – engage with others to help out.
There are megatons of raw power in that demographic that the progs and leftists can’t use. Cucks like French and the NRO gang can’t either. The first guy that comes along and sees that demographic and succeeds in hitching his wagon to it – stands to gain some very valuable allies.
I am not surprised at all that our host realizes this. He may need to search his soul and tread carefully though: Real Christians will not be used by the Dissident Right, Conservative Inc, or anyone else. They will partner with the right players, but only if their morals, ethics and interests are respected. From what I am seeing here there may well indeed be a good fit between the dissident and the honest Christian – but care will have to be taken to maintain that relationship on good terms.
John Smith, no one speaks of grace any more. Grace is a hidden virtue in our culture. It is still out there, demonstrated every day. But it is a quiet thing. It is not particularly interested in hitching its wagon to anything, it is simply doing and saying the right things at the right moments, as one would expect from good people.
John Smith: ” They’re courteous and polite as a part of their culture and will go to lengths to avoid confrontation.”
Sorry, but that is not enough any longer, if it ever was. Merely quietly living a decent life and hoping you’ll get eaten last. Those who don’t see just how bad it is out there are those who WON’T see. No, I’m not endorsing street theatre, certainly not when the force of the state and apparatus of muh law are arrayed against us. But this purported division between being a Christian and recognizing the reality (and godliness) of HBD and protecting/promoting one’s own must end. The now defunct website Faith and Heritage explored and biblically explained the issue far better than I can. Their archives are all there and well worth anyone’s reading.
Well said. As a Christian HBD realist, I wish to treat others with respect and compassion, but also cannot ignore statistical correlations. As Derb has pointed out, in real life you have to play the probabilities. I do not want violence, but also see the violence done to us and do not wish to knuckle under. I will always vote dissident and can embrace fighters with personal moral failings, but to go to the next level is a constant balancing act. Though I am amazed at how far I have moved in the last 10 years.
The Founders were white Christians, who assumed they were founding a white Christian country.
They were British Christians who founded a British Christian country. Why is that so hard to say?
So yeah, I guess that makes them white Christians founding a white Christian country.
Got it! Thanks.
“White” is a derogatory term, like “brown”, “yellow” or “black”.
Really? I had no idea. I guess I’ll have to start feeling bad about myself. Bummer.
>>>“White” is a derogatory term, like “brown”, “yellow” or “black”.<<<
I prefer the term “Heritage Americans” to describe ourselves. It means the same thing without the baggage.
‘Heritage Americans’ is good messaging for the proselytizing cause but it’s not *really* what ethnonationalists are seeking because ‘Heritage Americans’ includes Blacks, Indians, mestizos, etc. All of these people were within the confines of what became the USA when it was founded.
Thank goodness for the energy and leadership of all those blacks, Indians and mestizos “within the confines of what became the USA”! They were so important to the Founding Fathers and the birth of the nation they created. (/sarc)
Gay
That went over well…
Now, the only reason you guys don’t consider “white” a racial slur, is because, for some incomprehensible reason, you bigots don’t think that being white is a bad thing, but “white” is most definitely meant to be a derogatory label by its authors. There’s a reason they insist we call blacks “African-American” and browns “Latinos”.
Felix, good point. I don’t consider any of the race terms such as Black, Brown, White bigoted or insulting or racist. Hell, I’m used to hearing such from minority advocates quite often here. I’ll keep your comment in the back of my mind for future reference—not that I need more things to take offense to. 😉
I don’t consider any of the race terms such as Black, Brown, White bigoted or insulting or racist.
That’s because you’re white – top of the evolutionary stack – so you don’t have psychological issues with your skin color. I bet you don’t have a nervous breakdown either if somebody calls you a cracker.
No racial slur against whites carries any real sting because we are so unbelievably awesome, and it enrages them that they can throw any label at us, and we still don’t give a frack. Nothing worse than having your racial insults met with calm, slightly amused condescension.
But yes, next time some poc calls you white, call them brown in return.
Yup Felix, not breaking down and melting when you get called something is simply an exercise in white privilege. See how unfair our world is? I luvs me my white privilege.
I luvs me my white privilege.
I sometime buy a packet of “skin color” band-aids, just to put one on my arm and watch it blend seamlessly with my lily-white skin. I’m like “Mmmh! White privilege confirmed!”
After moving to San Antonio, Texas in ’65 I learned to use the term “anglo” to refer to those of us not of Hispanic heritage. I also learned that I was a “bolillo” (white bread – from a small bread pastry similar to a dinner roll) – so anglo works for me even though my last confirmed ancestor from England was almost 3 centuries past and my most recent ancestors were of Scandinavian descent).
For the record, labels can only be “derogatory” if one takes umbrage at them. I was raised with the principle of “Sticks and stones may break my bones; but words can never hurt me.” Only if I have a chip on my shoulder can ANY word or words be “fighting words”.
They were British Protestants.
No, they were not founding a “British Christian country”. They were breaking away from Britain and founding an American Christian country. Why is that so hard to say?
But they weren’t Americans until they broke free, were they? Before that date, they were Limey as all heck. Logically, Americans can’t have created America.
LOL, there were a lot of Germanic background folks here as well. Truly as Anglo a country as ever existed!!
Actually, nothing was founded. Just England expanded a little bit. Later came the independence but US was until recently just one big English county. There is also some inhabited islands next to UK. When Englishmen move there to live, this is not some nation of immigrants.
Sure, most of the founding fathers were Brits and Protestants. Catholics did play a role too. Problem is you limit yourself to that demographic and you get 2 problems.
1. Your numbers will be a tiny fraction of what you need.
2. How many British Protestants today are capable of doing what the founding fathers did?
White Christianity gives us a broader base without compromising ourselves on something essential. I am a European mutt and a Catholic. This is my home. I know of no other. Given the history of America and how various European countries colonized this land, that gives me the right to call myself an American.
1. Your numbers will be a tiny fraction of what you need.
What do you need? Democracies work best in small units; I figure 5-5½ million is the perfect size for a state. (Not that I’m prejudiced in that regard.)
And yes, I’m aware that America was populated by a range of different Europeans, but the founding of the nation was a very British affair.
My point about objecting to the label “white” is that it’s generic, anodyne. “Heritage American” or “European American” is a much more powerful carrier of identity. “British”, or “Irish” or “German” American even more so.
You should demand that the next census survey contains options for Americans of every European ethnic group, don’t accede to just being called “white”. (Incidentally, this would allow you to play the minority card at the drop of a hat.)
I realize this is a hard sell in America – after all, you became Americans because you didn’t want to be European. But reaching back across the breach with the Old World, would give your children ownership to a treasure trove of identity and culture. Scandinavia is the least Latinised region of Europe, but I still consider the people of Rome and Athens my spiritual progenitors, and it doesn’t take away from my Scandinavian heritage, it adds to it.
Well said Felix. I think part of the unease is due to the fact that European solidarity is just beginning in the USA, and is coalescing under “white” auspices. “White” also includes more periphery white groups wgo are not necessarily Euro: white appearing, multi-generational American Latinos, Lebanese, etc. I agree that Euro-american is a much more powerful marker (and probably more accurate. “White” Latinos would do well to pivot toward their Euro heritage, and ME Christians have a cultural/spiritual connection with Europe), but many are loathe to counter-signal it. They find strength in owning the slur.
“White” Latinos would do well to pivot toward their Euro heritage
I believe they already do that, at least until they come to America and discover the wonders of victimhood. Brazil, I’m confidently told by some guy on the internet, has a semi-formalized racial hierarchy that would make antebellum planters dizzy with its complexity. You can forget about the one-drop rule, they have one-drop rules, three-drop rules, seventeen-drop rules, they have race down to a mathematical science.
We never had the chance to become Americans, a branch of the European Caucasoids. All stocks and regions were shoehorned into a one size fits all constitution. Had we been left to our natural inclination and preferences we probably would have formed regional nations or maybe a sort of Swiss confederation among those regions.
Despite the forced sameness of the constitution we managed to build a nation with different regional sensibilities.
This was destroyed by the Civil War and the mercantilism orchestrated government (MOG) that followed. The unnecessary western catastrophe of 1914-1945 completed the sapping of vitality of all western peoples. They were eager and open to being flogged and hustled. MOG got ZOG’ed and here we are. Very little of the social structure of the past 2 or 3 centuries is worth preserving. Nature has some housecleaning to perform.
Sohrab lost the debate, but French was postulating from fantasy land so egregiously that it is hard to see anyone walking out with a better opinion of either.
Not much point overall, as these academic dock-waving contests only appeal to 0.01 percent of the population , and it is not like the right has any power in academia to propagate the winners ideology.
They were bookends: articulating the acceptable boundaries of civilized debate. That’s all there is now. It’s why so many people can’t find a political home. The Uniparty agrees on most things: Endless War; Open Borders: and Debt Slavery.
Patriot Prayer in Portland.
But the Public Square or space is the shell game. A generation ago they got rid of Obscenity, Pornography, and Blasphemy laws in the name of free speech. Now they wan’t to censor “Hate Speech” which means things like “Its okay to be white” or quoting the Bible.
One big problem with Patriot Prayer is they need to pick a side. Either “patriot” or “prayer” but not both. The fact that their leader is not even an American makes the “patriot” part seem contrived. Then you have their tactics, which are all about causing a scene with Antifa. Street theater is always about the theater, rather than the street. If they want to bring people into their faith, their focus should be on recruiting and their public expression should be aimed toward that, rather than costumed warfare with college lesbians.
I know you frown on fighting in the streets, yet I have always wondered whether Patriot Prayer, civnat as they come, isnt a pathway for some of the normies to find us. It must be awfully frustrating to live in a city where lawless imbeciles are allowed and encouraged by leftist pols to disrupt the normies basic tasks like getting to work or picking up kids from school. And i cannot be the only one who would love to vacay in Portland during one of these antifa riots to practice kickboxing. Now most folks aren’t going to practice kickboxing, yet will spectate. And as spectators of the chaos, particularly the nonfeasance of the Popo, eventually turn against the regime that protects and allows the chaos. My point is antifa creates incentives and PP a pathway for normies to begin the Hajj to reality. Of course, i could be full of shite and just a big fan of kickboxing!
If you want to “practice kickboxing,” be prepared to say hello to your new cell mate, James Fields.
Yea. The thought of being subjected to the “justice” of white weakling or anti-white minority prosecutors has kept me from vacationing in Portland.
The interesting thing is, six years ago this fall, the feds in Seattle were busy ripping apart the anarchists in Portland with a series of grand juries chasing down the perpetrators of their once-unpopular May Day chaos downtown.
They hauled a young woman, Leah-Lynne Plante, up to Seattle from Portland and then tossed her into jail when she refused to testify before the grand jury. Another grand jury “resister” did a lot of time, but Plante couldn’t take it, walked out — who knows what she did or didn’t say — and immediately was snitchjacketed. She disappeared off the map after that.
Seems like a different world now.
If you won’t risk death, jail, hardship and also kill, imprison or afflict suffering for your beliefs than they are not beliefs.
They’re pretensions.
If you’re main concern is staying out of jail avoid “dissident” politics.
These gay-ops in Portland are the least of their problems. They have homeless drug addicts running around committing crimes and the police aren’t allowed to enforce the law.
The progressives in charge of Portland are turning it into a shit-hole, quite literally.
They are in complete denial about it too. Same thing in Seattle too.
At this point I’m just focused on escaping from here. I think Portland is beyond hope. The only good thing about it is that, along with San Francisco, it showcases what happens when you put hipster Leftists in charge of a place.
As someone still stuck in Portland I can tell you I always feel Portland is more of a place to take a vacation from rather than to. Then again I cannot think of a place, even NYC, where just kicking a random ass would be more likely to be kicking a Leftist ass.
Basically they frown on fighting anywhere, anytime over anything.
Not fighting makes you a cuck.
Accepting we’re at war makes you a Fed. For all the blabber about cuckservatives they aren’t saying both we’re facing genocide BUT ABOVE ALL NO FIGHTING.
Who’s the cuck?
In fact what’s lower than cuck?
ZMan wrote, “One big problem with Patriot Prayer is they need to pick a side. Either ‘patriot’ or ‘prayer’ but not both.”
Why, good sir, need they “pick a side”? Can one not, at the same time, be both a Patriot AND a practicing Christian? Why must it be an “either or” proposition?
Please note that I am NOT trying to argue but to understand. My understanding of how the universe operates does not make the two mutually exclusive.
Well, “The Founders were white Christians, who assumed they were founding a white Christian country.” to quote Zman so I would assume if they were both patriotic and Christian so can we.
I seem to recall some guy saying, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”
Theocracy fuses those two masters, doesn’t it? An “Israel for Europeans” still sounds like a good idea to me. Actually, I think we used to have an Israel for Europeans; we called it Europe, and then there was a smaller version called the U.S.A. Both may be toast now.
A Christian theocracy would not be ‘nationalist’ but imperialist (in the sense of ruling over multiple different peoples). The Catholic Church’s domination of Europe is an example of a theocracy ruling over different ‘nations’ (races). In a sense, the opportunities for ‘patriotism’ (a love of one’s patria) is entirely subsumed under the religious imperative. The nation-state was an alternative to the Catholic empire, not a function of it.
Europeans already have “an Israel,” it’s called Europe!
Funny you should mention that, Z-man. I seem to recall some guy in the new testament, I think, who said something like his kingdom was not of this world and render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. So one can be part of both religion and nation. And I’m not any sort of expert on the bible but even I can see the flaw in your argument.
Spiritual matters are transcendent and personal and are not strongly linked to the material world except as guides in matters of morality and choice. Dump Christianity in particular and religion in general takes away a higher power than man that establishes certain moral truths. All that remains is morality that man himself creates which can be altered or abolished at his own whims or needs. The essence of post-modernism. That man creates his own morality, man becomes himself god. Then if man is his own god, he can create his own heaven on earth. This is the essence of progressivism. Cultural Christianity, at least, is necessary and useful even to the hereditary strong-man aristocrats of yesteryear.
Something that libertarian and objectivist apostates firmly and solely rooted in pure materialism have trouble understanding.
Christ also asked if those who were to follow him were prepared to hate their mothers and fathers. He of course was speaking symbolically, in short, were they prepared to despise the old ways and traditions to seek truth.
If Zman’s core belief is that we whites cannot rescue the United States from it’s current course then something new for us must be built. Therefor his statement about picking a side “patriot or prayer” and referencing Christ’s discussion serving two masters is consistent with his argument.
I don’t wish to misrepresent our esteemed host, that is my perception of his argument gleaned from reading and listening to him. If I am wrong then mea culpa.
Don’t know if his approach is correct or not, but if I surmise his belief on this accurately then his argument that one cannot be a patriot and a Christian is at least consistent.
ZMan, it was the Carpenter’s Son who made that observation but the context would not support your interpretation. Cornelius was a Centurion (roughly equivalent to a company commander in the Army or Marines and thus an O-3 “Captain”) but when he and his family were converted by (a very reluctant) Apostle Peter, he was not required to resign his commission and leave the Army. The dichotomy in the passage you referenced was between serving The Creator or MONEY (personified by the false god Mammon). Were your interpretation valid, a person could not be a Christian and hold down a job. Unfortunately for that interpretation, through the Apostle Paul we are command that in the area of charity, “He who does not work shall not eat.” (This was in reference to people capable of work but chose not to do.) Apparently, The Creator is not a big fan of welfare for people who are able to work because immediately after the above Paul wrote, “[W]e hear that some of you are living in laziness, refusing to work, and wasting your time in gossiping. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ we appeal to such people — we command them — to quiet down, get to work, and earn their own living.” Other passages by other writers indicate that The Creator thinks it is OK to work for a living and that the one who works is worthy of their wages.
>Can one not, at the same time, be both a Patriot AND a practicing Christian?
In theory? Yes.
In practice? No, not if being a Christian means never casting stones but instead collaborating with obvious evil by always giving Shlomo whatever the fvck he wants because Schindler’s List said so.
Multi-culti kumbaya ghey friendly dual-loyalist-worshipping modern Christianity isn’t compatible with patriotism. Muscular ethno-chauvinistic Christianity isn’t compatible with CivNat patriotism. Patriot Prayer blends too many incompatible elements of both Holocaustianity and Civic Nationalism.
No, you can’t. Progressivism is a shitty religion and it will brook no others. Post-America’s religion is progressivism, and as such one can either be a ‘patriot’ for a country that no loner exists – a losing proposition – or can embrace an actual faith and thereby reject post-America.
Historically this country was founded by Christian men for Christian men and Christian men fought died over the centuries for our country.
So the patriotism and Christianity can mix.
That said Patriot Prayer is going about things all wrong. Their leadership is nothing short of idiotic. They are like the DR was when Spencer and his clown posse ran the show.
Now the DR isn’t much better. To this day no one knows what it stands for, opposes, what it goals are, etc.It’s so bad it would be impossible to even put together a 4 page pamphlet for recruiting new members.
Patriot Prayer is an organization. With all the infighting, infiltration, etc., that running such an organization in the present day of mass surveillance brings with it.
I think you’re spot on with the attractiveness of a militant Christianity. The ‘Deus Vult’ memes reflect this. I personally have never been a christian, but if a crusade-like movement started up? For now I don’t see any fight left in Christianity and that’s not attractive for a male wanting to fight for his people. For now I’ll larp as a lonely neopagan in sillycon valley.