web analytics

Greg Johnson on Christianity

The following are responses of Greg Johnson to Christian sympathizers at Occidental Dissent right after the Breivik incident (slightly edited):


Before you draw conclusions about the usefulness of Christianity as a vehicle for White racial preservation, you need to read the Breivik manifesto.

First, in the name of Christian Universalism, for instance, he advocates treating all Christians as Europeans, no matter what their race, and even bringing non-White Christians into his Templar Crusade.

Basically, Breivik’s concern for preserving Nordics is trumped by his Christian universalism. If all the Muslims in Norway converted to Christianity, he would have no objection to them.

Second, in the name of Christian universalism, Breivik envisions crusades into the Middle East to help the local Middle Eastern Christians. So Europeans will spill their blood to help the genetic first cousins to Europe’s Muslim invaders, so long as the beneficiaries are Christians.

This is the logic of Christian universalism at work. Blood is particular. But Christianity is universal. Blood is natural. But Christianity aims higher than nature. Thus Christian brotherhood always trumps and undermines blood brotherhood.


It is possible to hold conflicting values without problems as long as they are merely in one’s mind, as abstractions never tested in the real world. The problems emerge when you try to live by them, then they actually do come into conflict, and you actually do have to decide which value trumps which.

Say that you are a devout Christian, and your daughter wants to marry a devout Black Nigerian Christian. You now have a conflict between blood-based values and Christian universal values.

Which is more important to you: maintaining genetic distinctness or honoring the universal community of the church? If a Black man is worthy of sharing heaven with you, through accepting Jesus Christ as his savior, then why should he not be worthy of sharing the same neighborhood with you, the same public transportation, the same church, the same water fountain—or holy wedlock with your sister? Or do you think that there will be Jim Crow in heaven?


Christianity will not be dead until its secular offspring, liberal universalism, is dead as well. But you know that, don’t you?

Christian fanatics are precisely the ones who believe that blood differences don’t matter. One can work with lukewarm or confused Christians, or people who are racists first and Christians second. But you can’t work with real Christians, because they take their supernatural universalism seriously, which pits them against blood brotherhood wherever and whenever it conflicts with the supernatural brotherhood in Christ which is the Church.

Judaism is an ethnocentric religion. Racism is just a form of ethnocentrism. Christianity is a universalistic religion. Paul, who is part of the Bible and therefore part of Christianity, makes it clear that the differences of blood and nation make no difference once one enters into the universal brotherhood of the Church. Christianity is therefore anti-ethnocentric, anti-xenophobic, and anti-racist—even if “racism” was not a word at the time.

This means that all kinds of men can share heaven. Again, if a black Christian is good enough to share heaven with you, on what grounds [he can’t] enter holy matrimony, one of the sacraments of the church, with your daughter?

Kievsky (again),

Good luck to you. There is nothing we need more than a Racial Reformation of the Church, and only practicing Christians can provide it.

The Churches have always been willing to compromise with the Zeitgeist because ultimately their kingdom is not of this world. Once a racialist Zeitgeist re-emerges, we will hear less and less about Christian anti-racism.

But if we get that genie back in the bottle, we will always have to be eternally vigilant, lest it escape again. Because Christian universalism is, in fact, opposed to racialism and thus will always pose a danger.

Update of 3 May 2012:

Johnson has now commented at The Occidental Observer:

[Christianity] did undermine racial exclusivity for nearly 2,000 years. Racial and subracial differences were no bar to marriage, as long as both parties were Christian. Christianity spread in the racially and culturally mixed seaports around the Mediterranean, to the lowest strata of society, which included slaves and freedmen of all races. Of course we do not have records of these people’s marriages, but surely the church blessed many miscegenating matches from the very beginning.

We have better records from later times, when Christianity was the dominant religion of Europe. Here are just a couple of random examples. In the 8th century, the Byzantine Emperor Constantine the V married Irene of Khazaria, a daughter of the Khazar Khagan. Their son, Leo IV, also called Leo the Khazar, ruled the empire from 775 to 780. But Constantine himself was no Greek or Roman. His family were from Syria, but they married into the Byzantine ruling class. Because of Christianity, the Byzantine Empire had lost its ethnically Roman and Greek character by the early 8th century, taking on instead a heavily near-Eastern (Armenian and Syrian ethnic composition). The later Phyrigian and Macedonian dynasties were actually Armenian, and they married their sons and daughters to the Frankish and Russian aristocracies. Indeed, Grand Duke Vladimir of Kiev Christianized himself and the Rus in order to marry Anna, the daughter of Romanos II, in the late 10th century.

Race mixing has, of course, increased with the greater mobility of populations. But wherever Christians of different races and subraces existed together in the past, the Church has been willing to bless their matches.

Jews, of course, are not Europeans, yet the Church has blessed marriages between Jewish converts to Christianity and European Christians, and these sorts of matches must have been quite common in the early years of the Church.

And of course the Crusades, in which Europe spilled the blood of generations of its finest and fairest Frankish nobles for the freedom of Near Eastern Christians, could hardly be said to be in the genetic interests of Europeans.

Update of 27 March 2013:

Johnson has now commented at Counter-Currents:

Where are the WN Christians in your little scenario? Apparently they have no agency whatsoever. The Left has conquered the churches, and New Right pagans argue that this is no accident on tiny websites and in the pages of low-circulation books and magazines. But where are the pro-White Christians?

Oh, wait, they are here, trying to shut down anti-Christian discourse on the Right. Because that is what you are saying: shut up; stop agreeing with the Left that Christianity is a universalistic, egalitarian, individualistic religion. Which it is.

Again, I have to ask: show me evidence that you are actively combatting anti-white hate in the churches and I will take you seriously as a white advocate rather than merely a christian apologist.

As for the either/or: that comes from the Bible. Yahweh is the only god, and all the others are false. Christianity actively wiped out paganism. Those Christians who incorporated elements of paganism killed it before they ate it.

I regard Christianity as part of my cultural heritage too. But I don’t regard it as true. I try to focus on the things the Christians created, rather than the things they destoyed. And I look at Christian art as merely the ideological channel through which white genius was forced for a long time to flow.

Update of 29 May 2013:

Johnson has now commented at Occidental Dissent:

Here’s my breakdown of the ultimate causes of our plight:

1. Whites are prone to universalism: the idea that there is one humanity and one moral law that transcends differences of race and culture. This tendency is pre-christian. One finds it in the Ancient Greek philosophical schools, and Stoicism is perhaps the most striking expression of it. Whether this plight is genetic in any meaningful sense or not is an open question. I hope it is not genetic, because we don’t have time to change our gene pool to fight it.

2. Christianity, which is a universalistic religion grafted on the trunk of Jewish tribalism, and infected with Jewish fanaticism and intolerance, came to dominate the West, which pretty much explains why whites are open to everyone, but Jews are somehow more equal than everyone else.

Of course, Christians who take the New Testament seriously and who remember the early history of the Church, made a distinction between the old holy Jews and new, unholy Jews who crucified and reject Christ, and imposed legal restrictions on the latter that lasted until the Enlightenment. (That distinction is lost on today’s mouth-breathing Christian Zionists.)

3. Enlightenment liberalism pretty much secularizes Christan axiology, and since it discarded Christianity, it discarded Church-based impediments to Jewish emancipation, opening the doors to Jewish hegemony. To secular liberals, however, Jews (and blacks) are more equal than others because they believe that they suffered from intolerance to unique degrees.

Any group that practices rigorous ingroup nepotism in a liberal society while demanding that the rest of the society treat them with tolerance and fairness has a built in advantage that will cause them to accrue power and wealth at the expense of the rest of the society. South Asians and East Asians in the US are now using the same techniques, with similar results.

16 replies on “Greg Johnson on Christianity”

I’d take 1 Christian Breivik over 100,000 atheist Greg Johnsons any day.

This is not an attack on Johnson either. It is just a fact.

Breivik’s vision of Europe was that minorities of any type would only be less than 2% of the population at any given time (enforced by law and force) so Johnsons claim that Breivik didn’t care about race and wouldn’t care about immigration as long as it was Christian is baseless and full of shit. He does claim that Muslim immigration is the worse because it is not Christian which is true. Please read his book again.

Page 1162 of Breiviks book:

“No Nordic country should ever try to absorb more than 2% of non-European immigrants per generation”

Then Johnson is right. If Breivik (and other counter-jihadists) were racially conscious he would have said 0%. Even a 2% minority of non-whites would ruin your gene pool with enough time (look at what happened to Latin America after the Amerindians were apparently defeated).

That which is called christianity in the world today, is not. It’s another false religious face of jewry. The real ones are few and far between and don’t go around tooting their own horn. They live their lives in quiet simplicity and are the True ones…

But even what’s considered true Christianity, say the one that the Spaniards wrought to the Americas in the sixteenth century, is responsible for the mestization that bastardized the gene pool of the Iberian whites almost throughout the whole continent.

Do you mean that Catholic Spain of half a millennium ago was not “truly Christian”? Surely this is a matter of theological opinion, not historical fact.

Some Christians even go so far as to consider whites as the biblical jews in order to justify white racialism. Unfortunately lost on them is how revealing it is that they must consider themselves jews to find biblical support for the preservation of their race.

Breivik was an atheist by the way.

Anyway, fuck Jesus. The 21st century is not calling for superstitious luddites. These people are a threat to advanced civilization.

Scientific rationality is the way of the future. There’s no gods or fairies to save you. Wise up White man!

Scientific rationality has failed miserably. You know, I used to be an avid reader of the literature of the organizations that Paul Kurtz—America’s leading secular humanist and defender of scientific rationality—founded. And recently I’ve seen him photographed among secular negroes! Pics that remind me very strongly what Christian missionaries do in Africa.

Greg Johnson:

“But if we get that genie back in the bottle, we will always have to be eternally vigilant, lest it escape again. Because Christian universalism is, in fact, opposed to racialism and thus will always pose a danger.”

Christianity is going to disappear, because the New Testament has now been proven to be a literary fraud perpetrated by the Roman government (Caesar’s Messiah). As Nietzsche suspected, it was designed to be a slave religion, and soon the word will get out, first to the intelligentsia and then to the masses.

Since liberalism is the gutless, secular fossil of Christianity, it is reasonable to expect that it won’t last much longer, either, since it is dependent on Christianity by existing within a predominantly Christian society, in the same way that the secular Jewish ethos is dependent upon the society of Jewish religion. To put it another way: The Christian society is a wellspring of which liberalism is a downstream effect, just as the society of Jewish religion is a wellspring of which the secular jews are an effect. When the wellspring fails, the flow further downstream ceases.

What whites now need is a comprehensive mythos, to go with their superlative, world-conquering logos; a mythos that is now absent due to the near extinction of Christianity (which was a slave religion, anyway).

The trouble with any mythos is its provenance: It helps if its origins are obscured by time, so that its authority is obscured. So, the Muslims burned all alternative versions of the Koran, and the Christians did something similar around the time of the Council of Nicea, so there is only one “word of God,” as one would expect. For other people in other places, the mists of prehistory were sufficient obscurity, so one simply accepted the folklore that was handed down, allegedly from some patriarch such as Abraham, Confucius, or the Sky Father of the Aryans.

A people must have a mythos. Without it, they cannot pull in the same direction, work as a team, maintain their bearings. Without it, they disappear from history, overrun by people who do have a mythos.

By the way, scientific rationalism is universalist, and therefore unsuited to our prurpose.

I like Dual Seedline Christian Identity, although it is weakened by its origins in the Bible, and its recent origin.

I like National Socialism better, since it bypasses the Bible: it is a mythos that it combines mild socialism with race consciousness. It is therefore consistent with the compassionate tendency of white people, while making clear that “kindness” is cognate with “kin.”

Can we do better, in forging a mythos?

NS is enough. See my translations of Manu Rodríguez in this blog. (And by the way I don’t buy what Atwill says in Caesar’s messiah—see also the articles by Joseph Hoffmann in this site.)


Mythos defines the identity of a people; it tells them who they are. That’s what enables them to function coherently in the world as a people, and thus to pull in the same direction, maintain their bearings, etc.

I left out a couple of important examples of mythoi:

The classical Greeks had The Illiad and The Odyssey, by which their (oral) balladeers would declaim the heroic nature of the listeners’ forebears.

The Freemasons have a mythos, wherein their tradition supposedly extends back into antiquity.

The Freemasons’ notorious nepotism (which is why whites so often join in order to advance their businesses and careers), like that of the Jews, is a big reason for their success.

Speaking of Freemasons:

I’m part way through Breivik’s book.Thanks to the articles on this website, I took the time to look into the man’s narrative. I suspect that his evident interest in Freemasonry and The Crusaders was motivated by exactly what I’m talking about here: the need for a mythos as the basis of a social movement.

Comments are closed.