Christianity turns the good soft things—love, mercy, forgivenness—into weapons of terror.
There is more residual White racial consciousness in Dixie today than the Federal Republic of Germany.
Fascinating quotations from an exchange between Alex Linder and Hunter Wallace, and from a chapter in Arthur Kemp’s history of the white race, in my two appendices to WDH—both about Christianity.
32 replies on “Christianity under fire”
No matter how anti-Christian our enemies get, Christianity is the main cause of our decline.
I personally am so fucking tired of debating the points. This debate has been going on for decades while Linder’s atheist friends keep getting more and more liberal with each passing year.
When the hell are these anti-Christian fuckers in the North going to start embracing racialism, when Im fucking dead?
Hunter is right on this point, these people are getting worse and worse and none of them are Christians. Linder is always saying that Christianity is losing power and yet we are becoming less and less racial as the years go by. Somehow it should be the opposite.
This whole debate is BS. It always has been. I’m sick of sitting around waiting for these great anti-Christian heros to lead us to racial victory.
I’ll take the great “Christian” Kings of our past any day of the week over these assholes.
Good points there Hawke. I’m not sure why Chechar would cast his vote so early on in the game. There’s every chance that any real racial group that comes about in the future… and by real, I mean more than a few fringe crazies and nihilists, will have a strong Christian backing.
By throwing yourself in with the Linders, Odinites, homo-elites, Pierce-ites, etc you might possibly be barred from these groups. Take note of the French catholics currently smacking down the LGBT groups in a rally. You see that families, clans, traditional groups are far more potent in a real war (not Internet wars).
Seriously, have a look at the current WN army… nothing but individual reactionaries who hate each other as much as the enemy.
You are not even addressing the main issue: is Christianity involved in the current paradigm? See the second article of this list.
I was an Evangelical Christian for more than a decade. I graduated from a missionary training college. I was a preacher. I am now an atheist; and the survival, expansion, and advancement of my White Race is the most important thing in my life. I know Christianity is psychologically killing my White Race with its Biblical morality. I KNOW it! Anybody who has studied the New Testament will know that a true follower of Christ (not a king/ruler who is only Christian in name) will NEVER be able to take part in a revolutionary war to establish a White homeland.
“We must settle accounts with this Christianity, this greatest of plagues that could have happened to us in our history, which has weakened us in every conflict.” – Heinrich Himmler
@Hawke,@Roger, yes, I see these virulent anti-Christians as very similar to the truthers, completely immune to factual argument. I hasten to point out that our host is not among the virulent ones.
I have from time to time pointed out that it was a white race with strict Christian values which came to dominate the planet, that is to them an odd coincidence. I have pointed out that Western decline coincides with the decline of Christianity in the West, that does not give them any pause. I have pointed out that they hold the same opinion as the jews do, right down to the victimology; in their particular conspiracy theory the poor innocent pagan tribes were victimized by murdering Christians, just like the poor innocent jews were. Apparently survival of the fittest applies only to races, when it comes to religions the loser deserves the praise and the winner is the beast.
You are also correct when you point out that such sentiments are highly counterproductive, a virulently anti-Christian ideology can never produce a popular movement but will only guarantee perpetual fringe status. In my view much of the popularity of these views comes from the desire to be a radical among radicals, and what better way to do so than by being a white nationalist who attacks the religion of the vast majority of white people.
I see the positive contributions of Christianity, as you saw in my review of the MacDonald book. Still you say:
You are the one who is immune to argument. What you said has been answered in my list “The Christian problem encompasses the Jewish problem”; start with the second article as I pointed above.
(And I am not a truther btw.)
@Chechar,, yes, you may recall that I excluded you, “I hasten to point out that our host is not among the virulent ones.”
As to your “You are the one who is immune to argument,” I have yet to see a factual argument presented by the anti-Christians, the historical record is routinely ignored because it disproves the theory. If Christianity were the problem and the anti-Christian theory were correct the decline of Christianity in the West would have produced a strengthening of Western civilization and in fact the opposite has occurred. This inconvenient truth is always met with vague conclusions rather than any attempt to prove via historical fact that we have benefited in the slightest by the decline in Western Christianity because we obviously have not benefited in the slightest by it.
I will again offer that challenge, show me how the historical record supports the theory that Christianity is the problem. You will not be able to do so because the historical record demonstrates that strident Christianity has been the most effective white defense against the jews.
As a final thought I will mention that I understand how a reasonable man might view Christianity as mere superstition, much jew tribal myth has been retained from the OT which should have in my view been discarded and there is plenty of room for reasoned disagreement regarding the details of doctrine. As before, I do not take your opposing views personally and I enjoy debating the subject with you.
Sorry: I didn’t get you were referring to me with this phrase.
I don’t believe that Christianity is the cause for our woes. Its role has been ambivalent (cf. the linked article by Con Swede above and my review of MacDonald’s second trilogy book). If I believed that Christianity is the single cause, it would make me a “monocausalist”. And if you visit the WN blogosphere you already know that I have vehently opposed “monocausalism”.
My hypothesis is multicausal. This is what I’ve written elsewhere:
Source: here.
Yes you are correct that history makes fools of these people. The idea that Christianity is a dying star also makes me laugh. There was a time in the West, circa 500 AD where Christianity was down to nothing in Rome. It was a ghost town, with a few priests, against hordes of pagan tribes… you see, beyond all the ‘quoting’ debates, Christianity’s advantage is that it’s the most beautiful idea/narrative. ie. an objective truth, an immortal soul, the judgement of man according to his deeds, the singular manifestation of all power as a human being.
Now many who attack, do so because of a prior bitter experience, or exposure to certain ‘bible-bashers’ which I can understand… but unless someone can show a better metaphysical reality, then they are simply doing the jews work I’m afraid.
It is dying. This is what I have just posted at VNN forum addressing Brad Griffin:
Brad, I understand that these comments of yours are not addressed to me. But let me say that I am neither a pagan nor an atheist. Provisionally I would define myself as a non-theist apostate from the Catholic faith. (The whys of my apostasy are too complex for a single post.)
Unlike Dawkins and Hitchens, whose liberal anti-religiosity is superficial and often silly (they are totally blind about, say, the heights reached in the Sanctum of Beethoven’s Missa Solemnis), I can see the great contributions of the Church to defend the race. As you probably know, my field of expertise used to be child abuse studies. I recognize the labor of the Church against the infanticide of white babies that plagued the later stages of the Greco-Roman world. Also, I agree with MacDonald’s second book of his trilogy that the Church’s collectivism played a pivotal role as a defense mechanism erected against the subversion of the Jews.
It is true also that without a myth that galvanizes the white psyche, whites tend to consumption, hedonism and runaway degeneracy (of which the so-called gay movement is part). However, now that Christianity is dying, now that the red giant has exhausted its nuclear core and has expanded thousandfold into secular liberalism, it is time to think of the paradigm in the making that will occupy the place of Christianity.
The new star is in its primordial stage. Like a tiny gaseous sphere already leaving the cradle of the nebulae, white nationalism is accumulating more and more mass that is forming a center of higher density to form a protostar. When enough pressure in the interior rises—when a considerable mass of whites wake up and work together (could be in the form of Southern Nationalism)—, it will increase the density and temperature until the gas turns to plasma. Only then a nuclear fusion will be initiated at the core and the new star will shine in the Occidental heavens.
Fortunately, once the dollar crashes it will be easier to attract the masses because whites will be looking after new forms of leadership.
@Chechar, re
Yes, those are good points and are a good start for a reasonable discussion of the topic. I have reviewed many of the anti-Christian articles and they typically consist of untestable, and therefore in my view useless, conclusions. Christianity has a long history and various mixes of Christianity vs. secularism have been tried in the West. The results are historical facts which either support or contradict the competing theories about whether Christianity is a benefit or a detriment to our race, as I mentioned previously;
You have no doubt reviewed the anti-Christian WN articles more extensively than I have and I expect you will agree that they never meet the test I describe, historical support is always absent. I think you will also agree that the explosion of secularism we have seen in the West since WWII has been accompanied by an explosion of jew influence. Therefore I think that you will ultimately agree that we have nothing to gain by weakening Christian influence even further, maybe not now or even soon, but ultimately. At a minimum I’m fairly certain you will agree that a virulent anti–Christian WN attitude is counterproductive or at least highly problematic given that most whites are also Christians. I did not believe that you were one of those that blame Christianity for all or even most of the problem, your conclusion that its role has been “ambivalent” is fair enough in my view, that is why I excluded you from the virulent anti-Christians I wrote about.
The various factors you mention above are specific enough to address specifically, and I will come back to them. For now I will only say that in my opinion you left out the most important factor, the feminization of the West. In my view it is the feminization that most directly weakened our defense against alien nonwhite influences, particularly jews, and incidentally weakened Christianity’s historical defense against jew influence.
I am presently discussing the subject at VNNF. Instead of replying here, see my latest response there and pay attention to what I said about the Yin phase of Christianity (feminized western males; “secular Francuscanism”, etc).
@Chechar, re the VNNF post, at least we agree on the feminized Christianity part. For the
“Moribund Christianity must die so that a NS movement, a completely new star in human history, may be born,” I’ll leave you to quarrel with AH about that for now, see point #24 of the NSDAP, “The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity…” link at [here]; I suspect that this topic may come up between us again but for now I’d like to move on to another element of our prior discussion.
I indicated yesterday that I would be coming back to the various causes you listed;
Regarding the “Individualism, universalism, weak ethnocentrism (“hardwired” characteristics in the White psyche since prehistoric times) “universalism” is a bit vague to treat as a hardwired characteristic however I agree that the relative degree of individualism and ethnocentrism are hardwired. Our individualism was with us while we rose to become the dominant race so I don’t see that as a cause of our current decline. The same applies to our allegedly weak ethnocentrism, and in any event it is unlikely that our genetic or hardwired level of ethnocentrism differs much from other races, every species studied so far to my knowledge demonstrates the trait which is called ethnocentricism in humans, it is an inevitable product of evolution and almost certainly any significant differences among the races are cultural and environmental, not genetic.
As far as egalitarianism, I think that the biological and cultural causes of it are too intermingled to draw a valid conclusion but I expect that the level currently expressed is primarily cultural; liberalism and capitalism are political and cultural phenomenon, although we may well be slightly more predisposed to them than other races I doubt that it is primarily a function of genetics. The Jewish culture of critique in the 20th century is of course the main cultural factor involved in speeding our decline, but as you point out that is a 20th century phenomenon, our hardwiring is not at fault there, our defenses against jew influence held up well enough until something about us also recently changed, which I will discuss below. In short, to the extent that our racial differences are hardwired, it is those differences that account for or at least did not significantly hinder our becoming dominant, and they did not cause our current decline.
A race with a history of ascendance spanning millennia which suddenly reverses course and rapidly declines in just the last century has not declined because its hardwiring has suddenly changed, it has suddenly declined because something cultural has suddenly changed. That sudden change was the adoption of universal suffrage and the resulting feminization of the West. This causal relationship is demonstrated by historical fact. For centuries as one empire declined another rose, after feminization all Western empires were lost rapidly and more or less simultaneously. All Western nations rapidly adopted nanny-state socialism, multiculturalism and the various forms of anti-white policies which we see now. There is no other single cause which matches the historical facts better. To the extent that other causes may be advanced they are secondary to the main one, which is in my view the feminization of the West subsequent to universal suffrage.
But feminization cannot be the single cause; that would be monocausalism. The fact that whites have done it again in the historical past, with no universal suffrage, shows that the etiology is more complex (see my blog Fallen Leaves and pay special attention to March of the Titans).
“The new star is in its primordial stage. Like a tiny gaseous sphere already leaving the cradle of the nebulae, ”
You make some good points but you assume that the ‘source’ of Christianity, is the same as NS, or the same as WN. The star ‘life-cycle’ is a perfect metaphor for NS. It ‘exhausted’ itself and the ‘end’ of Hitler and co. couldn’t illustrate better why it did so. I’m sure you’re well aware of the complete contrast between the events at the Garden of Gethsemane and the Bunker.
My point is not to debate but to suggest people keep their options open. This new ‘star’ of yours is not even close to leaving the nebulae. The last thing we should encourage is another pagan adventure where the leaders have no true faith and crumble, leaving millions in ruins, all for someone’s ego.
Ask yourself, if you were Rothchild and Co. with billions of dollars/weapons etc… do you think it would be difficult to buy off this current crew of WN leaders? Are they men of steel when the blow torch is applied?
You are not even understanding the metaphor. See the long post in this blog, “The Red Giant”, that I believe is linked above.
NS never exhausted itself. It was muredred by infernal Anglos. See the most important post in this blog on The Death of Nazi Germany.
Christianity will be a white dwarf by the 22nd century. Again, see the entry on what Conservative Swede said at Gates of Vienna in 2009.
Oh I read it and CS’s subjective position – Nietzschean/Norse-mythology/German-centric(not all Whites)- puts forward a historical perspective which many consider flawed… and why I dispute the metaphor.
First of all, there was no ‘Inversion of values’ historically. That anyone who considered the first Christians ‘weak’, the Franks, the Crusaders, the British who conquered the world,the Conquista, the Pioneers etc has already betrayed their bias.
Two. Christianity was not a destruction of previous myths but an overlay/progression. Did Odin not dies on the tree? Was Logos not in existance? Elyssium? Valhalla? Jove? So the Star Metaphor would be better applied to the beginning of ALL mythology, not just Christianity. At least that would be objective.
Now if you say the ‘mythological core’ of European man has extinguished itself, then that may be a fair point… but to pretend we can just concoct some new myth in a lab is foolish. How many Germans today believe in the Thule Aryanism that Himmler tried to create? With millions of martyrs and you have nothing left.
I am in a cibercafe and cannot answer in detail. Suffice it to say that presently Christianity is in its “red giant” stage, a Yin form of secular Christianity also known as liberalism (if Christianity was as Yang as it was under the Inquisition, I’d not object).
The hope that there will be a great awakening among the German people is based upon the (very likely) fact that the dollar will crash soon and that, by the end of the century, the depletion of oil will cause billions to starve.
Whites might be willing to listen us after the first catastrophe (dollar crash) hits the western world. The rest is all hope of course.
@Chechar, re your “But feminization cannot be the single cause; that would be monocausalism,”
I did not make such a claim, see my “To the extent that other causes may be advanced they are secondary to the main one, which is in my view the feminization of the West subsequent to universal suffrage.”
Obviously there are other factors involved, my claim is that feminization is the most significant one. Calling it “ monocausalism” is a quibble which evades addressing the issue.
Re, your “The fact that whites have done it again in the historical past, with no universal suffrage, shows that the etiology is more complex,” you are incorrect. We have not, as you claim, “done it again in the historical past, with no universal suffrage,” the current Western decline is unprecedented, see my prior “after feminization all Western empires were lost rapidly and more or less simultaneously. All Western nations rapidly adopted nanny-state socialism, multiculturalism and the various forms of anti-white policies which we see now.”
You cite no history in support of your claim because there is, in fact, no precedent prior to universal suffrage for such a universal Western decline.
Feminization cannot be the most significant factor, since whites committed racial suicide more than once throughout the millenia way before the feminist movement took over. Again, see the series excerpting Kemp’s book at Fallen Leaves (and the ones excerpted from Pierce’s history of the white race I’ll be adding soon at WDH‘s addenda).
Chechar, re “Feminization cannot be the most significant factor, since whites committed racial suicide more than once throughout the millenia way before the feminist movement took over.”
Again you describe nothing specific, if in fact whites committed racial suicide more than once throughout the millenia way before the feminist movement took over you would be able to cite specific examples with dates and places.
See the entries linked on the sidebar about white suicide in Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome (the same thing that happened in the Iberian peninsula centuries later).
@Chechar, re your “See the entries linked on the sidebar about white suicide in Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome (the same thing that happened in the Iberian peninsula centuries later).”
That is evading the question, please be specific, as I said before “if in fact whites committed racial suicide more than once throughout the millenia way before the feminist movement took over you would be able to cite specific examples with dates and places.” I have reviewed your prior materials and there is nothing there even remotely comparable to the current racial suicide; “Egypt, Greece, Rome, Iberian peninsula,” that is not even close to what is happening to our race now.
It is not evading the question at all! All these civilizations were manly with no feminist movement, yet all committed racial suicide. Just look at how southern Mediterraneans look like tody—they are not Aryans anymore—, let alone the even darker fellows in the Middle East, once ruled by pure Indo-Europeans. Today at Fallen Leaves I’ve just added excerpts of Kemp’s chapter on India—another example of Aryan suicide thru interbreeding. You cannot blame feminism for the mess in all those cultures; that would be “monocausalism.”
@Chechar, yes, that is what I was looking for, a summary of your argument rather than a referral to another article, and it is much better to have our arguments in front of us when we post in my opinion.
You are of course correct that those examples are indeed racial suicide, the distinction that I draw is that those examples of disasters to our race, and the others throughout history, are isolated events pertaining to a particular part of white civilization and are not disasters which destroyed white civilization everywhere on the planet. The decline that our race has suffered these last fifty years is unique in that all white populations are being destroyed simultaneously, there is no historical precedent for that.
For example whites are declining in absolute numbers worldwide, and not because of any epidemic or war, we always recovered from such things historically, this time we are doing it to ourselves voluntarily. In terms of military and political power, or morals, same thing, the entire race is now in decline simultaneously. We have gone from a race which conquers to a race which abandons all of its empires, from a race which found pride in hard work to a race where white civilization consists of parasite-ridden welfare states, all since the adoption of universal suffrage.
It is this simultaneous worldwide continuing series of disasters of the 20th century which I link to the contemporaneous adoption of universal suffrage in the early 20th century. That is something which in my view you were not addressing, the uniformity of the disaster. You can show me many disasters from the past, but never will you find a time where every white nation was suffering the same ones simultaneously. I would like to hear your views on why only now, after universal suffrage, do we see such uniform decline.
Chechar in regards to the newborn star what of Christian Identity
“The longer I live, the more do I find myself outside of Christianity, and, moreover, alien and hostile to Christianity. A reading of Prof. Hans F.K. Guenther’s The Religious Attitudes of the Indo-Europeans reveals that we had a better religion, a religion truer to our own traditions and essential instincts, than is to be found in Christianity. And if in the end Aryan man, the supremely gifted and most masterful race known to history, should disappear from the Earth, the primary reason for it will be his having succumbed to the virus of Christianity. This has been the direst calamity in his entire history.” – William Gayley Simpson, from the book “Which Way Western Man?”. From 1915 to 1918 William Gayley simpson was a seminary trained Christian minister.
@Redbeardian, lol, more of the old refrain of anti-Christians quoting other anti-Christians on the subject of Christianity, not a single historical fact mentioned. You anti-Christians make my case, you run away from facts as if they were bombs.
You are mistaken. I am not anti-Christian, I am anti-Christian theology. Are you a practicing Christian?
@Redbeardian, lol again, still no historical facts to support your claim, but at least you’ve moved on from quoting other anti-Christians to the typical semantic quibbles, it’s good to know that you are “not anti-Christian, I am anti-Christian theology.” Same here, I’m not anti- Redbeardian, I’m only anti the garbage you quote;
“And if in the end Aryan man, the supremely gifted and most masterful race known to history, should disappear from the Earth, the primary reason for it will be his having succumbed to the virus of Christianity. This has been the direst calamity in his entire history.”
I asked you one simple, straight question, and you did not have the courage/honesty to answer it. Give me a straight answer to my question, or consider this exchange over.
@Redbeardian, I don’t answer personal questions, if that’s the best excuse that you can come up with for running away I won’t miss you much.