I recently listened to an entire debate between Richard Carrier—whose scepticism about the historical Jesus I admire—and a Christian nationalist. The debate highlighted the big ideological differences between secular humanists and Christian nationalists.
I was greatly surprised that, when it comes to the 14 words, although the Christian nationalist is not a Nazi like us, he is much closer to our side because he is concerned about mass migration to the West (an issue on which Carrier approves of the mass migration of coloureds that metamorphosed Canada and Sweden!). Carrier also doesn’t care about the sexual dissipation that has been destroying the white race in recent decades.
I believe that Gaedhal, whose text mentioning Carrier I published on Saturday, is right to speak of “atheistic hyper-Christianity”. Folks like Carrier have abandoned not only belief in God and the historicity of Jesus, but at the cost of hypertrophying suicidal Christian ethics: what I have been calling neochristianity on this site.
It is incredible the damage that Christianity still causes to atheists, even though they are clueless of the fact that their scale of values is a secular embodiment of the Gospel message.
Racialist Christians aren’t much better. Nick Fuentes recently responded harshly to Vivek Ramaswamy, an Indian living in the US. However, he added that if the Indians’ grandchildren wholeheartedly accepted American culture, Nick could consider them for entry into his country. This contrasts with the priests of the sacred words who desire a far more extreme outcome—one resembling the ethnic cleansing described in William Pierce’s novel.
The priest repudiates both atheists and Christians, and if he had the power, he would replace the Christian/secular humanist paradigm with Hitlerism.
