We have a theocracy already. It is neither Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or any other traditional religion. Our theocracy preaches tolerance and inclusivity, but is mindlessly intolerant. The morality of our emerging theocracy has these pillars:
1. The feminization of men, including advocacy of castration and pegging.
2. Denial of biological reality, like male and female.
3. Hysteria over safety, including squelching of free speech.
4. Ever-expanding protected classes of people.
5. The right to impose our morality on other countries.
6. Willful destruction of the family.
7. The gradual extension of the state into companies (e.g. HR) and industries (media, education, banking, social media/big tech, etc.)
A Christian Nationalist would want a society in which Christian ethics guide behavior. The United States and the European states were such places until very recently. Look how far we have fallen. Look at Ireland as a prime example of anti-Christian colonization in Europe. A White Nationalist would believe it is impossible to separate a nation from the bio-spirit of its founding people without forming a different nation. The fundamental transformation Obama and his allies pulled off in the United States was a shift away from essential Christianity and primary European identity to the establishment of an atheistic, Rainbow, non-white culturalism. Thus, any traditional person, a conservative reactionary in America or Europe, would have to embrace both Christian and White Nationalism even if that is a thought that is too uncomfortable for most people to admit to themselves. I can assure you that the majority of Bannon viewers are closeted White, Christian, Nationalists, even if they would not be willing to acknowledge that to themselves. Some are private about it because they understand the Overton Window and the powerful psychological warfare of their enemies you alluded to in your excellent article. This is not about a theocracy. It is about the roots of culture and the people that cultivate and maintain that culture. And the people that seek to destroy a culture for their own aggrandizement.
There's some stuff in your comment that I agree with, but some that I don't. The question of morality that you mention below is fundamental. But you seem to be conflating conservative morality -- which is needed in a balance with liberal morality -- with white people. I don't think that really holds up in terms of Americans "of colour", and most non-white non-Americans are deeply conservative and traditional in ways that would shock dumb American liberals who have no clue what the world is like outside their myopia.
> most non-white non-Americans are deeply conservative and traditional in ways that would shock dumb American liberals who have no clue what the world is like outside their myopia.
Well, that certainly doesn't appear to be reflected in how they vote.
"Non-white culturalism" implies there's a universal "white culture" and a universal "non-white culture." Perhaps I'm misinterpreting. As a female, Catholic southerner married to a male, WASP Yankee and living in the south (both of us pale skinned), the first time we visited his relatives in Massachusetts I reached for a passport. I might as well have been in Mongolia.
It's pretty clear she didn't mean "I might as well have been in Mongolia" to be taken literally. If she had said "I might as well have been in Oz", or "on Mars", would you have questioned her knowledge of the Emerald City, or astronomy? Just pointing out that she was being metaphorical makes me feel like Captain Obvious, but you seemed not to get it.
There is no "universal white and/or European culture," as much as some imagine. There's British culture, Italian culture, Danish culture, German culture, etc., and they are all different. I have more in common with my fellow southerners of all colors than I do with non-pigmented or pigmented people from New England or other parts of the US.
Similar is not the same as homogenous, or as you put it, white. This is one of the reasons the definition of who was "white" has shifted like jello over time. Greek and Roman culture spread across Europe, and since the skin pigmentation of both cultures varied and still varies, perhaps we can say this is Roman nose culture.
Do you believe there is an African-American Community as is often stated? How about the Asian Community or the Native American Community? A community has a shared culture by definition right?
I think that leftists wanted a new epithet to throw around since they had worn out the epithet of "racist" through overuse. Since leftists don't like genuine Christians (they often tolerate nominal Christians) and since they don't like people who are loyal to their countries rather than to leftist ideology, they found the term "Christian Nationalist" a convenient label. I'm sure we will be hearing more of it thrown at whoever they don't like.
The Progs look in the mirror, think about what they want/intend to do, then claim that those things are what all of those nasty non-Progs intend to do. Brilliant tactics or a psychosis?
Can't have people being proud of there countries, especially those in the West. We're colonisers, Never forget lol. IT's why the English flag is demonised so much by the UK MSN and hated by the left yet it's okay for the Welsh and Scottish to love and be proud of their flags (hint it's because they don't matter as shit as that is to say.)
It’s interesting that the left has managed to load the words ‘Christian’ and ‘nation’ with so many negative connotations. And then creates a bogeyman out there ready to repress us into mindless obdedience.
I know overschooled (yet undereducated) Democrat white women who seem to believe, in complete sincerity, that The Patriarchy, led by Donald Trump, is going to put women in Handmaid's Tale concentration camps, wearing long-sleeved gray dresses and bonnets. The fact that he made no move to do so during four years as president hasn't penetrated their thick skulls. Since it's impossible to communicate with them, I avoid being around them as much as I can.
Why do they hate Christians so much? Because any genuine Christian would rather die than have his religion be The State. They use the fear of death to enslave people, but it doesn't work on people who aren't afraid to die.
Hebrews 2:14,15
“Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (Jesus) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;”
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.”
I can appreciate that one's perception of discrimination is one significant aspect of their culture but if I had a client whose identity was primarily shaped that way, I would help her set goals to live a more authentic and empowered life. But that is not the focus of our discussion.
Also, I can see it today, watching Donald Trump running in 2016 quite confused at how many Christians were rooting for him, thankful, but admitting he was not a Christian.
A further com comment from a retired Christian minister. I never heard of Doug Wilson so therefore did not listen to him on Tucker Carlson's interview show. However, now that I have, I have to say that his prominence bothers me a great deal. I do not like it when ministers are replaced for Jesus in their role from the pulpit. If anything we should admit to our own helplessness and our own need to personally repent, that will do more to lead our congregations and non-christians than any amount of ego that I saw displayed in this interview, I have lived through a lot of Godlike ministers like the televangelists on television who did a lot of harm to a lot of people. If any of the stuff that Wilson is accused of doing is true and real, then we had best take a second look before we Elevate him on a pedestal.
There is a comment after Tucker's interview by a woman named Kaylee that's k a e l e y last name t r i v v e r. She accuses Wilson of a whole bunch of stuff and of course since I don't know anything about Wilson I can't verify what she says but if there's a little tiny bit of smoke I think one should watch it and see. I myself know absolutely nothing about Wilson and admit that I have not read his books since I don't know anything about him. But I know what goes on in churches with particularly male pastors who know that once you're in the pulpit you gain an immediate amount of respect from your congregation. All we have to do is think about the priest situation in the Catholic church. As I say I don't have a race a horse in the race since I don't longer preach but I repeat that anyone who finds Wilson to be perfection needs to do a bit of digging into his past just to see. We do not need another minister saying they're speaking for god.
I thought he was a persuasive intelectual who made a cogent and rational case for Christian Nationalism. His analysis was draped in liberty not authoritarianism.
> She accuses Wilson of a whole bunch of stuff and of course since I don't know anything about Wilson I can't verify what she says but if there's a little tiny bit of smoke I think one should watch it and see.
In that case I recommend you remember the 9th commandment and avoid spreading malicious gossip.
I was very honest when I said that the complaints should be investigated. I was not spreading anything that can't be found in the comments section about Tucker's interview with him. However, I was curious so I went to Wilson's videos and watched one where he was condemning Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church in California of being silly because Warren admitted he now favored women in the pastorate. As a seminary woman with an M d i v degree, I was appalled at how Wilson demeaned and make fun of of Rick Warren's change of heart about women in the pulpit. You don't like malicious gossip, and I agree. But I don't like one minister making fun of another minister on his video podcast. Especially, because Rick Warren is a giant in his own church and nationally and internationally. You may disagree with him as I often do and did, but Wilson's treatment of him was in my opinion despicable as well as his making fun of women in the pulpit. So this for me is a red line I cannot and will not cross. As I read some of the pro Wilson comments, I knew who was coming out of the woodwork- people who have never wanted women with power in the church.
> I knew who was coming out of the woodwork- people who have never wanted women with power in the church.
Including St. Paul himself.
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law."
Hi, Quotes like these by GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert don't help your argument. “The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church.” and “I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk – that’s not in the Constitution.”
Neither does this one by GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, "We need to be the party of nationalism and I’m a Christian, and I say it proudly, we should be Christian nationalists.”
John Adams said our Republican system with Democratic principles can only be effective with a moral people. The Founders, although many were Deists as I am, understood the necessity of Christianity to manage the impulses of the citizenry. Without Christianity there could be no democratic nation. Indeed, that is where we are today. Atheistic anarchy opening the door for totalitarianism.
Wow, two whole comments that you could offer us t o denigrate Jenny's argument? Seems to be that is kind of nitpicking. I am a retired Christian minister Lately from the Pacific Northwest and not to worry there is not a Christian nor a nationalist in the entire Pacific Northwest
The left has 1. The Quota Project 2. The Green Project 3. The Androgynous Project and it is losing steam, so it is time to lie and create this very complicated world the worse for it. Middle finger salute to MSNBC.
We have a theocracy already. It is neither Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or any other traditional religion. Our theocracy preaches tolerance and inclusivity, but is mindlessly intolerant. The morality of our emerging theocracy has these pillars:
1. The feminization of men, including advocacy of castration and pegging.
2. Denial of biological reality, like male and female.
3. Hysteria over safety, including squelching of free speech.
4. Ever-expanding protected classes of people.
5. The right to impose our morality on other countries.
6. Willful destruction of the family.
7. The gradual extension of the state into companies (e.g. HR) and industries (media, education, banking, social media/big tech, etc.)
Fair point.
Well explained. It's a neo-Fascist pseudo religiosity which considers itself THE State Church and the internet is its "outreach."
8. The essential badness of Caucasian heredity.
9. Sexual anarchy.
10. One Health.
Not to mention rejection of reason and critical thinking.
Is the MSM still around? Hadn't tuned into them for years now
It's about dividing people into groups. With that the groups diss each other and MSM has done it's job
A Christian Nationalist would want a society in which Christian ethics guide behavior. The United States and the European states were such places until very recently. Look how far we have fallen. Look at Ireland as a prime example of anti-Christian colonization in Europe. A White Nationalist would believe it is impossible to separate a nation from the bio-spirit of its founding people without forming a different nation. The fundamental transformation Obama and his allies pulled off in the United States was a shift away from essential Christianity and primary European identity to the establishment of an atheistic, Rainbow, non-white culturalism. Thus, any traditional person, a conservative reactionary in America or Europe, would have to embrace both Christian and White Nationalism even if that is a thought that is too uncomfortable for most people to admit to themselves. I can assure you that the majority of Bannon viewers are closeted White, Christian, Nationalists, even if they would not be willing to acknowledge that to themselves. Some are private about it because they understand the Overton Window and the powerful psychological warfare of their enemies you alluded to in your excellent article. This is not about a theocracy. It is about the roots of culture and the people that cultivate and maintain that culture. And the people that seek to destroy a culture for their own aggrandizement.
There's some stuff in your comment that I agree with, but some that I don't. The question of morality that you mention below is fundamental. But you seem to be conflating conservative morality -- which is needed in a balance with liberal morality -- with white people. I don't think that really holds up in terms of Americans "of colour", and most non-white non-Americans are deeply conservative and traditional in ways that would shock dumb American liberals who have no clue what the world is like outside their myopia.
> most non-white non-Americans are deeply conservative and traditional in ways that would shock dumb American liberals who have no clue what the world is like outside their myopia.
Well, that certainly doesn't appear to be reflected in how they vote.
"Non-white culturalism" implies there's a universal "white culture" and a universal "non-white culture." Perhaps I'm misinterpreting. As a female, Catholic southerner married to a male, WASP Yankee and living in the south (both of us pale skinned), the first time we visited his relatives in Massachusetts I reached for a passport. I might as well have been in Mongolia.
> "Non-white culturalism" implies there's a universal "white culture" and a universal "non-white culture."
There is in fact a universal White, or European, culture. You're just so used to taking it for granted that you don't realize its not universal.
> I might as well have been in Mongolia.
Tell me you know nothing about Mongolian culture without telling me you know nothing about Mongolian culture.
I agree with this perspective. I support the premises of whiteness studies in sociology.
It's pretty clear she didn't mean "I might as well have been in Mongolia" to be taken literally. If she had said "I might as well have been in Oz", or "on Mars", would you have questioned her knowledge of the Emerald City, or astronomy? Just pointing out that she was being metaphorical makes me feel like Captain Obvious, but you seemed not to get it.
Her argument was that different European cultures differ from each other more that they differ from non-European cultures.
My comment addressed only your criticism of her use of "Mongolia" in her metaphor. You seemed to think she was literally discussing Mongolia.
You might want to look at the rest of the thread.
There is no "universal white and/or European culture," as much as some imagine. There's British culture, Italian culture, Danish culture, German culture, etc., and they are all different. I have more in common with my fellow southerners of all colors than I do with non-pigmented or pigmented people from New England or other parts of the US.
> There's British culture, Italian culture, Danish culture, German culture, etc., and they are all different.
They're much more similar to each other than they are to traditional African or Chinese culture.
Similar is not the same as homogenous, or as you put it, white. This is one of the reasons the definition of who was "white" has shifted like jello over time. Greek and Roman culture spread across Europe, and since the skin pigmentation of both cultures varied and still varies, perhaps we can say this is Roman nose culture.
Do you believe there is an African-American Community as is often stated? How about the Asian Community or the Native American Community? A community has a shared culture by definition right?
Like I said, calling it European culture may be more accurate.
I think that leftists wanted a new epithet to throw around since they had worn out the epithet of "racist" through overuse. Since leftists don't like genuine Christians (they often tolerate nominal Christians) and since they don't like people who are loyal to their countries rather than to leftist ideology, they found the term "Christian Nationalist" a convenient label. I'm sure we will be hearing more of it thrown at whoever they don't like.
The Progs look in the mirror, think about what they want/intend to do, then claim that those things are what all of those nasty non-Progs intend to do. Brilliant tactics or a psychosis?
Jenny - appreciated, as always!
I, too, have noticed the left's tendency to projection.
Can't have people being proud of there countries, especially those in the West. We're colonisers, Never forget lol. IT's why the English flag is demonised so much by the UK MSN and hated by the left yet it's okay for the Welsh and Scottish to love and be proud of their flags (hint it's because they don't matter as shit as that is to say.)
It’s interesting that the left has managed to load the words ‘Christian’ and ‘nation’ with so many negative connotations. And then creates a bogeyman out there ready to repress us into mindless obdedience.
I know overschooled (yet undereducated) Democrat white women who seem to believe, in complete sincerity, that The Patriarchy, led by Donald Trump, is going to put women in Handmaid's Tale concentration camps, wearing long-sleeved gray dresses and bonnets. The fact that he made no move to do so during four years as president hasn't penetrated their thick skulls. Since it's impossible to communicate with them, I avoid being around them as much as I can.
Why do they hate Christians so much? Because any genuine Christian would rather die than have his religion be The State. They use the fear of death to enslave people, but it doesn't work on people who aren't afraid to die.
Hebrews 2:14,15
“Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (Jesus) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;”
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.”
I can appreciate that one's perception of discrimination is one significant aspect of their culture but if I had a client whose identity was primarily shaped that way, I would help her set goals to live a more authentic and empowered life. But that is not the focus of our discussion.
Also, I can see it today, watching Donald Trump running in 2016 quite confused at how many Christians were rooting for him, thankful, but admitting he was not a Christian.
Rule of thumb: anything MSNBC is hyperventilating over is probably a good thing.
A further com comment from a retired Christian minister. I never heard of Doug Wilson so therefore did not listen to him on Tucker Carlson's interview show. However, now that I have, I have to say that his prominence bothers me a great deal. I do not like it when ministers are replaced for Jesus in their role from the pulpit. If anything we should admit to our own helplessness and our own need to personally repent, that will do more to lead our congregations and non-christians than any amount of ego that I saw displayed in this interview, I have lived through a lot of Godlike ministers like the televangelists on television who did a lot of harm to a lot of people. If any of the stuff that Wilson is accused of doing is true and real, then we had best take a second look before we Elevate him on a pedestal.
What is Doug Wilson accused of?
There is a comment after Tucker's interview by a woman named Kaylee that's k a e l e y last name t r i v v e r. She accuses Wilson of a whole bunch of stuff and of course since I don't know anything about Wilson I can't verify what she says but if there's a little tiny bit of smoke I think one should watch it and see. I myself know absolutely nothing about Wilson and admit that I have not read his books since I don't know anything about him. But I know what goes on in churches with particularly male pastors who know that once you're in the pulpit you gain an immediate amount of respect from your congregation. All we have to do is think about the priest situation in the Catholic church. As I say I don't have a race a horse in the race since I don't longer preach but I repeat that anyone who finds Wilson to be perfection needs to do a bit of digging into his past just to see. We do not need another minister saying they're speaking for god.
I thought he was a persuasive intelectual who made a cogent and rational case for Christian Nationalism. His analysis was draped in liberty not authoritarianism.
> She accuses Wilson of a whole bunch of stuff and of course since I don't know anything about Wilson I can't verify what she says but if there's a little tiny bit of smoke I think one should watch it and see.
In that case I recommend you remember the 9th commandment and avoid spreading malicious gossip.
I was very honest when I said that the complaints should be investigated. I was not spreading anything that can't be found in the comments section about Tucker's interview with him. However, I was curious so I went to Wilson's videos and watched one where he was condemning Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church in California of being silly because Warren admitted he now favored women in the pastorate. As a seminary woman with an M d i v degree, I was appalled at how Wilson demeaned and make fun of of Rick Warren's change of heart about women in the pulpit. You don't like malicious gossip, and I agree. But I don't like one minister making fun of another minister on his video podcast. Especially, because Rick Warren is a giant in his own church and nationally and internationally. You may disagree with him as I often do and did, but Wilson's treatment of him was in my opinion despicable as well as his making fun of women in the pulpit. So this for me is a red line I cannot and will not cross. As I read some of the pro Wilson comments, I knew who was coming out of the woodwork- people who have never wanted women with power in the church.
> I knew who was coming out of the woodwork- people who have never wanted women with power in the church.
Including St. Paul himself.
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law."
-- 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
Please read his books.
Hi, Quotes like these by GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert don't help your argument. “The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church.” and “I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk – that’s not in the Constitution.”
Neither does this one by GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, "We need to be the party of nationalism and I’m a Christian, and I say it proudly, we should be Christian nationalists.”
That MTG quote was exactly what I had in mind when I wrote that MAGA people openly embrace the term CN. That's my entire point.
I don't remember the last time -- if ever -- i heard Boebert on War Room, I'm not familiar with her at all.
John Adams said our Republican system with Democratic principles can only be effective with a moral people. The Founders, although many were Deists as I am, understood the necessity of Christianity to manage the impulses of the citizenry. Without Christianity there could be no democratic nation. Indeed, that is where we are today. Atheistic anarchy opening the door for totalitarianism.
Wow, two whole comments that you could offer us t o denigrate Jenny's argument? Seems to be that is kind of nitpicking. I am a retired Christian minister Lately from the Pacific Northwest and not to worry there is not a Christian nor a nationalist in the entire Pacific Northwest
How about the pastor from Moscow, Idaho that Tucker Carlson interviewed last week. https://ijr.com/america-needs-jesus-tucker-carlson-sits-christian-nationalist-warned/. He offered a cogent and acceptable defense of Christian Nationalism.
I had a whole section about him in my first draft of this essay, but it was too long so I took it out and will write about it separately.
The left has 1. The Quota Project 2. The Green Project 3. The Androgynous Project and it is losing steam, so it is time to lie and create this very complicated world the worse for it. Middle finger salute to MSNBC.