McAtee & Wilson Converse on Kinism — And you are Privy — Part VI

DW ends on a playful note (BLM loves to play).

In a different article, Bret McAtee complains about the Leftist press anointing me as the titular head of the Christian Nationalism movement, and argues that I am going to use my immense powers the same way that William F. Buckley did when he “cleansed” the conservative movement, first of the Birchers, followed by others like Brimelow and Sobran.

BLM writes,

Honestly, one could read this article by DW as a way to cleanse his Christian Nationalist movement of the kinists he finds so problematic. Isn’t DW saying, “Christian Nationalism, yes …. Kinism as part of Christian Nationalism NO?”

In fairness though, I don’t blame DW for that since in my world DW’s kind of civic and pluralistic “Christian” Nationalism likewise would need not apply.

DW writes,

He bases his account of this on an article by Murray Rothbard, and one wonders why McAtee is demonstrating his leftward drift so openly, citing the work of a Jew like that. A little suspicious, no?

BLM responds,

I not only have read plenty of Rothbard, I’ve also read plenty of Neil Postmen, Jaques Derrida, and Bernard Bailyn — Jews all. Does this prove I’m not an anti-Semite?  I’ve even been known to read Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as well as St. Paul. By DW’s reckoning I’ve been suspicious for a very long time now in terms of my leftist drifting.

DW writes,

However I confess myself as not being in charge of anything that other people might want to call themselves. I am only in charge of what I am willing to call myself. And if Christian Nationalism comes to be widely associated with ethnic animosity and/or ethnic vainglory, then to Hell with Christian Nationalism, and I would rather be dead in a ditch than to call myself that. I would drop it like a hot rock. But if Christian Nationalism gets successfully defined by Christians who understand how important it is not to go down that ungodly wormhole, then I am happy to be associated with it.

Bret responds,

I quite agree that I have no desire to be widely associated with a Christian Nationalism that is guilty of ethnic animosity and/or ethnic vainglory. I agree with Doug’s sentiment “to hell with that form of Christian Nationalism.”

But, as they say, “the devil is in the details,” and I’m not confident per our exchange here that DW and I are going to define ethnic animosity and/or ethnic vainglory in the same way. In the “for whatever it is worth” category I want DW to know that I find myself repeatedly pushing back against some of the ethnic animosity and/or ethnic vainglory he is rightly concerned about. I see this in some quarters where, for example, people want to argue that National Socialism was a positive good.

DW ends with,

But time will tell. I have not yet gotten my orders from the CIA.

BLM responds,

Well, we trust that DW will be honest with us when those orders from the CIA come in.

McAtee & Wilson Converse on Kinism — And you are Privy — Part V

Doug Wilson (DW) writes;

Suppose the apostle Paul had said something like, “‘Cretans are evil beasts, lazy gluttons, and liars.’ This testimony is true” (Tit. 1:12). Just suppose, all right? Would it be to the point to say, “some are, some aren’t, just like the rest of us”? Different cultures sin differently, even though we live in a time when it is almost illegal to state the obvious. Some cultures are laid back, some of full of cussedness, some are grasping, and some are lazy.

Me, back in 2008

But having said all this, it is crucial to note that the apostle Paul does not leave the Cretans to wallow in their wicked ways. He goes on to tell Titus to “rebuke them sharply” so that they wouldn’t be like that any more. There is no genetic determinism when it comes to sin.

Bret responds,

Right… the genetic determinism lies in the disposition for different peoples to have besetting sins in different categories. Obviously, the determinism is not so final that the old man can’t be put off, while the new man in Christ can’t be put on. Obviously, the determinism does not suggest that progress can’t be made in sanctification. But the genetic aspect clearly, while not deterministic in the fullest sense of that idea, does suggest that different peoples can have different dispositions towards particular expressions of sin. This is the teaching of Paul here in Titus.

I think we might agree here though we may be in violent agreement.

DW writes,

So as the gospel brings the world closer to the blessed day when the world will be filled with all the fruit of God’s kindness, the different ethnic groups are going to bring all their variegated glories into the New Jerusalem. And all of us, emptied of our vainglorious pufferies by that point, will praise and honor one another, each of us esteeming the other groups as better than our own (Phil. 2:3). This is not the self-loathing we see on display now, but rather the glory of Christian humility, which is something some white people really need to work on. Some whites do the self-loathing thing, and others do the chest-beating, and everybody ought to consider Paul’s more excellent way.

BLM responds,

Obviously, DW and I live in different worlds because as I look upon the cultural landscape right now I see whites doing the self-loathing thing (my Suicidal Altruism I mentioned earlier) more than the chest beating thing. Indeed, I see DW as seeking to get the white man to scurry back to his self-loathing mode. “How dare the white man quit with his self-loathing and agree with Churchill on the JQ? How dare the white man state the obvious that minorities are being used to be the one of the constituencies of the new proletariat to do the Cultural Marxist long march through the Institutions? Don’t they know they are supposed to be so busy self-loathing that they don’t see, let alone mention, the obvious? How dare they commit the sin of noticing?”

And when I say the above all DW can seem to hear me say is that, “Whites are perfect and have no sinful dispositions.” And no matter how often I deny that it seems to be what he hears me saying.

DW writes,

As the kings and chieftains are making their way through the gates of that New Jerusalem, there will be no thrown elbows, catcalls, or jeers. Differences yes, but the differences of all the varied instruments in a symphony orchestra, all playing a song composed by Moses in Heaven, and by the Lamb.

“And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints. Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou only art holy: for all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy judgments are made manifest.”

Revelation 15:3-4

Bret responds,

Yes, they do sing that song but they sing it as a great choral with each nation as a nation singing its distinctly assigned part. They do not sing as one homo-globo mass but as distinct nations who together in a confederated heavenly church choir sing their glories to God.

Praise God that DW and I seem to agree on that.

 

McAtee & Wilson Converse on Kinism … And you are Privy — Part IV

Doug Wilson (DW) writes;

Uniquely Sinful?

But I still need to pick up on something Bret says at the end of that previous quote. I believe that the temptations to animosity and vainglory are universally human because all humans are fallen, bent, and sinful, and this is one of the common areas where it is on display. I don’t believe that whites or blacks or Jews have an inside corner on this sin. Not at all.

Bret responds,

Who could ever deny this observation? However, allow me to contend that if ethnic animosity and vainglory can be besetting sins for all peoples so it can be the case that that an opposite sin — yet equally heinous sin — can be embraced by a people. Let us call that opposite sin “Suicidal altruism.” This sin would be the sin of accepting and carrying false guilt piled on a people via various enemy cultural outlets. It is the sin whereby a people find virtue in embracing false guilt and owning the all the wrongs done in the world to the point of becoming the world’s spittoon. 

Maybe an example will suffice. I remember some years ago reading a story of a WOKE young woman who went to Haiti. Once there all she could see was the white man’s oppressions. She wrote about it freely. One evening she was raped by a gang of Haitians and her response was to blame her rape on the white man who had oppressed those poor Haitian rapists to the point that they felt they needed to get revenge by raping a white woman. Voila… Suicidal altruism. 

I’m all for tamping down and rebuking the sin of ethnic animosity and vaingloriousness. Will DW join me in tamping down and rebuking the sin of suicidal altruism?

DW writes,

Again, the sins associated with all this are ethnic animosity and ethnic vainglory. The former is something we here in Moscow hate with the heat of a thousand suns. The latter is something we hate with the heat of 25 suns. The former diabolical and filled with spite and envy. The latter is filled with the bumfuzzledness of human blundering and stupidity, which on a good day can be somewhat endearing. Kind of like watching a Dufflepud Superiority Rally, where there is so much cringy fremdschamen material on display that one does not know where to look, and it is so bad that a sort of splendor creeps into it. So on the more entertaining days, I simply disapprove with the heat of a tanning booth set at medium high down at the Summer Solstice Tanning Salon.

Bret responds,

I suppose it is easier to have all this hatred for ethnic animosity and ethnic vainglory when one lives in Whiteaho (Idaho) where the ethnic breakdown is  White 82.9 %, Hispanic 11.9%, Black 0,6%, Asian 1.3%, Mixed 2.0%, Other 1.2%. This is not to excuse ethnic animosity and ethnic vainglory where it exists. It is to say it is easier to have white hot sun hatred for those sins when those sins are not going to be a danger of falling into because the opportunity for them to come into play just doesn’t exist as much because of demographics.

DW writes,

Yes. All of these (various races of) kinists are skinists. In my world, nobody gets a free pass to sin because they are sinning on behalf of a certain color swatch they got at Benjamin Moore. But they are skinists because this is a common human failing. Every ethnic group tends to think that they are the center of the world, and are regularly astonished at any form of cosmopolitanism. And there are two basic forms of cosmopolitanism. There is the form brought about by merchants, harbors, international traffic, supply chains, and foreign exchange students. This can be benign, but it often drifts into the supercilious attitude currently on display with our globalist elites, noses in the air, jetting off to Davos to save the planet again. That’s one kind. The other kind is a gospel cosmopolitanism, the kind established by missionaries, church planters, and Bible societies.

Bret responds,

1.) Keep in mind that we have not established, DW’s protestations to the contrary, that Kinism = skinism. Doug is just wrong here equating his skinism with the kinists — regardless of their race.

2.) I’ve read Roland Allen who is perhaps one of the greatest 20th century Missionaries and I can promise you that Roland Allen didn’t advocate gospel cosmopolitanism.

3.) Perhaps I need more of a definition from DW on just exactly what “Gospel Cosmopolitanism” is in his world. However, in my world I can’t imagine more of a contradiction occurring then what occurs when those two words are slammed together.

DW writes,

A biblical doctrine of sin and depravity would protect us from a lot of this foolishness. When I read of certain atrocious passages in the Talmud (and there are some), I don’t think of the unique perfidy of Jews. Rather I take it as just one more entry in Paul’s Romans 2 argument that the Jews are lost sinners, just like everybody else. When I read of the appalling treatment that Americans applied to certain Indian tribes, I don’t blame whiteness, or America, or the Founders. I reflect on the fact that Americans are descended from Adam, and have behaved exactly like that on more than a few occasions. When I think of the African kings who enslaved other Africans and took them down to the coast in order to sell them off to the slavers, I don’t attribute this to the blackness of their skin, but rather to the blackness of their hearts.

BLM writes,

1.) One has to concede immediately that all sin comes from our sin nature and that regardless of race. However, that is not to say that particular sins can’t be attached to particular peoples as St. Paul notes in the book of Titus. Sure, the sins of the Cretans were because they, like non-Cretans, were sons of Adam. However, that the Cretans were sons of Adam along with non-Cretans didn’t mean that they had a unique flora to their sin set.

2.) If DW can read the Talmud without at least wondering about the unique perfidy of the Jews then something is wrong. Has DW read John’s Gospel?

3.) Does DW ever read about the appalling treatment by the Indians upon those of European descent. All of this comes across as just more WOKE-ianity.

Allow me to emphasize again that I hold that white people apart from Christ are dead in their trespasses and sins. I hold we have the problem with WOKE-ianity precisely because the white people of the West are apostate, having abandoned the God who has been so generous to the in blessing them. I hold that if White people continue on the trajectory they are on Sodom will seem like a vacation paradise. I affirm that white people are not made of better dirt than non-white people.

I go out of my way to affirm all this so DW won’t call me a skinist or accuse me of having ethnic animosity or ethnic vainglory.

McAtee & Wilson Converse on Kinism … And you are Privy — Part III

Doug Wilson writes,

Rejecting Malevolence

McAtee begins his piece by quoting my book.

“The thing that requires me to identify kinists as racists (and as much in defiance of the Scriptures as any they oppose) is the overt malevolence they routinely show toward the image and work of God Himself. To mock folly and sin is a prophetic duty. To mock the color of a man’s skin is to defy the handiwork of God.“

Douglas Wilson, Skin and Blood

And he also quotes me as saying this . . .

“Racial malice and racial vainglory are sins against God, not because they take the obvious factors of race into account as they interpret the world, but because they are malicious and vainglorious.”

Douglas Wilson, Skin and Blood

First, notice my use of “racial” and “race” in that quote, which is how I used to speak of these things. Back in the old days before I was wise.

BLM responds

1.) Well, as the younger and less wise Doug is just now having this book come out from the older and more wise Doug, I might suggest that he “stop the presses” so his older and more wiser self can make the changes before the hot off the presses book is released.

DW writes,

So let me begin our interaction with something McAtee does grant at the beginning, and which I am very glad to see—as far as it goes.

“Allow me to admit that there have been times when I have seen black people being mocked by white Kinists simply because they are black. I do agree when this happens this is a bridge too far . . . I will grant that it is still sin to mock the color of a man’s skin if Wilson will grant that a majority of people with pigmented skin have been co-opted to genocide White Christians and to roll Jesus Christ off His throne.”

Bret McAtee

First, while I don’t want to quibble, it seems to me that a confession that mean-spiritedness is wrong ought not to be dependent on anybody else admitting to something else. That’s not how this works. But as far as the point he wants me to grant goes, I do grant it. But something more needs to be said, and it is really important.

BLM responds,

1.) The reader needs to go back and read the ellipsis that Wilson omits in order to get a better understanding of my comment to which DW objects.

2.) As long as people go back and look at that ellipsis to see the context I am happy to grant this to Rev Wilson. Certainly, though DW does not really think that my  admitting to some mean-spiritedness happening in the Kinist camp is first dependent on him admitting to something else? My mistake above was in using the word “if” as opposed to using a word like “expecting.”  Thank you Doug for pointing this out. It was a proper correction.

DW writes quoting me,

“I do think though that the Rev. Wilson might want to take into some considerations that there currently is an ongoing attempt to genocide white people, or at the very least turn them into hewers of wood and drawers of water (slaves) . . . Does Wilson need to be reminded that it is minorities along with other constituencies who are have been captured by the cultural Marxists . . .”

Bret McAtee

No, I don’t need to be reminded of anything like that. I am in a pitched battle with the commies, and I don’t much care what color the commies are. Here we are, defending our cultural Helm’s Deep, and the next wave of orcs comes swarming up the walls. And then suddenly, down our rampart a little bit, I hear the cry raised by the kinists. “Just shoot at the darker ones!” I would suggest mildly, and with just a hint of exasperation, that somebody doesn’t understand what the hell is going on.

BLM responds,

1.) DW bangs this drum a little too long and a little too loud. If you look at the Kinists writings (Iron Ink, Tribal Theocrat, Faith & Heritage) there is just scads of evidence of arrows skewering the chest of plenty of Caucasian orcs from the Kinist bows. I admit that the claim, from a literary standpoint is colorful and genius, but I deny that it is rooted in reality.

2.) For the sake of argument though, even were it true (and it most certainly is not true) were the Kinist “just shooting the darker orcs” it would still mean that Helm’s deep had fewer enemies assaulting the gates than it had before those kinist arrows were unleashed. And that would be a good thing right Doug?

Still, having said that I agree with you. Christendom is dead whether we are slain by white orcs or by non-white orcs and so they must all be put down.

And here I suppose, just to be safe, I should add that we are talking in metaphors here. I am not a bowman by trade and I have no intent to unleash real live arrows on anybody any time soon.

3.) Still, if DW would be exasperated, exclaiming that “somebody doesn’t understand what the hell is going on,” allow me to suggest that has been the mindset of the Kinists for well over a decade now. Rome is burning and all we get from the CREC normies and Murican Bears is that the Kinists are the Hell-bound enemy, when all we are doing is trying to defend Helm’s deep from all comers. Does the fact that you don’t believe in race and we do believe in race mean that we can’t at least play the role of the Ents to your role of the Riders of Rohan defending Helm’s Deep? Must we be shooting each other in the defense of what little is left of Christian civilization?

DW writes,

Various minorities, pigmented and otherwise, have in fact been co-opted by forces of great evil in the world. That is true. But their program is not really genocidal. What is the color of the co-opters? It would be better to describe all this as suicidal.

“But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: All they that hate me love death.”

Proverbs 8:36 (KJV)

BLM responds,

Again, I have repeatedly written that the co-opters are a problem. I have also repeatedly written that the co-opters of the co-opters are even a bigger problem. And, I would still disagree that this is not genocidal and religio-cidal. The enemy is out to especially genocide the Christian white man and religio-cide the Biblical Christianity of all men. If someone is both white and Christian they live with a larger target on their back. If someone is both non-white and a Biblical Christian they are lonely beyond words. The new proletariat being used (co-opted) to “March through the institutions” are a large percentile of minorities, all perverts, feminists, and many academics. You’ll notice it is not White South African Christians that they are letting come across the borders by the millions.

DW writes,

When the body of whiteness is found, and the gun lying beside that carcass still warm, it will not be to the point to say that the gun hated whiteness. The gun was the instrument, but it was whiteness itself that pulled the trigger. Aggrieved minorities (ethnic, sexual, hearing-impaired, and Vietnam-era vets) are being used as the instrument, sure enough. So?

BLM responds,

Here we find a significant disagreement. Whiteness pulled the trigger or “Whiteness” is pulling the trigger?

And here we find, once again, Doug going all racial. Why is it when DW makes a mistake on the matter of race it seems always to be in the context of how evil the white man is? “Whiteness pulled the trigger?”

And the answer to the “so” question is. “it’s always good to know who your enemy is.”

DW writes

I grant that “whiteness” has been made a central target, and that extermination of Western civilization, that is to say, a generically Christian civilization, is the goal. Much of the besieged city is not truly Christian anymore, but these people hate God so much they don’t want anything that even reminds them of something that used to be Christian.

BLM responds,

No, it is not a generically Christian civilization that the enemy is going after Doug. It is a particularly white Christian civilization that they are going after.

I thoroughly agree with DW’s second sentence above.

DW writes,

But who co-opted these minorities in the first place? Who enlisted them to do this awful thing? Who is using them as a cat’s paw? White people, that’s who. Woodrow Wilson was white. FDR was white. LBJ was white. Earl Warren was white. Margaret Sanger was white. King Charles III is white. Out of the six justices who voted for Roe, only one was black. Elizabeth Warren is white. Ted Kennedy was white. Nelson Rockefeller was white. John Roberts is white. Jimmy Carter is white. Nancy Pelosi is white. Hillary Clinton is white, ditto Bill. John Dewey was white. Richard Rorty is white. Keith Olbermann is white. The overwhelming number of Ivy League grads are white. Shall I go on?

BLM responds,

White people are guilty Doug? But I didn’t think whiteness existed? But maybe I should re-translate this to mean people of European ancestry are guilty?

1.) Now this “who” question brings us to another flash point but instead of quoting from Martin Luther or John Calvin, or Peter Hammond or Maurice Pinay, or Nesta Webster, or Chrysostom I’ll just quote from a Normie hero of the 20th century. Somebody that the CREC crew can get behind;

“In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”
 
By the Rt. Hon. Winston S. Churchill.
 Illustrated London Herald
February 08, 1920 — pg. 5

Now, DW, later in this piece will mock people who make the same observation above that Sir. Winston Churchill makes but this observation has been made by the best of Christian men through the centuries (and the worst of them as seen by the Churchill quote) and I suspect that it is no less true in 2022 then it was in 1920 when Winnie wrote what he wrote. The “who” question … the who as in who is the ultimate co-opter in this drama has to be answered and Sir Winston Churchill steps right up to the mic and gives us the answer. This is not to say that plenty of white shaboss goy do not exist who have played their role and need to be indicted. It is to say that the fire that is alight in Western Civilization will not be put out by anyone who does not want to face the “who” question squarely.

2.) Winnie gave us a pretty good list to offset DW’s list of guilty white shaboss goy but allow me to give a few more names.

 

First can we admit that among the political players that Doug mentions that they themselves are likewise merely cat’s paws of a much bigger interest. IOW, those white people among the political players that DW lists are being moved and animated by another whole level of Malthusian anti-Christ chicanery that often is peopled by a minority that is white when convenient and not white when not convenient.

Yes, and Herbert Marcuse was white, and so is David Axelrod, and Max Horkheimer, and Jacques Derrida, and Janet Yellin, and Timothy Geitner, and Chuck Todd and Spielberg, Katzenberg and Geffin, and George Soros, and Louis Brandeis and Felix Frankfurter, and Felix Weil and FDR’s handler Bernard Baruch, and Nixon’s handler Henry Kissinger, and Samuel Untermeyer, and George Lukacs, and Wilhem Reich and Sigmund Freud, and Leon Bronstein, and the overwhelming number of Harvard graduates are “white.” Shall I go on Doug? OK.. I will

Bella Abzug was “white,” and Gloria Steinem, and Betty Friedan of “The Feminist Mystique Fame” and Sec. State Anthony Blinken, and Sec. Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, and Rachel Levin the Admiral in the Biden Administration that seemingly can’t answer the question, “What is a Woman.”  are “white.” Louis B. Mayer was “white.” So is Roman Polanski and Bill Maher.

I feel like Captain American when I say; “I can do this all day.”

DW writes,

So when the commies are wrecking the place, which they are, you don’t get to say that all the white people who cooked up the destructo-plans in the first place are doing their evil deeds in spite of their noble skin color, and that all the darker-skinned groups that have been enlisted as patsies in the cause are doing it because of the color of their skin. How convenient for the thesis. What my net don’t catch ain’t fish.

Bret responds,

1.) That’s cute. Except no Kinists has ever said that or I suspect ever thought it. Is DW conflating Kinism with CI?

2.) Commies are only white people DW? If Paul can justly characterized Cretins with negative attributes isn’t it time to justly characterize another specific people group as more than just being “white.” Who are the real patsies DW and who have used the willing white Shaboss Goy from time immemorial?

I am glad to point the finger at the evil white men who have traded in their inheritance for a pot of red stew and have done so repeatedly on Iron Ink. Are you Doug, willing to name the people that Winnie named?

Thanks … I didn’t think so.

 

Vox Day weighs in on the matter. He is not as winsome as I am.

Doug Wilson is a Boomer Fraud