“Leftism with its strongly identitarian bent and a non-spiritual, materialistic, enthusiasm either declares race and nationality to be supreme values to which everybody has to conform (as the Nazis did) or they want to ‘explain them away’ and ignore them with iron determination … because they are an obstacle to identitarian uniformity. The Nazis wanted to eliminate by brute force those who did not racially conform, those nationally (ethnically) not conforming by cultural high-pressure methods. The ‘international leftists’ wants us to close our eyes and ignore facts. This is just another process of ‘elimination.’ The rightist, who is a liberal in the genuine (classical) sense of the term, keeps his eyes open and gladly and charitably accepts diversity of mankind. Rejecting egalitarianism (no less than identitarianism), he knows that God’s gifts are distributed in mysterious ways — not only among persons but also among nations and races. Though they cannot be expressed in simple scientific formula and never work out mathematically in time or space, they do not invalidate the rightist principle of suum cuique.”

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Leftism — pg. 223

There is a movement afoot in some “Christian” quarters to suggest that the Postmillenialism requires us to see that God builds His Kingdom by the elimination of ethnic and national distinctions. Personally, I see such “thinking” as a kind of Baptized Cultural Marxism, since it is likewise the goal of the Cultural Marxists to eliminate the idea of distinct ethnicity and / or national identity. This can be seen by examining just a few of the words from the Cultural Marxists and their ideological forebears,

“Princes and nations will disappear without violence from the earth, the human race will become one family and the world the abode of reasonable men.”

-Adam Weishaupt, quoted in Paul Johnson, Intellectuals (London: Orion Books Limited, 1993), p. 32.

Capitalism developed the ever more inhuman polarization of the sexes. The cult of making distinctions, which serves only for oppression, is now being swept away by awareness of resemblance and identity.

M. Walser
Uber die neusten Stimmungen im Westen
In: Kursbuch, Bd. 20, 1970, S. 19-41.

”What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities?

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and hereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.”

~ Frederick Engels in “The Principles of Communism”, 1847

“The equality of races and nations is one of the most important elements of the moral strength and might of the Soviet state. Soviet anthropology develops the one correct concept, that all the races of mankind are biologically equal. The genuinely materialist conception of the origin of man and of races serves the struggle against racism, against all idealist, mystic conceptions of man, his past, present and future.”

—Mikhail Nesturkh, Soviet anthropologist, 1959
“The Origin of Man” (Moscow)Mikhail Nesturkh, Soviet anthropologist, 1959:

This from Igor Shafareivich’s “Socialist Phenomenon”

“But with almost perverse consistency, most of the projections of Marxism have been proven incorrect. A better percentage of correct predictions could probably have by making random guesses…. we limit ourselves to three (examples) in order to underscore the typical and in most cases fundamental nature of the errors: the truth proved to be not merely different but in fact the opposite to that which had been predicted.

a.) The national question: ‘National differences and antagonistic interests among various peoples are already vanishing more and more and more thanks to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the corresponding conditions of life. The supremacy of the proletariat will accelerate the disappearances of differences.’

However, the Biblical view of race, ethnicity, and national identity is far different than what is offered by the Cultural Marxists and those Christians who are trying to Baptize the elimination of ethnic markers by embracing the Marxist anthropology “that the genuinely materialist conception of the origin of man and of races is that all the races of mankind are biologically equal.” And of course, in the Marxist world and life view “biologically equal” means mere component parts that can be used interchangeably in the great machine culture that Marxists always turn society into. “Biologically equal,” for these people means that there is no God ordained differences between the families of men.

In the quotes below we see a different vision than that given by the Alienists in our midst.

“Now the predicates of the covenant are applied in Isa. 19 to the Gentiles of the future, — “Egypt my people, and Assyria, the work of my hands, and Israel, mine inheritance,” Egypt, the people of “Jehovah of hosts,” (Isa. 19:25) is therefore also expected to live up to the covenant obligations, implied for Jehovah’s people. And Assyria comes under similar obligations and privileges. These nations are representative of the great Gentile world, to which the covenant privileges will therefore be extended.”

Martin J. Wyngaarden, The Future of the Kingdom in Prophecy and Fulfillment: A Study of the Scope of “Spiritualization” in Scripture (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2011), p. 94.

“More than a dozen excellent commentaries could be mentioned that all interpret Israel as thus inclusive of Jew and Gentile, in this verse, — the Gentile adherents thus being merged with the covenant people of Israel, though each nationality remains distinct.”

“This abiding distinction of the nationalities is also clearly implied by Isaiah. For, though Israel is frequently called Jehovah’s People, the work of his hands, his inheritance, yet these three epithets severally are applied not only to Israel, but also to Assyria and to Egypt: “Blessed be Egypt, my people, and Assyria, the work of my hands, and Israel, mine inheritance.” 19:25.

Thus the highest description of Jehovah’s covenant people is applied to Egypt, — “my people,” — showing that the Gentiles will share the covenant blessings, not less than Israel. Yet the several nationalities are here kept distinct, even when Gentiles share, in the covenant blessing, on a level of equality with Israel. Egypt, Assyria and Israel are not nationally merged. And the same principles, that nationalities are not obliterated, by membership in the covenant, applies, of course, also in the New Testament dispensation.”

Wyngaarden, pp. 101-102.

What the Alienist Christians are missing in their lurch towards amalgamation is that they are in bed with some strange bedfellows. Here is another person they with whom they are sleeping,

“National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism.”

Papa Joe Stalin

Hostility towards the validity of national and ethnic identity tend to rise at various times when it is useful to those in power or as part of political strategy. Such was the straitjacket imposed on thought by Soviet socialism that nationality was understood as “a social construct” that could easily be de-constructed. As Solzhenitsyn observes in his frank way:

“Before the camps, I regarded the existence of nationality as something that shouldn’t be noticed—nationality did not really exist, only humanity. But in the camps one learns: if you belong to a successful nation you are protected and you survive. If you are part of universal humanity—too bad for you.”

Many of the Christian Alienists are living in Solzhenitsyn’s pre-camp reality. Like the pre-Gulag Solzhenitsyn the Alienist Christians, invoking Christianity as their proof, have embraced universal humanity. They do not yet realize that what they are invoking in their advocacy of the erosion of nations for the sake of Christ, in the words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “will sooner lead to the entropy of the soul… not the unification of humanity.”

Why isn’t the world media covering the genocide of the Boer in South Africa as it covered Apartheid in the 80′s and 90′s? The White Boer Farmer is being raped, pillaged, and murdered and we hear next to nothing about it in our traditional media outlets. Could it be the reason that we hear so little about this crime is because the South African Boer Farmer is white?

Here we have all this noise and fury about the Belhar confession and the need for racial justice all the while the white Boer Farmer is being attacked at every turn. The Belhar confession, coming from South Africa as it does, is supposed to be this great statement about unity and social justice and yet the very country that it comes from is pursuing genocide of the White Boer Farmer.

Something doesn’t add up here.

http://www.censorbugbear.org/africa/south-africa/war-threats-hate-crimes-soar-sa-whites-june-2012

http://www.neo-genocide.com/farmitracker/

In the old days in Europe the cultural exclusivity was religious. There was a time at Oxford university one had to subscribe to the articles of the Church of England to be academically eligible. Harvard University was named after a Puritan minister in the 1630′s, was a church sponsored institution for two centuries. The problem at that time was not not Eurocentrism, it was Christocentrism. Harvard was culturally exclusive, but in a religious sense.

The politics of the quota system at American universities was originally intended to restrict the number of Jews admitted in favor of Christians — Christocentrism gone mad. There is still a lot of Christocentrism left at American universities, but most of the university life has been secularized. However, as the 20th century is coming to an end, we have reached yet another cultural frontier. Just as Harvard once had to try and shed off Christocentrism, all American campuses now must shed off excessive Eurocentrism….

Ali Mazrui
Professor — State University New York
Round Table Discussion — circa 1990

Here is the cat is let out of the bag.

1.) Note the reason is all American campuses must now shed off excessive Eurocentrism is precisely because in Eurocentrism one finds the Christocentrism that was previously sloughed off and yet remains expressed slightly in the culture that is Eurocentrism. This quote, from one of the enemies of the West, ties together for us in the most tightly connected fashion the connection in the minds of our enemies between the Christian faith and the White Anglo Saxon Christian and the culture that they built.

What this means of course is that the war being waged against the white man is being waged precisely because the white man was the carrier of the Christian faith — and yet still retains the slumbering remnant of Christianity in its cultural code. What people like Mazrui, Obango, Holder, and other epistemologically self conscious minorities == as well as far more self hating white people understand == is that if Eurocentrism can be finally destroyed then their previous attack to kill Christ will be largely successful. (Though they know that Christ can never be killed so they will be vigilant in each generation to do what must be done in order to keep Christ at bay. They can not succeed.)

Our enemies positively must destroy the White Anglo Saxon Christian Eurocentrism. It is a threat to all that they desire to build on the grave of the West and Christianity.

As an aside it might be asked where the origin of the self hatred of whites lies. The answer is simple. Self hating whites hate Christ and hate God’s moral law and anything of Christ that remains yet in their culture. As such they will, by way of multiculturalism and political correctness, make league with pagan minorities (most often cultural Marxist in their ideology) by ginning up past real and perceived minority grievances, in order to overthrow what remains of Christo-centrism and Euro-centrism. The real irony is when this is pursued in the Church all in the name of Christ. The real Christ will be murdered by a false Christ by self hating whites who would prefer civilizaitonal death than being ruled by Christ.

2.) When the universities favored Christians over Jews there was obviously an understanding that these united States was to be for Christians and be a Christian nation. Was there a reason why the universities at one time were careful to restrict the number of Jews?

3.) When Mazrui mentions that the universities became secularized and so moved away from Christocentrism there is an absolute necessity to understand that this move to the secular was in actuality a move towards anthropocentrism in any number of faith forms. In other words the centrism of Christianity in the universities was exchanged for the centrism of some other faith system. The idea of the “secular” is a myth.

4.) Like it or not Christianity and Christocentrism has been identified with the European and his Eurocentrism by our enemies. It is a convenient identification because by making this identification our enemies can attack us as “racists” when we defend the Christianity that made Europe, Europe when in point of fact we are “Christianists.” Well, if Christianist equals racist then let the whole world be covered with the success of the Gospel turning all men into racists as they are converted to Christianity.