If you want to listen to the section I’m dealing with you must go to the 30-minute mark and start there and listen for appx. 10 minutes.
The person being interviewed is Crawford Gribben who is a historian of early modern religion, with a particular interest in Calvinist literary cultures. He is connected to Queen’s University in Belfast. Recently he wrote a book titled; “Survival and Resistance in Evangelical America: Christian Reconstruction in the Pacific Northwest,” and in the linked interview above he is speaking on this book.
For this book, Gribben interviewed some Kinists in the Northwest area. I know several of them and so I asked them about Gribben’s observations on this interview.
1.) “The kinists I met love Rushdoony and they did quote some pretty unfortunate statements that Rushdoony made on race.”
I note this one first in order to demonstrate that Gribben should be considered a hostile witness when he makes observations on kinism. I’ve read tons of material by Rushdoony and I have yet to come across a “pretty unfortunate statement on race.” As such, Gribben’s observation on Kinism should be taken with a large grain of salt. Gribben obviously has an ax to grind for Political Correctness if he thinks RJR made pretty unfortunate statements on race.
2.) “The way the kinists presented themselves is that they were cool. They were not hicks from the sticks. They were very cool people.”
Is Gribben by this description reaching for the ancient idea of Jove’s (Dona’s / Thor’s) pagan oak worship in ancient Germanic times? By this description is he trying to tie kinists to those who once worshiped in sacred groves? Never mind that modern elites (Bohemian Grove Society) do themselves gather in forests to worship their deities.
4.) Kinists are very secretive people. Very worried about publicity and very happy to talk but also very concerned about what would happen as a consequence of that speech.
This should not be that surprising given how everything that Kinists say is twisted beyond recognition once our enemies get a hold of it. I myself am happy to talk but am also concerned about where I am going to end up while speaking the truth. My kinist friends are no different. When we live in a cancel culture as being driven by the fruitcake SJW’s, Alienists, and Marxists how could we not be concerned about what would happen as a consequence of our speech?
Alternately, Crawford’s ambiguity on this point could be, in itself, a subtle challenge to the Alienist Reconstructionists. If Gribben is not sure then that means that it might be the case that Kinism is indeed the natural consequence of RJR the cause. If that is the case, then Alienist Reconstructionism is itself the bastard child who has no ideological legacy in the writings of RJR.
Honestly, if Gribben is accurate here this speaks badly of the rest of the Alienist Reconstructionists camp. If they are not the most up to date then they don’t realize what they are facing and in a battle that means annihilation.