Remember, in this series of posts, I am providing commentary on a set of proposals written by Mr. Mickey Henry several years ago on defining characteristics of Kinism. These can still be found on the Tribal Theocrat website. The original postulates are the paragraphs with the Roman numerals. There are 24 total postulates. We have been providing commentary on four daily.
Editorial note — in the future, I am going to use the phrase “the 3multis” as a shorthand way of saying “multi-culturalism/multi-racialism/multi-faithism.”
XIII.) That atomistic individualism and centralized totalitarianism are not in tension, but are necessary corollaries. That the rise of rationalism has led to the simultaneous rise of an impersonal and rootless man and a unitary, technocratic state. That man inherently desires association and a sense of belonging, and that, in the absence of human-scale associations, will substitute the sense of belonging offered by the total state. That the cure for collectivism is not individualism, but rather to increase human-scale associations, principally in the primal community of the family, but also in multitudinous local social institutions, such as the church, civic organizations, and trade associations.
We might say that centralized totalitarianism is the logical consequence of atomistic individualism. Before I explain that, allow me to say that the reason that this is listed here is that kinists believe that the agenda of the New World Order with its polyglot marriages, transracial adoptions, and putatively multi-faith/multi-cultural/multi-racial social orders is being accomplished as a global centralized totalitarianism is precisely because of the pursuit of atomistic (or hyper) individualism.
Centralized totalitarianism succeeds more easily when the individual is stripped away from his varied covenantal contexts wherein he finds his identity such as family, church, guild, clubs, community, etc. so that all is left is the sovereign individual alone the consequence is that the atomized individual will look for some environment in which to find some identity and the only place left after all those covenantal contexts are destroyed is the State. Humans are like chameleons. They will always change colors to fit their environment. If men and women have all their varied covenantal contexts stripped away from them in pursuit of a hyper-individualism the result will be only one context will exist against which man will change colors to identify with and that will be the State so that atomized men will live, die, and find their being in the god-state. Because all this is true it is in the interest of statist governments who desire to grow in their power to pursue legislation that will set the individual “free” from all these covenantal communities. By pursuing this kind of “freedom” the end game is total and complete bondage of the individual to the centralized state. Now when you combine this reality with previous observations made in this series the result is the pursuit of a universal sameness as dictated by the state.
That multiculturalism is destructive of community and leads to isolation, alienation or loss of identity and a prevailing sense of loneliness. That a man who no longer identifies with his community will not expend his labor or capital in its maintenance, improvement, or in service of its future existence.
The rationalism that is referenced above is the rationalism of the autonomous man. The kinist believes in rationality but he does not believe in the rationalism that has been the trademark of modern autonomous man since the Endarkenment project. Rationalism as used here leads to an impersonal and rootless man because man has been cut off from a personal God who alone can provide roots in the various covenantal contexts as ordained in Scripture. Man disconnected from a personal God has nowhere to go but the impersonal plus time plus chance and as such man becomes impersonal. The unitary and technocratic state comes to the fore as the new immanent One that is seeking to provide an immanent transcendence that has been lost because the God of the Bible has been locked out of His cosmos (or so modern man thinks). So modern man, cut off from God is cut off himself from the possibility of being genuinely personal and becomes a cosmopolitan wanderer as the rootless atomized individual. When that happens look for the technocratic unitary and totalistic state to rise like bubbles blurping up in cooking pancake batter on a hot griddle.
All of this requires a re-thinking of the whole idea of individual freedom. The individual is not most free when he is most abstracted from God-ordained covenantal contexts such as family (nuclear and extended), community, church, clubs, and guilds. Indeed, the case can be made that the more we are connected to a myriad of covenantal contexts the more individualism we will have. The idea that the more any of us are “free” from these attachments the more we will know true freedom smells of brimstone and tastes of sulfur.
Are the kinists wrong here? To suggest they are is a denial of historic biblical Christianity. Again, I say, the kinists see a connection to all this and a world and church that applauds trans-racial adoptions, and polyglot marriages as normative, as well as a putatively multi-cultural/multi-racial/multi-faithism New World social order.
Christians need to be listening to the kinists, which is just another way of saying that “Christians” need to be listening to the Christians.
XIV.) That the forces of the New World Order have a vested interest in destroying community, as a means of atomizing man so that he willingly embraces the total state.
If you could take a course on the decline of the family as a community in the West in the 20th century you likely would be shocked at the full-on assault that has been waged against the family. With everything from the invention of the automobile (boudoirs on wheels freeing young women from the oversight of parents) to women’s suffrage (delimiting the authority of the man as the head of the home), to the advertising crusade to normalize women smoking cigarettes (women are just like men), to Rosie the Riveter (women working under male covenant heads not their husbands), to women routinely attending university away from home, to the rise of the pill, to the death inheritance taxation, to abortion, to women retaining their maiden names as combined with their married name, to placing children in government schools what has been seen is one constant assault by the state on the family and the Communist pursuit, stated in its Manifesto, to eliminate the family.
If it had happened all at once there would have been blood in the streets but because it has happened slowly and incrementally we have kept adjusting to each new outrage.
It is all done so that we would come to love the state who hates God and us with a rabid viciousness. The monster state labors to support every proposal from hyper-individualism that comes down the pike because the more of this kind of individualism that exists the more the state grows like the blob who ate San Francisco.
XV.) That multiculturalism is destructive of community and leads to isolation, alienation or loss of identity and a prevailing sense of loneliness. That a man who no longer identifies with his community will not expend his labor or capital in its maintenance, improvement, or in service of its future existence.
The 3multis is destructive as stated above because the price of man gaining hyper-individual “freedom” is becoming “Mr. nowhere man, living in a nowhere land, making all his plans for nobody.” The atomized individual is, to be sure, free, but he is free only to be by himself, alienated, lonely, possessing an identity that is the identity of only one and so not shared with anyone else.
And here we see the rise of the 25-year-old male still occupying his single mother’s basement honing his video game skills, only possibly interested in girls for the easy score they might be as well as the bitchy female who like the female Praying Mantis devours her mate after finishing coupling with him. Both the male and female versions of “free” individuals are disconnected not only from their communities but also from their past and their future. There is no thought for a future worthy of investing in because in their hyper-atomization they have also been cut off from their past just as they were cut off from their community. All that is left is a kind of perpetual nihilistic existentialism (sometimes called Postmodernism) that would embarrass Nietzsche and frighten Camus. Laboring for the maintenance of a yet future existence of my community? What ficking community are you talking about?
XVI.) That all men are equal only in the sense that we have a common origin and federal head in Adam. That we are equal before God’s Law in the sense that it applies to all men; recognizing that in points it applies unequal treatment to the sexes, to believers than to unbelievers, to the native than to the alien. That men are unequal in almost every other way, whether it be in talents, intelligence, character, strength, appearance, etc. That these inequalities are inherent in man, and not the result of differences in their environment or upbringing. That Christians, the native-born, and property owners, have a greater claim to wielding power, whether that be holding a position of leadership, voting, land ownership, or freedom of movement. That hierarchy is the natural and proper structure of human society.
Kinists HATE with a torched passion anything that smells of the modern notion of egalitarianism. Kinists just relaxingly bathe and leisurely soak in the hatred of those who love egalitarianism. We see egalitarianism as an example of that first sin wherein the creature was told that she would become like God if she only would take and eat. By merely eating the very real fruit of the very real tree the very real Eve, the first practitioner of Luciferian egalitarianism believed that God and man would become equal (i.e. — the same).
Kinists believe as the statement gives that all men ontologically have the same sinful nature because they all have fallen Adam as their common father. Kinists believe that God’s law applies to all men just in the way God says men are responsible to God’s law.
Kinists believe that God delights in the differences and distinctions that He has ordained and that any work that seeks to eliminate those inherent distinctions and differences proclaims one as at war with God. Modern man is at war with God. If we had any IQ left we would delight in these differences. After all, who desires to be just another comrade clone in just another grey Mao suit, greeting one another with the same ubiquitous leveler greeting of “Citoyen,” or the Anabaptist “Brother?”
Kinists believe in hierarchy and patriarchy defined biblically. We don’t want wives who know Kung Fu so well that they can single-handedly wipe out the army of Genghis Khan. We don’t want to cuddle up at night with reincarnated Old West characters like Calamity Jane. Kinists believe men and women have Biblically ordained roles and while we understand that everything can be overdone we hardly are concerned about masculinity or femininity in this culture being overdone.
Kinists are at war with this latest intensified incarnation of 1789 Paris, 1865 DC, 1918 Moscow, 1949 Peking and whatever the capital’s name is of timeless Hell.
Are Kinists the last Christian thinking men left standing?
