Category: Marxism/Cultural Marxism

Fisking Humanist Manifesto III (Antioch Declaration) (Part I)

Today Humanist Manifesto III was dropped by the Boomer-Cons. They are calling it “The Antioch Declaration.” I hope to interact with it some over the next few entries

We will start with a quote by Augustine;

“Difference of race or condition or sex is indeed taken away by the unity of faith, but it remains imbedded in our mortal interactions, and in the journey of this life the apostles themselves teach that it is to be respected, and they even proposed living in accord with the racial differences between Jews and Greeks as a wholesome rule.”

St. Augustine on Galatians 3:28

Humanist Manifesto III (Antioch Declaration — Hereafter AD)

“We deny that the Kingdom purposes of Christ and requirements of His Word can be equated with the seating positions of political actors during the French Revolution, or that the modern antithesis between right and left is equivalent to the antithesis that God established in the Garden of Eden between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, the kingdom of darkness and kingdom of light.”

Paleocon responds

I wonder if the Boomers who put this together know that even though the French Revolution gave us “the Left and the Right” as political categories realize that both the Girondists, who sat on the right nor the Montagnards who sat on the left belong to what today would be known as conservative. The difference between Girondists (“right”) and Montagnards (“left) is that the Girondists were moderate and soft left while the Montagnards were hard left. There was no right.

It is the same today. In wonderful irony these chaps writing this document belong to the soft-moderate left in the Church. They are not as far left as the WOKE left but they are still doing the devil’s work in opposing well established revisionist understandings of the post-enlightenment consensus.

Now as far as the antithesis goes, it is true that the Biblical antithesis is not the same as left vs. right but with that said can the Boomer-Cons give anybody on the left that doesn’t belong to the seed of the serpent? I can give all kinds of names of those on the Right that belong to the seed of the woman. So, there isn’t an exact mirroring going on here but everybody on the left hates the Messiah.

Humanist Manifesto II (AD) writes, 

“We affirm that the modern neo-pagan secular project is bankrupt and desperately trying to hold the social order together by means of a fraudulent narrative and anti-Christian worldview.  As a result, the lies of secular elites in all spheres have necessarily grown increasingly evident and outrageous.”

Paleocon responds,

I affirm that the Boomer-cons are likewise bankrupt, being a pale expression of the neo-liberal Enlightenment project. They are likewise seeking to desperately hold the ecclesiastical social order together by means of a fraudulent narrative that finds Hitler behind every thought that disagree with them and views themselves as being Churchills who won’t make the mistakes of Neville Chamberlain. I would contend that they likewise are holding to a anti-Christian world and life view, and in order to support it the lies of these would be gatekeepers necessarily grow increasingly evident and outrageous.  This is a classic case of accusing your enemies what you yourself are guilty of.

Humanist Manifesto (AD) writes,

“We affirm that, as a consequence, some young men in the West have become jaded and cynical, with an element among them now rejecting or doubting the received account of virtually anything. The great danger is that now, instead of acting on the basis of revealed truth in Christ, they are in the unhappy position of reacting by choosing between opposing sets of lies.”

Paleocon responds,

I affirm that, as a consequence, many old Boomers in the church in the West have become bossy and imperious, with an element among them now rejecting or doubting the well documented revisionist history on just about everything over the last 200 + years since the Endarkenment. The great danger is that now, instead of acting on the basis of a Christian Worldview derived from Scripture that allows them to properly read and interpret history, they are in the unhappy position of choosing to believe the lies fed to them by the non-Christian court historians of the 2oth century.

Twin Spin #2 — McAtee Contra Wilson On The Value Of His Conservatism

In this 30 second clip the Modernist of Moscow tips his hand in a revealing fashion;

https://www.youtube.com/clip/Ugkx7CxL4q6HzpNHhIzYS7j1kJI0UjqHnL6p

Wilson is a classic example why Biblical Christians need to avoid the sobriquet of “conservative,” and why they need to be done with being followers of Wilson. Wilson has demonstrated for us that there is very little admirable in being “conservative.” This is why some of us have reached for other labels. Some of us have suggested “Reformed Dissident.” We certainly need some identification that marks us as distinct from the type of conservatism that Wilson embodies.

The three quotes below from Samuel T. Francis begins to limn out the problems that currently exist with being thought of as “conservative.”

“What paleoconservatism tries to tell Americans is that the dominant forces in their society are no longer committed to conserving the traditions, institutions, and values that created and formed it, and, therefore, that those who are really conservative in any serious sense and wish to live under those traditions, institutions, and values need to oppose the dominant forces and form new ones.”

Samuel T. Francis

“Abandoning the illusion that it represents an establishment to be conserved, a new American Right must recognize that its values and goals lie outside and against the establishment and that its natural allies are not in Manhattan, Yale, and Washington but in the increasingly alienated and threatened strata of Middle America. The strategy of the Right should be to enhance the polarization of Middle Americans from the incumbent regime, not to build coalitions with the regime’s defenders and beneficiaries.

Samuel Francis

“The first thing we have to learn about fighting and winning a cultural war is that we are not fighting to “conserve” something; we are fighting to overthrow something….While we will find much in the conservative tradition to teach us about the nature of what we want to conserve and why we should want to conserve it, we will find little in conservative theory to instruct us in the strategy and tactics of challenging dominant authorities.”

Samuel Francis

Wilson in that link is nothing but astonishing … maybe “shocking” is a better word. I think my readers will find this link interesting.

To set this up, we need to keep in mind that there is a rumor floating around that Trump’s Sec.Def. nominee, Pete Hegseth is no longer a zionist, but that is not confirmed and is meaningless at this point. It is also interesting that I also heard that Hegseth attended a CREC church.

Anyway …  in this recent clip linked above, Doug expresses glee over the possibility that Hegseth IS a zionist, all because it puts a damper on those Doug label’s “Aunti-Zemite” and that crowd’s hope of prevailing against the advance of Zionism in America.

The great irony of this is that boiled down: DW would rather a Christian Heresy (zionism) continue to prosper and haunt our nation, just to shut down a group of people he has a personal grudge against. This even though this heresy of Zionism is really aimed at the strength of the church in favor of a heathen belief and people.

DW expresses glee over a heresy which has subjected our children and nation to constant war / poverty. He takes glee in the undermining of the Church and nation, so that these “Aunti-Zemites” he so detests personally would experience setback.

It’s also interesting that DW in the clip above talks about “bad forms of Kinism.” Does this mean that DW finally recognizes that there is a Kinism that isn’t bad? And if he finally recognizes that would he possibly come out and say so?

Folks, conservatism is dead and ministers like Wilson (and Foster, and Sandlin, and Boot, and White, and etc. etc. etc.) are Pied Pipers either keeping us in the very bad place we currently are or worse yet leading us to an even worse place yet.

Dabney noted this long before Samuel Francis when he wrote of Conservatism in the 2nd half of the 19th century;

“It may be inferred again that the present movement for women’s rights will certainly prevail from the history of its only opponent, Northern conservatism. This [Northern conservatism] is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always when about to enter a protest very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its “bark is worse than its bite,” and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent role of resistance: The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it “in wind,” and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy, from having nothing to whip.”

― Robert Lewis Dabney

Biblical Christians need to be done with conservatism and they need to be done with the clergy, like Wilson, who are the embodiment of the Conservative impulse.

Twin Spin #1 — McAtee Contra Wilson On The Nature & Character of America

Responding to Doug Wilson’s bloviating on the thread linked below;

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1857824129925476821.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3a1SPDhUvNC-nX6pYuuYPYmtPBv9NRr-5MKRrxyw5Qa4EIIxZ5eAtg2zg_aem_RkYsp4e3U2k8YoFQYGPCJw

“The heaviest lift in our (America’s) process of assimilation was the descendants of the Africans who were brought here as slaves against their will. But it still was largely accomplished . . . until the advent of identity politics. Identity politics intends to melt the pot itself.”


Doug Wilson
Pope of Moscow

1.) Yes the descendants of Africa were brought here against their will as they were sold into bondage by their black African captors to, in many cases, Bagels who owned the shipping that was transporting these black Africans captured and sold as booty of war at at a great profit. It was a terrible thing for those people to endure but in the endurance of it the descendants of those black Africans have inherited a position and well being that could have never been theirs had their ancestors remained in Africa as war booty.

2.) Descendants of Africans were assimilated? They sure didn’t think so in the time of MLK. To listen to many today they don’t want to be assimilated instead preferring to be constantly playing the role of aggrieved victim. Those genuinely assimilated will have no foundation for pleading victimization.

3.) Identity politics came into being precisely because assimilation with its “America as melting pot” metaphor was NEVER true. It was only a matter of time once the project of white replacement got underway that identity politics was seen as the mask it was and is.

It is a mask, having been ripped off is now understood . If one looks at voting patterns, for example, going back decades and decades one can see the reality of identity politics in how minorities have voted over the decades. Identity politics merely became a problem, for people like Doug Wilson, once white people started voting in their interests. Identity politics was fine with the left up until the point when White folks began to realize that they had unique interests vis-a-vis other people groups.

“Until recently, America was a distinct ethnos that came into being as the result of many different ethnoi coming together at a pace that made assimilation possible—it was truly a melting pot.” 

Doug Wilson 
Pope of CREC

1.) What Doug doesn’t mention is that while it can be argued that America was indeed a distinct ethnoi, it was a distinct ethnoi as the European cousins inter-married. In other words, the US became a distinct ethnoi as comprised, in its majority expression, of White Europeans. That this is true is seen in census results from my own lifetime that registered America as being 88% white. This is a significant fact left off by “gate-keeper of Moscow.”

2.) Contra Wilson America was NEVER a melting pot. That was a myth sold to America in the early 19th century. I’m confident that current Reformed chaps seeking to be the Gatekeepers know that the more prevailing metaphor now is “America as salad bowl.” Interestingly enough the idea of America as melting pot was popularized by a early 20th century Russian Bagel immigrant, Israel Zwangli in a play he wrote. It has always been to the Bagel’s advantage to sell this dissimulation so that White Anglo Saxon Protestants don’t have a sense of ownership of their own nation. Those selling the whole “Melting Pot” myth have to know that America was, as recently as my birth, a nation that was 88% white and overwhelmingly Christian.

It is in the interest of Bagels to embrace and promulgate this false metaphor of “melting-pot” because by doing so no ethnic/racial majority is allowed to rise in order to “persecute” the Bagel population. A melting-pot metaphor keeps a people who are 2% of the population in an advantaged place as a “divide and conquer” technique. If there is no majority people group then it is easier for a group who has always refused to assimilate to control the whole nation.

“What these disparate groups were assimilated into was an Anglo Protestant culture that was superior to many other cultures. But any superiority that it had was because it was Christian, not because it was Anglo.”

Doug Wilson
Gate-keeper of Moscow

1.) If these disparate groups were assimilated into a Anglo-Protestant culture that was superior to many other cultures, then we might ask; “What the Hades has happened to that Anglo-Protestant culture these foreign elements were assimilated into?” I mean, if they were really ‘assimilated’ per the Gate-keeper of Moscow shouldn’t we still have that original Anglo-Protestant culture?

For the rest of the Wilson blathering immediately quoted above I quote the response of my friend DD;

2.) Wilson is arguing that America is not monoethnic but is a “melting pot” that at one point had an “Anglo-Protestant” culture. There are problems with this too numerous to deal with in a short post, but what I want you to see is the underlying egalitarianism.

If this is correct, there is no functional difference between ancient Greece, Japan, and the Aztecs because all were pagan.

At root, you see, there are no significant differences among the different peoples that cannot be primarily explained by the external factor of religion. There are men–not Dutchmen, Englishmen, Chinese, etc. and culture is reduced almost exclusively to one factor.

I once tried to explain to a pastor-friend, many years ago now, that the views he was articulating (similar to Wilson) were bound up in egalitarianism, which is a faith system that acts like leaven, poisoning the entire loaf. Once the camel’s nose is into the tent it is not long before you have women leading pastoral prayer or distributing the Eucharist. In time, they will be officers in the church, ruling and teaching. The knocking down of natural boundaries and categories does not stop, it is a ceaseless acid burning down the social order.



The Modernist of Moscow isn’t finished quite yet;

“The open borders policies of the last few years were not a continuation of our historic pattern of assimilation, but rather an ideological assault on the culture that was doing the assimilating.”

Doug Wilson
Embodiment of Modernity

1.) The last few years? Does the last few years begin for Dougie Doo Doo with the The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Celler Act,? That was when this ideological assault began in principle. What has happened in “last few years,” is merely the logical consequence of that act that overturned a previous immigration policy that was decidedly pro Western and pro White.

2.) As this immigration is indeed a part of an ideological assault on our culture it is obvious in order to save what is left of this once “superior culture” we must close the borders and repatriate tens of millions of people. Is Doug down with that? I have my doubts.

3.) If you scratch the surface of the Hart-Celler Act Doug isn’t going to be too pleased with which unassimilated people group in America were the ones pushing for the end of the previous Hart-Cellar policy.

Dougie Poo continues with his genius IQ;

 

“In light of all the foregoing, Clarence Thomas is a far better representative of—and defender of— our Anglo Protestant cultural heritage than, say, a gross ton of anon crusader accounts with laser eyes.”

Doug Wilson
Egalitarian Maestro

If Japan found a Clarence Thomas defending their cultural heritage I imagine that they would be glad for that Clarence Thomas. However, that doesn’t make such a thing ideal or the expected norm.

So, inasmuch as Clarence Thomas does defend Anglo-Protestant culture then three cheers and more for Clarence Thomas. May he remain healthy for many more years. May he find himself continued to be hated by the overwhelming majority of his own people.

However, that an anomaly exists doesn’t mean that we should keep looking for anomalies as the norm.

Dougie Poo ends with a flourish;

“So those who want to defend America as a monoethnic state need to take care lest they wind up defending a morono-ethnic state instead.”

Doug Wilson
Moron in Chief 

Look at how clever Doug is. Did you see what he did there? he changed out “mono” for “morono.” My that is clever. Head of the class type of stuff.  Makes me wish I could be clever just like Dougie.

Hey …. I’m trying.

 

 

 

 

 



Doug Wilson, Side-B Nazism, The Green Witch & Awaking From The Silver Chair

In his latest brain fart the legendary gatekeeper Rev. Doug Wilson accuses those of us who agree with Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther, and Calvin on the issue of the Bagels as being a new version of “Revoice.”

Only the most high Rev. Wilson observes; whereas “Revoice” was about side-b sodomy, those of us who agree with our Fathers on the issue of the Bagels are side-b Nazis. According to Pope Doug we who agree with our Fathers on the Bagel issue are trying to be “sin-adjacent.” True, per Pope Doug, we don’t want to be out right Nazis but we do want to be kind of like that. Why some of us even have the temerity to agree with Dr. R. J. Rushdoony, David Irving, and many others that the genocide numbers may well have been inflated. Indeed, per Doug it seems that it may well be a sin to not only inquire too closely about the actual number total of deaths but it is even the case that it is beyond the pale to even contemplate the possibility that International Jewry had an agenda that was decidedly against the German people. One wonders if Doug has ever read about the boycott against German goods called for by International Jewry in March of 1933?

So, in Doug’s brain any honest attempt at historical revision automatically falls under the category of a Nazi version of revoice where Christians see how close they can get to Nazism without actually becoming Nazis. Of course, by this standard, Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther and Calvin and many Church councils were the original version of Revoice that folks like Sam Alberry, Nate Collins and Misty Irons copied in 2018.

Of course, Doug, as he typically does, leaves himself an out by saying, after he rips people who question the WW II narrative, that he has been questioning the WW II narrative for decades. Yeah, it sure shows Doug.

Doug wants to accuse these young chaps of being a Nazi version of “Side-B Sodomy.” Very well then, I accuse Doug of being the embodiment of C. S. Lewis’ “Green Witch” in the Narnia book “The Silver Chair.” If you will remember in that novel, Prince Rilian, has been seduced and enchanted to serve the ends of the Green Witch. However, the spell is never complete and daily the Prince is required to sit in the Silver Chair in order to get his daily fix of enchantment that will keep him beholden to the Green Witch. One day, in the presence of Jill, Eustace, and Puddleglum, Prince Rilian incrementally awakens from the spell and begins to rail and rage against The Green Witch and her spell upon him. At this point the Green Witch enters into the room they are all in and begins to sing again her spell of enchantment in order to put the Prince back to sleep and so under her spell.

Doug is playing the Green Witch. Young men are waking up to how much and how often they’ve been lied to by the Governmental-Corporate-Ecclesiastical-Media complex. In this awakening everything is being questioned from the post-Enlightenment/ WW II consensus forward. People are discovering that for centuries, if not millennium Jewish and Biblical Christian interests have been at severe cross purposes. Yet, in this awakening there we find guys like Doug Wilson seeking to reinvigorate the spell that has had us all sleeping for decades and has had us serving as lackeys for the purposes of an Institutional Green Witch that is contrary to our own Christian and National interests.

Now, to be sure, there are voices out there that are excessive on this subject. For example, some of the work, that the Lutherans, Mahler and Woe, are doing is positively unhinged. Keep in mind though that the swing back of this pendulum may be particularly vicious given the resentment and rage over being lied to for decades. If the snap back is extreme guys like Wilson (Andrew Sandlin, Karl Trueman to name a couple more) have to share the blame. Forcing the lid down on a boiling pot only guarantees that the whole pot is sure top explode.

Doug Wilson on this subject (and more than a few others) is the Green Witch seeking to put the young Princes of the realm back to sleep.

And myself?

I’m just trying to play the role of faithful Puddleglum by casting myself on the fire that is aiding in the Green Witch’s enchantment. I can only hope that burnt McAtee smells as head clearing as burnt Marshwiggle.

Addendum

I would strongly recommend that Doug read the following books. It is only a start.

E. Michael Jones — The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit
E. Michael Jones — The Holocaust Narrative
Maurice Pinay — The Plot Against The Church
Hillarie Belloc — The Jews
Martin Luther — The Jews and Their Lies
John Calvin — Response to Question and Objections of a Certain Jew
Against the Jews — Chrysostom

Contra Joe Boot

 

“Lies that sound true are always more dangerous. Jesus doesn’t call us to follow the Greek conception of the true, good, and beautiful — he requires obedience to the law of God which includes loving one’s enemies. My people are God’s covenant people from every tribe, tongue, and nation (Mt. 12:48-50). There is a difference between acknowledging the particular familial and civic responsibility I have toward my own immediate family and nation & ‘preferring’ some people over others. The overtones of this are obvious. And frankly it wasn’t Hispanics, who brought abortion to America or Blacks who brought Cultural Marxism, or Asians who brought LGBTQ ideology, or N. American Indians who brought euthanasia, or Arabs who brought the Climate Cult — I’m pretty sure it was ‘our people’ on all counts. Let’s put our house in order.”

Joe Boot

1.) Just for clarification’s sake, it should be understood that “the good, the true, and the beautiful,” are not independent categories that exist outside the reality of the God of the Bible being the precondition for being able to identify “the good, the true, and the beautiful.” In other words, apart from the God of the Bible the adjectives “good,” “true,” and “beautiful” could (and have) just as easily mean “bad,” “false,” and “ugly.” We know what the “good, the true, and the beautiful” are because of who God is. It is not the case that the “good, the true, and the beautiful” are descriptors of God apart from presupposing God.

2.) God’s law does require us to “Love our enemies,” but I would bet the farm that Boot doesn’t understand that one way to love our enemies is by resisting them with all our might. Scripture teaches that we are to “Let love be genuine. Hate what is evil; hold fast to what is good. (Rom. 12:9). We are indeed to love our enemies and sometimes the best way to do that is by giving them justice. The simplest example of this is spanking children. We spank our children because we love our children. Similarly, loving our enemies is sometimes not going to look like love as our enemies might want to define love.

Honestly, I can’t believe that Boot, of all people, is trotting the old “love our enemies” trope in order to prove that we should not have a greater love for our own people than for those who are the enemies of our people and who wish to destroy them.

2.) When Boot insists that his people are Christians from every tribe, tongue, and nation, as opposed to his kin, Boot has confused categories at best and at worst he is involved in a view where grace destroys nature. The fact that I have a very real spiritual attachment to all who rightly call on the name of Christ regardless of their race or nationality does not negate the fact that because of God’s work of creation wherein he has set people in clans, tribes, and nations so that those clans, tribes, and nations can properly be referred to as “my people.”

Why is it that this is so hard to understand? Normatively, I have a greater obligation to my own unbelieving parents than I do two Han Chinese Christians old enough to be my parents who live 1000 miles away. Is this not why we have the fifth commandment?

Look, it is not as if we Kinists do not understand that we have obligations to Christians who are not from our people group. When are the Alienists going to understand that it is fitting and proper to talk about a unique allegiance that we have to our kin?

3.) So, Boot, understands that we have a peculiar responsibility to our kith and kin and yet desires to insist that it would be improper for us to prefer our own kith and kin? This coming from the guy who named his organization “The Ezra Institute?” Man, the irony can’t get much thicker. Hey, Joe, you do realize don’t you that Ezra of all the OT Fathers perhaps more than anyone demanded, under penalty of law, for the Hebrews to put away wives and children who were not kith and kin to the Hebrew people. Joe… Booty man … it sure looks like Father Ezra understood it was proper to prefer one’s own people.

4.) Boot then cryptically drops .. “The overtones of this are obvious.” Now, I can be corrected here but methinks old Joe is dropping the Nazi card here. As if the fact that preferring one’s own people automatically makes one a Nazi. But you know what Joe? I don’t care anymore. You and your Boomer ilk can call me Nazi till the cows come home and I now longer give a tinker’s damn. Of course you won’t mind if I in turn, refer to you and your ilk as Cultural Marxists.

5.) Now this last bit is precious beyond speaking. We have the likes of Doug Wilson forever insisting how sinful it is to notice the sins of his Jewish ancestors because, well, because, they’ve done lots of good things to that balance the scales. Now, we find Boot putting white people in the dock quite without saying the scales are more then balanced. I’m sure Doug will soon be writing an article lecturing Boot on how inappropriate he was here.

6.) Next, on this same point can we notice that Maggie Sanger, who was the apostle for abortion was aided by Jewish immigrant named Fania Mindell in providing abortions to the public. On October 16, 1919, Mindell, Sanger and her Sister opened the country’s first birth control clinic, located in a tenement in Brownsville, New York. Jewish publications crow crow about this Jewish influence.

https://forward.com/culture/359288/meet-the-jewish-woman-who-helped-lay-the-groundwork-for-planned-parenthood/

Dr. Bernard Nathanson who preformed countless abortions before seeing the light was Jewish. Indeed, the Talmud teaches that abortion is perfectly acceptable since the fetus, in their twisted thinking, is a pursuer seeking to do harm. Now, I don’t deny that more than a few white people (Shabazz Goy) have been involved in the Abortion industry but the idea that somehow abortion arose and developed apart from Jewish influence is untrue.

Next we move to Boot’s bit on cultural Marxism … again, Cultural Marxism while having plenty of Shabazz Goy white disciples was a movement first originating with Jewish people. Jewish Names like Marcuse, Adorno, Horkheimer, György Lukács, and Wilhelm Reich litter the Cultural Marxist beginnings. Surely, Boot knows this, yet Boot decides to lay all this uniquely at the feet of white people.

Sure, white people, have sins plenty to repent of but the idea that Boot so quickly wants to prove that we are all equal because we are all sinners is just a sacrifice offered up to the God of egalitarianism.