A Small Biblio-Theological Defense of Nations and Nationalism (Kinism)

1) Man is created in and reflects the image and likeness of God.

2.) Man is not completely man as an atomized singular individual (Gen. 1:27, 2:18). There is something lacking (Gen. 2:20f). Woman is created out of man. The first family unit together constitutes “Man.” Family is the primary building block that comprises tribe, which extended comprises nation which extended comprises ethnicity (people group), which extended comprises race. Think of outward concentric circles each larger circle related to the previous circle.

2) God consists of three persons in one essence. He is Trinitarian. God is both one and many.


a.) The One, the Three and the Many: God, Creation, and the Culture of Modernity  — Colin E. Gunton 
b.) The One and the Many — R. J. Rushdoony
c.) Assorted works of C. Van Til

3) Being created in the Imago Dei, man reflects God both individually (one) and corporately (many). Man is both Adam singularly and Adam & Eve corporately.

4) One manifestation of this idea is that while men are individuals they are also part of families. I am an individual and I am also a “McAtee,”– connected both to my nuclear family and my extended family — with all that entails for good or ill.

5) Love and right relationships are governed by God’s justice standard as enumerated in His law. As this love flows along boundaries of commandments, it makes distinctions between God and man and distinctions among men. For example, the commandment to honor one’s parents reflects the importance of the ties of kinship (also see I Tim. 5:8) and ordains that there are familial distinctions among men while also demonstrating that men have concentric circles of obligation. (see #2 above).

6) Ethnic groups are extensions of tribes–which are extensions of families. See Genesis 10, Psalm 22:28, etc. For example the Hebrews were the Ethnic group which was the extension of their 12 distinct tribes.

7) Along with creating families and nations, God judged ethnic/racial and linguistic Unitarianism at Babel (Gen. 11).

8.) God creates nations with the purpose of reflecting his glory and establishing dominion. He appoints their boundaries that “they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him” (Acts 17:26-27). Moreover, God wants to bless the nations (Genesis 18:18, 22:18) and God governs the nations (Psalm 22:28).

9) The nations are deceived by Babylon (Revelation 18:23 ) and Satan (Revelation 20:3,8).

10) Part of Satan’s rebellion against God is the destruction of the nations and similar to murder the destruction of nations is, therefore, an attack on the image of God.

11) Ethnic dissolution, dispossession, or genocide, which may take numerous forms, is a violation of the 6th Commandment and an attack on man as God’s Image Bearer.

12) Modern globalism–including the unfettered migration of “Image Bearers” with the intent that all peoples and colors bleed into one undifferentiable sea of humanity represents an economic, cultural, and demographic assault on modern nations and therefore on the Divine Image. It is the genocide of particularity by means of a unitarian impulse. It is monistic humanism.

13) Globalism is anti-Christ and therefore Satanic. Ethno-Nationalism produces social peace, for which we are obliged to pray (I Tim. 2:1-2).

14.) Jesus Christ himself was born with an tribal/ethnic identity. Born of the tribe of Judah (as prophesied in Genesis) Jesus remains a member of that tribe as interceding for us at the right hand of the father as the Lion of the tribe of Judah.

15.) Jesus tribal/national identity was necessary in order for Him to be who he was. All the genealogies which trace out Jesus forbears testify to the importance that Jesus belong not to humanity as a mass but rather as belonging to the House of David.

16.) In Revelation 21-22 we see the nations as nations inhabiting the New Jerusalem. We are told that the leaves of the trees are for the healing of the Nations. We are told that the nations will walk by the light of God’s glory.
We are told the Kings — who by definition are leaders of particular nations — will bring their splendor into the new Jerusalem. We are told that the glory and honor of the nations will be brought into the New Jerusalem. Nations thus exist not only presently but will continue to exist in the New Jerusalem. Our national identities will not be eclipsed. If this is true then the attempt to destroy the nations is an attempt to destroy what God has ordained to be indestructible.

17.) In Isaiah 19 we read of the promise where distinct nations will belong to God as being distinct nations. The One and the Many principle is applied there as Egypt, Assyria, and Israel are spoken of as one day being the “people of God” together but yet without losing their identity as Egypt, Assyria, and Israel.

18.) In Romans 11 with the Olive tree and broken branches, the broken branches pruned and perhaps grafted back in to the Olive tree refers not to individuals but to nations. It is the Nations as nations that are pruned out and then grafted back in (See Geerhardus Vos).

19.) In Matthew 28 the command is go to the nations in order to baptize, teach and make disciples. It is not a bunch of random atomistic individuals that are gathered into the Kingdom but Nations as nations.

20.) In the New Testament we often (though not exclusively) see Households saved as Households. Seeing individuals saved also then reminds us of the one and the many principle throughout Scripture.

21.) In the great Judgment described in the Olivet discourse (Matt. 24) it is the nations that are gathered before the Son, and then judged, and separated so as to sit at either the left hand or right hand of Christ.

22.) In OT prophecy in Micah 2 and Isaiah 4 describing the future House of God and the Lord’s reign in Zion it is the nations as nations that we find streaming to the Mountain of the Lord.

23.) St. Paul emphasizes his own nationality and love for his distinct people in Romans 9:3



In Defense of Rightly Ordered Loves

“Nationalism has much to do with identity, but that (observation) entirely misses the main point. Nationalism is really about rightly ordering and prioritizing your loves in obedience to 1Tim. 5:8. The Christian faith harmonizes beautifully with all of this, because nations, and therefore national loyalties and duties, were initially God’s idea.”

Burl E. Farmer

The abandonment of or negation of the rightly ordering and prioritizing of our loves has to call into question if the one who abandons or negates the right ordering and prioritizing of our loves can really love God. Can it be the case that someone who diminishes a proper and Biblical love for kith and kin, tribe and people, nation and race — someone who flattens out the properly ordered concentric circles of affections — really love the God of the Bible who Himself practices the right ordering and prioritizing of His love? If God does not love everyone the same — if there is hierarchy in God’s loves — then can it be sin to have properly ordered hierarchy in our loves?

Jesus had his inner circle (Peter, James, & John). John seemed to be the favorite. Jesus cared for His mother uniquely on the Cross and not for the other women gazing on. Here we find the essence of the proper ordering of our loves.

Can we just be done with this blasphemy that somehow properly ordered loves that prioritize some loves over other loves is an offense to the God of the Bible?

What else can we call this mad drive to rid ourselves of the normativity of communities that reflect racial/ethnic harmony in favor of the destruction of communities that were heretofore built on the idea of properly ordered loves which by necessity meant communities built around the blood ties of kith and kin?

We are reminded at this point of the words of Pat Buchanan;

“Did the God of the Pentateuch strengthen the people he had created when he destroyed the unity of their language and scattered them to the four corners of the earth? To hear men endlessly recite this mindless mantra, ‘Our diversity is our strength,’ when tribal, ethnic, and religious diversity is tearing nations to pieces, is to recall Orwell: Only an intellectual could make a statement like that. No ordinary man could be such a fool.”

Ethnomasochism has instantly become a competitor to “Alienism” as the sobriquet that defines those putative theonomists and cultural Marxists who insist that diversity is our strength and deny the Augustinian idea of loves properly ordered.

As we have mentioned before there seems to be some kind of conviction among the Ethnomasochistic/Alienist “Christians” that somehow love of ones own kith and kin and the desire to have a nation consistent with that love somehow automatically means the hatred of everyone else who is not kith and kin. As we have repeatedly said, nothing can be further from the truth. Kinist Christians are not calling for some kind of “one-drop rule” investigation to determine who should and should not be part of a predominately white Christian nation. The pursuit of a core people such as was pursued by our Fathers in 1924 with the Johnson-Reed act, does not mean we hate other peoples. President Coolidge got this right when he said;

“Restricted immigration is not an offensive but purely a defensive action. It is not adopted in criticism of others in the slightest degree, but solely for the purpose of protecting ourselves. We cast no aspersions on any race or creed, but we must remember that every object of our institutions of society and government will fail unless America be kept American.”

Calvin Coolidge

And again President Coolidge offered,

“There are racial considerations too grave to be brushed aside for any sentimental reasons. Biological laws tell us that certain divergent people will not mix or blend. The Nordics propagate themselves successfully. With other races, the outcome shows deterioration on both sides. Quality of mind and body suggests that observance of ethnic law is as great a necessity to a nation as immigration law.”

Doug Wilson and the other ethnomasochistic/alienist “Christians” are besides themselves over these kinds of quotes and yet this was the language of all Christians through the centuries until 1950 or so. The 650 page Anthology; “Who is My Neighbor” by Thomas Achord and Darrell Dow piles these kinds of quotes up relentlessly as coming from our Christian Fathers.

In the words of Pat Buchanan the detractors of the Kinists have a disease of the heart;

“Ethnomasochism, the taking of pleasure in the dispossession of one’s own ethnic group, is a disease of the heart…It comes out of what James Burnham called an ‘ideology of Western suicide,’ a belief system that provides a morphine drip for people who have come to accept the inevitability of their departure from history.”

If our people must depart from history let it not be said that it was the Christian church and the Christian clergy who aided and abetted and so midwifed our departure.

I would not want to be guilty of that crime on the final day.

McAtee Contra Mattson on Nationalism

“For my part, I will start by repudiating all of these tired old forms of “post-liberalism.” Because it will not end any differently than it did the last time.”

Dr. Brian Mattson

Substack Article

One of the “tired old forms of ‘post-liberalism’ that Mattson is rejecting is Nationalism. Indeed, the whole article is given over to why Nationalism is evil and how it alone is the reason for two world wars in the 20th century. Of course, in order to conclude that one has to ignore the Internationalism that was seeking to conquer the world in the 20th century. One has to ignore as well that a particular and unique kind of Nationalism arose in the 20th century precisely as a defensive mechanism against the Internationalism being floated by the Bolsheviks. Perhaps Mattson is right that Nationalism has killed its millions but he fails to remember that Internationalism killed its scores of millions. Mattson further fails to remember that all because a wicked Nationalism existed in the 20th century that doesn’t mean that a Biblical Nationalism can’t exist or that those who are now advocating for Nationalism in the Church community are not all members of the Franco, Mussolini, or Hitler fan club. In short Mattson’s “lessons from history” and from Bertrand Russel (of all people) are hardly balanced or well informed.

Mattson sems also to forget in his article that in Genesis 11 the agenda wasn’t Nationalism but it was International Empire and that God’s solution to Babel was on one hand to scatter the effort at Nimrod-ian Internationalism while at the same time to raise up a confederation of Tribes, through the lineage of one man (Abraham) to be a Nation that would be a light to the Gentiles. Mattson likewise seems to forget that Jesus himself sanctions nations — and by extension nationalism — when, in giving the Great Commission, He commands His Lieutenants to “Disciple the Nations.” Mattson again forgets that in the book of Revelation we find it is the Nations in their identity as Nations that are found entering into the new Jerusalem. One can easily imagine Brian saying, as he scans the Nations coming in to the New Jerusalem, “is that wicked or what?”

All this anti-Nationalism, issuing forth from Reformed-dom and Evangelicalism is a testimony to a profound misinterpretation of history as combined with a profound misinterpretation of the Scriptures. Sometimes it really seems to be the case that we are being led by the dumbest smart people the Church has ever produced.

Just exactly what is it about Liberalism that Mattson is holding on to that a theonomic Christian Nationalist order wouldn’t provide? Does he prefer the vision of the Great Reset as embraced by Klaus Schwab, Pope Francis, Yuval Noah Harari, and the Davos crowd? Does he eschew the Christian vision of Victor Orban’s Hungary because it smacks of wicked Nationalism to him? Or, as I suspect, is Mattson, like so many other of our Churchmen cognoscenti, holding on to Tolkien’s vison of Saruman? — “We’ll be a kinder and gentler Christian version of Sauron.” “Give us that Christian Orc-ian social order.”

 This is what kills me. We may be living in a time that has never seen a bigger push towards one World Internationalism and these clowns wearing  their Ph.D. degrees like extra large clown shoes are out there hanging on the cord of the clown tocsin shouting;

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.