Chesterton & McAtee On Loving Humanity

I should very much like to know where in the whole of the New Testament the author finds this violent, unnatural, and immoral proposition. Christ did not have the same kind of regard for one person as for another. We are specifically told that there were certain persons whom He especially loved. It is most improbable that He thought of other nations as He thought of His own. The sight of His national city moved Him to tears, and the highest compliment he paid was, ‘Behold an Israelite indeed.’ The author has simply confused two entirely different things. Christ commanded us to have love for all men, but even if we had equal love for all men, to speak of having the same love for all men is merely bewildering nonsense. If we love a man at all, the impression he produces on us must be vitally different to the impression produced by another man whom we love. To speak of having the same kind of regard for both is about as sensible as asking a man whether he prefers chrysanthemums or billiards. Christ did not love humanity; He never said He loved humanity; He loved men. Neither He nor anyone else can love humanity; it is like loving a gigantic centipede. And the reason Tolstoians can even endure to think of an equally distributed affection is that their love of humanity is a logical love, a love into which they are coerced by their own theories, a love which would be an insult to a tom-cat.

G.K.Chesterton
Varied Types

The love of humanity is the root of all kinds of evil. It was the love of humanity on the part of the committee of Public Safety that brought down the Bastille and set up la madame guillotine in Paris. It was the love of humanity on the part of the Black Republicans and the abolitionists that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and blacks in order to “rescue” and “free” blacks. It was the love of humanity on the part of Bolsheviks that brought us the Holdomor and the gulag archipelago. The love of humanity has given us tens of millions of dead humans and has brought despotism and tyranny of untold magnitude.

Secondly, Chesterton teaches here the principle of love according to concentric circles. It is natural, Chesterton teaches us, to first love family, and then from there love others according to the 5th commandment proximity in which they stand to us. Jesus did it Himself. He revealed it when He took care of his own Mother when hanging on the Cross. He didn’t take care of all the Mothers of the world. He revealed His priority of love for His own when He referred to the non Israelite syrophoenician woman as a “dog,” in comparison to His people, who He referred to in His response to the woman as “the children.” He revealed His priority of love for His own when He proclaimed He was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. He revealed His priority of love for His own when Jerusalem’s refusal of Him brought Him to tears as He contemplated the judgment that would be visited upon them as a result of their rejection.

It is true that the love of Christ spilled over unto the Gentile world but His love was first prioritized upon His people. This is just as our love should be. The love of Christ in us should spill over to those outside our Kith and Kin who are of the faith, but that love first properly begins with our love of Kith and Kin of the faith.

The love of humanity is a love that is abstract and because it is abstract it seldom touches concrete people. When people love humanity in the abstract they abort concrete babies in order to love the abstracted concept of troubled women they have concocted in their twisted minds. When people love humanity in the abstract they pass legislation to destroy concrete people who they see as standing in the way of their twisted love for abstracted people. Stalin loved the Soviet people and so he murdered millions of Ukrainians who resisted his collectivization. Concrete people are put in Gulags who oppose abstract love.

The love of humanity also leads to a beehive and anthill social order as the love of a abstracted humanity brings with it the insistence that all humanity must be the same. The love of all equally, when translated into social policy, brings the destruction of all distinctions among concrete individuals that make up abstracted humanity. “I love all people equally,” soon becomes, “all people I love equally must be the same.” The love of abstracted humanity is a idea that has terrible consequences.

The love of humanity is going to get us all killed.

Reading the Political Tea Leaves

“After the uprising of the 17th June the Secretary of the Writer’s Union had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee stating that the people had forfeited the confidence of the government and could win it back only by redoubled efforts.

Would it not be easier in that case for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?

Would it not be easier in that case for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?”

Bertolt Brecht
The Solution

Obama’s actions in the last few days of,

1.) Granting Amnesty to 800,000 illegal immigrants

2.) Refusing to enforce Arizona immigration law as upheld by SCOTUS

Combined with earlier actions of refusing to enforce the “Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA),” and refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation proves, to those with eyes to see, that Obama’s 2012 campaign rests upon building a coalition of

A.) Public Unions
B.) Sexual Perverts
C.) Minorities
D.) Illegal Immigrants
E.) Feminists
F.) Academia
G.) Youths

In other words, we have finally come to crescendo wave that was began in the 1960’s with the Civil Rights Act (1964) and the Immigration Act (1965). This tidal wave, as it crashes into the American electorate, is intended to wash out to sea the remains of the Christian White middle class America. Folks, we are seeing before our very eyes, with the actions intended to flood the polls with illegals, the attempt of the State to bring in a new constituency and create a new nation.

Genocide & The White Boer … So Much For Social Justice

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.

War threats, hate crimes soar against SA Whites: June 2012

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

Marzui Attacks Eurocentrism

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.

Ask The Pastor — Do Genes Affect Culture?

Dear Pastor Bret,

Genes affect culture, Bret? Are you serious?

Bojidar Marinov

My Dear friend Bojidar,

Yes, genes affect culture. The great Rushdoony taught this idea himself.

“Ah, yes … uh, true, God has created the diversity of mankind and therefore each of the Christian cultures will begin with the sovereignty of God and the authority of His Word but there are areas where their particular talents and diversities will be expressed, so that, even as I, for example, have aptitudes in certain areas while a very dear friend of mine has aptitude in another area and is every bit as zealous for the Sovereignty of God as I am but when he talks in the area of sciences he loses me in about the second or third sentence. But he is applying the word of God in the context of his situation. Now that’s a little more extreme than cultures or nations, but there is no question that different peoples have different aptitudes and abilities. We tend today, just as I.Q. tests are today artificially constructed so that they will eliminate sexual differences (women will come out ahead in most fields except the two I mentioned) and racial differences because their are variations. People of one ethnic background will have marked abilities in one area and not as marked in other areas, but they don”t want to believe that there are these differences you see, therefore they try to eliminate them. Well, in a Godly culture we will consider those as blessings of God to be developed.”

R. J. Rushdoony
Lecture — The New Absolutism — 44:00 minute mark

Note, here Bojidar that the great RJR recognized that people of different ethnic backgrounds have different strengths and based on those differing strengths that are accounted for, in part, by their genetic inheritance, it is fairly obvious that genes affect culture. I am surprised that you would be surprised over such a simple idea Bojidar.

To suggest that individuals and peoples are only different because of the propositions they think is to deny our human-ness and the concrete families, places, and times that God has ordained for us. When Christ called me and set me apart He called me and set me apart as a “McAtee.” My Christian faith has not obliterated my “McAteeness.” I am, to be sure, a new man in Christ, but the new man that I am remains me. My memories are not erased. My genetics are not altered. The nurture and nature of my existence is what is redeemed.

I am my Father’s and my Grandfather’s son. Now, they were not Christian and I am Christian but I still retain, often-times most unfortunately, their strengths, their weaknesses, their predilections, and dispositions. That is part of what it means to be human. No matter how much I put off the old man and put on the new man created in the image of God at the end of that sanctification process it is still a McAtee who has been sanctified. It is not good anthropology to suggest that who God has created us to be by nature and nurture is obliterated by belief(s). It is my conviction that when we seek to obliterate our concrete human-ness with Christianity we become gnostic by the affirmation that the propositions that a person thinks in their head is alone what makes them what they are. I am not just the propositions I think, though I am never less then that. I am also part of a family, and part of a people. Now, to be sure the propositions I think (my beliefs) will completely re-arrange the way I lean into life (I sure hope that people would see a difference between me and my Father and Grandfather) but that leaning will still be done as a McAtee, as a descendant of white Scot-Irish Europeans, and as a son of the West. Good Christian, non-gnostic anthropology requires me to think this way.

So yes, seriously Bojidar, genes affect culture. Anyone who denies this is flirting with gnosticism.