Category: History

Nationalism Then & Now

I took every course offered by Dr. Glenn R. Martin in undergrad. He remains to this day a instrumental and formative presence in my life. He was the one who set me on the trajectory of presuppositionalism and Weltanschauung thinking. After, I left Martin’s tutelage I still had miles to go in understanding those categories of thought but I was set on the trail.

One of the courses I took from Martin was “American Intellectual & Social History.” It was basically a “History of Ideas in America” course. The kind of course that looked behind the events of American History to ask the question; “What was the thought world that drove the disputes and ideas in American history.”

Naturally enough a good amount of time was spent on the epochal event of US History — what we were taught to refer to as “The War of Northern Aggression.” We examined the theological thought world of both North and South and through that prism we were taught how to understand that conflict.

We were taught, rightly enough I still believe 45 years later, that the conflict was between those who theologically were committed to a social order system where authority and power was purposefully diffused and decentralized against those who were theologically committed to concentrated and centralized power. One one side one found the Nationalistic impulse of the Hamiltonians that resulted in a Unitarian Nationalism and on the other side one found the Anti-Federalist impulse of the Jeffersonians that resulted in a old style Republicanism. Over the decades I’ve continued pursuing this explosion in American history in my study and with my books and nothing I learned in 1980 in my “American Intellectual & History” course has overturned that essence of the conflict.

What has changed, oddly enough, is that I am now pursuing my Republicanism via a stodgy and unstinting defense of Nationalism. My convictions have not changed. However, the historical circumstances that we are now living in have changed. The contest we are now in against the Globalist is not significantly different than the contest our American forebears in the South fought against the Yankees. The difference is that in 1861 they wanted National Unitarianism. Today they desire Global Unitarianism.

I was and remain opposed to Lincolnian Nationalism because it was a centralizing and top down Nationalism pursued with a vision of destroying the various nations that comprised these united States of America. I now strongly champion Christian Nationalism because it is, at least in my vision, a movement that is committed to pursuing a of maintaining the distinctiveness of White Anglo Saxon America as against the earlier Lincolnian tendency to support Unitarian elimination of distinctives as found among states, regions, and even peoples.

In other words whereas the Unitarian Nationalism of 1861 was basically a nationwide globalist-like movement against regionalism and sectionalism, today Christian Nationalism, in my vision, is basically nationwide anti-globalist-like movement in favor of a regional identity (Americans as a distinct people and place) vis-a-vis a opposition that would do to all the world what Lincoln and the Black Republicans did to all of America, to wit, put us all in a blender in order to make all mankind into interchangeable cogs in a New World Order.

So, my remaining anti-Unitarian Nationalism in relation to the War Against the Constitution pursued by the Blue Devils in 1861 is consistent with my pro-Christian nationalism anti-Globalist convictions today. Indeed, my anti-Unitarian Nationalism formed between 1865-1877 is of a piece with my pro Christian Nationalism of 2025. If you genuinely understand the dynamics of the contest today against the globalists you will find yourself embracing increasingly the position of the Anti-federalists in 1787 and the Southerners in 1861.

It is interesting that historically speaking, Karl Marx, in a letter to Lincoln spoke of how he saw Lincoln’s war as having continuity with the European Revolutions of the 18th century. Indeed Marx writes to Lincoln clearly connecting the dots between the work of Lincoln and the Declaration of the Rights of Man scribbled in the French Revolution. This is consistent with the observations by some that the War Against the Constitution was America’s “French Revolution.” What more reason does one need to conclude that not only did the bad guys win out during the French Revolution against a faulty but a still clear Christendom but also the Enlightenment strength carried the day in the last Protestant Christian social order in the West.

There are some other similarities between the Unitarian Nationalism recreation of the US social order and the attempt today to snuff out Christian Nationalism’s resistance to globalism.  One of those similarities between now and then is the “conservative” church. As the Yankee Church gave “Christian” cover for Unitarian Nationalist project of 1861 so even the “conservative” “Reformed” churches give cover today for the Anti-Christ Globalist project. Just as Yankee Churches in 1861 needed to be plowed under & salted so the Globalist churches today need to be treated as the enemy.

Like Confederates of old we are now fighting not to be absorbed in a heathen top down system that would erase our identity in favor of bland sameness. Johnny Reb fought against a Unitarian Nationalism. We are fighting against a technocratic Globalism. If we lose, we lose who we are just as Johnny Reb lost his civilization between 1861-1877 and just as all Americans lost all remnants of that same civilization with the burgeoning impact of Wilsonian Democracy, FDR’s New Deal, and LBJ’s great society as well as the hits that have just kept coming since then.

I must say though that just as Johnny Reb lost in his contest with collectivization and centralized authority so I am not optimistic, in the short term, that we will succeed any better. Johnny Reb knew what it was to be a free man living in a free social order that was regulated by Christian law. We however, who desperately want to resist just as Johnny Reb did do not live among a people who have much knowledge of what it means to be a free man living in a free social order regulated by Christian law. Modern Americans have become accustomed to living off the teat of the centralized state. It is hard for me to believe that when push comes to shove the average American is going to be willing to be (switching metaphors) unhooked and detached from the Matrix. We as a people have become so attached to the centralized, managerial, and technocratic state that I don’t think that, in the short term, we have the will to tell the Globalists to “go bugger yourself.”

Americans may have to, for a time, live under the lash of Globalism with its creation of mass, uniform, global culture. However, I remain hopeful for the long term. Globalism is a culture of death because at its foundation is a hatred of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords; Jesus the Christ. Scripture teaches us that, “All those who hate Christ, love death.” As such since Globalism hates of Christ (which is the chief characteristic of Globalism)  therefore I am assured that it will die and everyone knows that death can’t win. So, while Globalism may continue to be victorious in the short term, in the long term, like its attempt in Genesis 11, it will be totally and utterly defeated. With its defeat will be the return of Christian nations embracing variant expressions of Christian nationalism.

In the short term we epistemologically self-conscious and stubborn few must continue to run up the flag of Christian Nationalism and the banner of Christendom. We must be able to explain the connection between men bowing to Christ individually and the subsequent result of all the nations being discipled and bowing in allegiance to Christ. We must earnestly pray that the Lord Christ would leverage us to advance His Kingdom. We must pray that we might get the opportunity that Samson got in his last hour — the ability to deal a devastating blow to the enemy of Christ and His people.

 

 

In Defense of Xenophobia and Racism As American Traits

“I know that it is red meat for his (my opponents) base that are xenophobic and racist to say to them that I am (he is) going to find a way to arrest and deport a member of Congress (Illhan Omar) who he thinks is doing something wrong when I am doing the right thing in trying to make sure everybody that is within my constituency has the resources and the information that they need.”

Illhan Omar
Somali Congress-Critter — Dem. Mn.
CNN Interview

As what is now called a “heritage American” I can not see the problem in being xenophobic or racist, given the fact that Christian Americans were for centuries xenophobic and racist.

Consider the xenophobic and racist nature of our own US Constitution where it was written;

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Keep in mind that both those who offered up this Constitution as well as those who later ratified this Constitution were all, without exception, White Europeans who were shaped by Christian categories. By the standards of Congress-critter Illhan Omar they were each and all xenophobic and racist. That was demonstrated again in 1790 the Naturalization Act which gave the US the first uniform rule for the granting of US citzenship. It read;

 “That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof …”

In addition to the above the US Courts linked whiteness with Christianity thus excluding Muslim immigrants from US citizenship until 1944 with the SCOTUS decision of Ex Parte Mohriez. Given that reality then by the standards of Mooselimb Congress-Critter Illhan Omar all Americans were racist and xenophobic until 1944.

President Calvin Coolidge, by the standards of Illhan Omar was a xenophobe and racist. No big deal.

“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.”

President Calvin Coolidge

The Great Emancipator himself, Abraham Lincoln, by Illhan Omar’s standard would be a xenophobe and racist;

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]-that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

Abraham Lincoln
Lincoln vs. Douglas Debate

Many more quotes from famous Americans could be reproduced with all of them suggesting that there is nothing ignoble about an American being a xenophobe or racist. Indeed, an argument could be made that part of what being a heritage American is, is being xenophobic and racist. Now of course xenophobe is a bit of a misnomer since no heritage American is afraid of the foreigner and the alien. Instead they are merely convinced that just as Japan should be for the Japanese and/or China should be for the Chinese it is the historic position, until the last 60 years or so, that America should be for the White European Christian. This is what our forefathers thought and this is what many contemporary Americans think and the only shame in such a position is the shame that comes from the race Marxists forever bleating that some people might well resist their agenda.

We should also say that, historically thinking, Americans have been broad-minded enough to allow a small percentage of non-Americans to live in our midst. However, at this point in our history, with the clear agenda present to diminish and even replace the white population in America what is required is a return to a 1924 type immigration act in order to keep America American.

 

Joel Webbon & His Claim That Hitler Was On The Right

“Hitler was one of the few bad guys on the right.”

Joel Webbon

1.) Hitler was a National SOCIALIST. Socialism, by definition, belongs to the left since it systematically is structured by Marxism. To argue that Hitler was a man on the right would mean that Deng Xiaoping (of China) was also a man of the Right since he wanted to bring reforms into China that would give Socialism a Chinese face. However, socialism is still socialism whether it has a German face or a Chinese face and as socialism it is most definitely NOT on the right.

2.) Now, one may argue that Hitler occupied the right side of the left and that the row between Stalin and Hitler was a row between the left side of the left and the right side of the left (International Socialism vs. National Socialism) but both Stalin and Hitler remained men of the Left along with FDR and Winston Churchill, as well as Franco and Mussolini. Any movement towards a statist collectivization (and here we include Abraham Lincoln and the Black Republicans in our own history) is a movement occupied by the Left. Any movement that would find a society or culture dominated and controlled by the State is a movement from and of the Left. Any movement that collapses society or culture into the State so that they are no longer distinct is a movement of the left.

3.) Hitler’s world and life view was consistent with all the major political heads at that time. That world and life view was captured by Mussolini’s statement;

“All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state”

Benito Mussolini

This is the religious confession of the Left. Nobody on the right would ever agree that “in the state we live and move and have our being,” and yet Webbon would have us believe that Hitler belonged to the Right. It’s just madness for a member of the clergy to be out there saying this kind of thing publicly.

4.) Hitler’s being on the left was also put on full display by his program of AktionT4 which found the State seeking to genocide the halt, the blind, and the disabled of all categories. Now, Hitler and the Germans learned this from the Americans (see Buck vs. Bell and Oliver Wendell Holmes’ idiotic statement that “Three generations of imbeciles is enough” thus justifying his vote to forcefully sterilize a woman) but how can anyone argue with a straight face in light of AktionT4 that Hitler was a “man of the Right?”

Read the reasoning of Oliver Wendell Holmes, and realize that this was the same reasoning that Hitler and the National Socialist would eventually use and keep in mind that the Germans managed to sterilize 400,000 women before their “Law for Protection Against Genetically Defective Offspring program” was halted;

We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. […] Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

— Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927)

Webbon and his crew are constantly complaining (and rightfully so) that American clergy have been suckered by the court historians of WW II and yet Webbon and his crew go right on mouthing this inanity that Hitler was a man on the right. They might as well argue that Robespierre was likewise a man of the right because he realized how important religion was to a culture and because Robespierre tried to bring a religion back to the French people.

It’s all so ludicrous and uniformed. It’s just like something Doug Wilson would say.

On Those Reputed To Be Jews

“The Six Million constitute a lay religion with its own dogma, commandments, decrees, prophets, high priests and Saints: Saint Anne (Frank), Saint Simon (Wiesenthal), Saint Elie (Wiesel). It has its holy places, its rituals and its pilgrimages. It has its temples and its relics (bars of soap, piles of shoes, etc.), its martyrs, heroes, miracles and miraculous survivors (millions of them), its golden legend and its righteous people. Auschwitz is its Golgotha, Hitler is its Satan. It dictates its law to the nations. Its heart beats in Jerusalem, at the Yad Veshem monument … Although it is largely an avatar of the Hebraic religion, the new religion is quite recent and has exhibited meteoric growth … Paradoxically, the only religion to prosper today is the “Holocaust” religion, ruling, so to speak, supreme and having those sceptics who are openly active cast out from the rest of mankind: it labels them “deniers,” whilst they call themselves “revisionists.”

Robert Faurisson

Former French Professor of Literature at Lyon University
Statement regarding the religious implications of the Holocaust narrativeNow, immediately there will be those who will scream that Faurisson was a holocaust denier. This in spite of the fact that the uber-Leftist Jewish Academic Noam Chomsky once wrote; “I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers, or even denial of the Holocaust…I see no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson’s work.” One should also note that if even Auschwitz in the early 90s had to revise their originally grossly inflated death count total down from four million. The Chicago Tribune reported in 1992;

“Jewish and Polish scholars of the Holocaust now agree that the Auschwitz death toll was less than half the four million cited here for four decades. The actual number was probably between 1.1 million and 1.5 million-and at least 90 percent of the victims were Jews.”

It would seem to be reasonable to believe, that in light of this gross overestimation (a gross overestimation that lasted for almost 50 years) of death totals in Auschwitz that it is likely the case that gross overestimations were made in the numbers reported from other camps. The idea that the numbers were routinely grossly inflated has been reported not only by Faurisson but also by others such as David Irving and Ernst Zundel.

I, myself, do not have a concrete opinion on the matter of total deaths suffered by those reputed to be Jewish though I can easily see how it serves as an advantage for those reputed to be Jewish to continue to cling to these numbers. While, I do not have an established opinion on the total death toll on those reputed to be Jewish I do find it curious that so much is made of this death toll in comparison to the horrendous death toll of other tribal communities that receive comparatively little attention. For example, there was a horrendous holocaust of Christian Ukranians by Jewish Bolsheviks under Stalin. Also, there was a horrendous holocaust of Christian Armenians by the  Dönme (Jewish) “Muslim” Turks (members of the Sabbatai Zevi cult). We should also mention that holocaust of over 1 million German “disarmed enemy forces” (nomenclature used to skirt the Geneva Convention treatment requirement for POWs) inflicted by the Allies upon surrendering German troops after WW II, the holocaust visited upon the Khmer people by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia in the late 1970s, and the holocausts of Mao visited upon the Chinese in both his “great leap forward,” and during the later “cultural revolution.” Indeed, the 20th century could be labeled as the “Holocaust century” — especially were we to add the holocaust of the unborn.

And yet I’d be willing to bet the farm that 9 out of 10 Americans have heard only of the Holocaust visited upon those reputed to be Jews. One is left asking… “Why is that?” A cynic might say that the answer presents itself when one notices what people group it is that has been the guiding light of the Western media / Hollywood since its inception. Those who own the news/entertainment report the news.

Those reputed to be Jews have gotten a good deal of mileage out of their unique ownership of the trademarked word “Holocaust.” They have been able to play the global victim due to their trademark ownership. This is an insurmountable advantage when living in a WOKE global philosophy that prioritizes the oppressed victim over and above the evil oppressor class. Those reputed to be Jews have, because of their holocausted status, have become the greatest victims of them all. In the game of Cultural Marxist poker, where he who is the greatest victim hold the greatest hand, the reputed Jews who were holocausted hold the royal flush against all competing victimhood hands. The reputed Jews who were holocausted are the trump that trumps all trump. Nobody can out victim them.

Their victimhood card was played again just a couple days ago when their Prime minister Netanyahu, invoking the holocaust, said;

“No Nation Came to the Aid of Jews During the Holocaust.”

I think all those boys who died on the beaches of Normandy might argue otherwise.

But, all argumentation is irrelevant. When you hold the royal flush of victimhood nothing else matters, and that was the card, Netanyahu played when he said that.

This returns us thus to the opening Farisson quote. The Holocaust has been turned into a religion. Some wags have taken to calling it “Holocaustianity.” Farisson fails to mention above that Holocaustianity also has its own unique Messiah and the Messiah of Holocaustianity are those who we routinely call “Jews.” They are their own saviors, and one of the means of saving themselves is this new religion wherein all have to bow before their very real tragic history, being required at the same time to ignore the very real tragic history of many other groups who have experienced attempted genocide. If other peoples are to be sympathized with then the sympathy with which those reputed to be Jews are sympathized with becomes diluted and reduced in its guilt invoking power.

Another advantage of Holocaustianity is that serves as a “get out of jail free” card. Any behavior by those reputed to be Jews can be overlooked because, “after all they are the greatest victims of all time.” Whether it is the Deir Yassin massacre, or the sinking of the USS Liberty, or the bombing of the King David Motel, or the ethnic cleansing of Christian Palestinians, it can all be washed away because “we were holocausted.”

Even if Faurisson was wrong about holocaust death totals, the point he makes about the creation of a new religion is spot on. That Faurisson is accurate on this point is seen by that Lawmakers in several U.S. states have recently pushed for laws defining antisemitism so as to censor wrong-speak. One sees the problem here when one considers that there has been no push for laws defining anti-Christian speech so as to censor wrong-speak against Christians. I would submit this is an example of holocaustianity at work. Especially, when living in a climate where antisemitism is defined as disagreeing with someone reputed to be Jewish.

These kinds of things need to be said with the coming of Trump. Trump has surrounded himself with Zionists (Hegseth, Stefanik, Huckabee to name just a few) and Trump has been labeled by Netanyahu as “the greatest friend Israel as ever had in the White House.” Radio Personality Mark Levin recently introduced Trump as “Our First Jewish President.”  In light of all this voices need to be raised warning, (paraphrasing Pat Buchanan here) about the continued increasing Israeli occupation of America.

I shouldn’t need the tag that finds me saying, “I am not pro-Arab or pro-Muslim.” I am not even “anti-those reputed to be Jews.” I am merely pro Christian and I don’t think that anybody but Christians should have special protection in a nation that was established on Christian principles and I am against politically correct poker.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Difference Between Christian Beliefs And Popular “Christian”, Non-Christian Beliefs

If you’re clergy and you agree that the Christian faith needs to work diligently at hearing the voices of minorities because white Christians have been tone deaf on the “racism” issue chances are that you are a Marxist and not a Christian.

If you’re clergy and you think that women in the Church need to be given leadership positions in order to be “fair” chances are you are a feminist and not a Christian.

If you’re clergy and you are actively seeking out ways to get more minorities to attend your Church for the sole reason that they are minorities odds are that you are a cultural Marxist and not Christian.

If you’re clergy and can’t see the serious problem with the way the corporate lugenpresse as well as Hollyweird films, as well as politicians are force feeding us egalitarianism with the way that miscegenation is forced down our throats odds are you believe in the “Tower of Babel” project of Gen. 11 and so not Christian.

If you’re clergy and you think that Uncle Adolph is the worst person who has ever lived but you are clueless about the crimes of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao that make Uncle Addie look like a piker as well as being ignorant of the  2000 year historical conflict between Bagels and Christians I’m leaning towards the fact that you are either a member of the Communist party or are a member of the Synagogue of Satan and so are not Christian.

If you’re clergy and you “know” all about the 6 gazillion Bagels who allegedly had their fat made into soap, or their skin made into lampshades, or their bone made into fine bone china but you know nothing of the mass slaughter by the American forces of over a million unarmed Germans after WW II ended or nothing about the forced return of tens of thousands of Russian soldiers who fought against Stalin in WW II to be murdered by Stalin, (as well as civilians who had not lived in Russia for generations) you may still indeed be Christian but you’re also just downright stupid and no more belong in a pulpit than a puppy belongs in the middle of a four lane highway during rush hour.