Christianity and the Ethnic Suicide of the West

Several comments on my post “What’s wrong with the Swedes?” mention Christianity as a problem in the dispossession of Whites. I agree that Christianity is part of the problem, but I think there are several difficulties with supposing that it is a root cause of the problem.

  • First and foremost, Christianity was the religion of the West during its expansion around the world. A century ago, with the exception of China, Japan, Siam, Korea, Ethiopia, and Liberia, the rest of the planet was dominated by Christian Europeans. Christianity was at least consistent with this incredible expansion and with the very large increase in the European population that occurred during this period of expansion. If anything, the decline of the West has co-occurred with the decline of religion among Western elites. If the world had stayed the way it was in 1960, no one would be talking about the suicide of the West.
  • Christianity has been many things throughout the centuries—an ideology of ethnic defense during the Iberian Reconquista, a pillar of exploitative monarchies and aristocracies in Europe and Latin America, a force for ethnic defense against usurious exploitation of peasants by ethnic outsiders at times during the Middle Ages, supporting slavery and segregation in the American South and apartheid in South Africa. Christianity has not had a consistent message of ethnic suicide or moral universalism. People on both sides of the slave trade in 17th–18th-century Britain were Christian. Both sides of the American Civil War were Christian.
  • Throughout history, Christianity has been quite adept at rendering unto Caesar—accommodating to the powers that be. In the U.S. and I suppose elsewhere in the West, Christians had much more influence on culture prior to the 1960s and the rise of the secular left — e.g., spearheading the successful drive to rein in Hollywood depictions of sex and Christianity beginning in the 1920s. But all that ended with the cultural revolution of the 1960s which was certainly not Christian in inspiration. Right now, the powers that be are the secular, multi-cultural, pro-non-White-immigration left, and one of their main goals is the eradication of public displays of Christianity and traditional Christian views on marriage and the family. Christianity itself has been corrupted by the secular left, most obviously in the case of the Second Vatican Council but also including the mainline Protestant sects. The Church had stood for cultural conservatism and had been a bulwark against Jewish influence for centuries.

  • The contemporary zeitgeist of the left is not fundamentally Christian. If anything, it is hostile to Christianity. The driving force of the left is decidedly secular, and the only areas where Christian views are welcomed into the mainstream (e.g., Christian Zionism and adopting non-Whites, but not abortion, gay marriage, or a public culture of Christianity) is where their beliefs coincide with those of the secular left. Right now in America, the Whites who are most Christian are behaving in an implicitly White manner in voting Republican and expressing concerns about illegal immigration. (And I strongly suspect that they are implicitly opposed to legal immigration and would have no hesitation voting for a candidate who proposed restrictions on legal immigration or ending it entirely.) On the other hand, secular Whites are more likely to be politically liberal and vote Democrat, the party of the non-White coalition. For example, in the recent senatorial election in Louisiana, a hotbed of Christian religious conservatism, only 18 percent of Whites voted Democrat, while only 5% of Blacks voted Republican. The figures would be very different for the predominantly non-religious Whites in the San Francisco Bay region. The increasing polarization in American politics is based on race, not religious ideology; secular Whites are least likely to vote along with the White majority.
  • I very much doubt that people like the Swedish MEP Cecilia Wilkström, who compares the deaths of migrants attempting to invade Europe to the Holocaust, are guided by their religious beliefs. Across Europe, only 5-6% of Europeans are actively connected to their religious tradition. Throughout Europe, the anti-White revolution has been a top-down revolution promoted by secular elites on the left. Many of the ethnically European among these elites are at best culturally Christian but do not take their religion seriously or have strong connection to their religious traditions. Christianity is not the guiding force behind the policies of the EU. Certainly some forms of ethno-masochism are motivated by Christianity, such as the family that adopted the 8 Africans (although in my experience plenty of non-religious Whites have also adopted non-White children), but here again we see a version of Christianity that is entirely acceptable and even approved by the real powers that be; imagine what would happen if this family owned a business that refused to cater a gay wedding because they took Leviticus seriously. Certainly, the Swedish university students who are so eager to be submerged with diversity are not being inundated with Christianity in their studies, but rather with cultural Marxism. The question is why they are so eager to adopt an ideology of ethnic suicide.
  • If Christianity is thought to be to be a Levantine import and hence foreign to the ethnic and cultural proclivities of Europeans, it’s worth noting that moral universalism and proneness to guilt and ethno-masochism are certainly not aspects of the cultures of the Levant. Rather, cultures of the Middle East tend to break down into closed ethnic enclaves, as in Syria now and throughout the region, despite often (but certainly not always) adopting a common religious veneer. Historically, Christianity did indeed originate in the fourth century as a non-ethnic ideology capable of broad appeal in the polyethnic Roman Empire. The Church Fathers often complained about the biological fixation of the Jews with their concern for biological descent from Abraham (see previous link). If anything, Europeans need to be more like the peoples of the Levant with their concern for ethnic kinship and empathy restricted to ingroup members. For example, within traditional Jewish culture there is no tradition of universalist ethics or for empathy with suffering non-Jews. Christianity, as it developed in Europe, is a European invention.
  • If one supposes that the moral universalism/idealism we see in a society like Sweden is due to Christianity despite the fact that Swedish elites are highly secular and even hostile to Christianity, you are committed to explaining how people can lose every aspect of Christian ideology except the ethics. Why keep moral idealism and universalism and not, say, the doctrine of original sin or the idea of Hell? Also, why don’t we see Middle Eastern Christian groups with aggressively universalist ethics? Groups like the the Assyrians and Copts are behaviorally much more like other Middle Eastern groups than they are like European Christians, particularly Christians in Northern Europe. And as noted previously, why has Christianity been compatible with non-universalist ethics, as in slavery, Jim Crow, etc. in some times and places and with elite oppression during so much of Western history?
  • The problem is clearly worse in the north of Europe—Sweden is a paradigmatic case. As an evolutionist and given the recent population genetic data and the northern European ethnic origins of the main movements toward moral universalism in America and UK, I think the case can be made for an underlying ethnic component.
  • Nevertheless, I am certainly not denying a role for cultural forces. As I note, the anti-White revolution is massively incentivized, so the self-interest of Whites — professors, religious leaders, politicians, media figures, and corporate honchos — coincides with going along with the program of White dispossession. It is clearly also the case that Whites throughout the West are being brain-washed because of the control of the moral, intellectual, and economic high ground by elites hostile to the traditional Christian cultures of Europe and the West. That’s why I emphasize the power of messages aimed at the cortex in inhibiting tendencies (e.g., ethnocentrism) based in the lower brain centers (see here). But the central component of these brain washing messages in the contemporary West is not Christianity. Indeed, the messages are very likely to inculcate guilt about the Christian past as exclusionary, aggressive (the involvement of Christianity in colonialism, slavery, the Crusades, ethnic cleansing of native peoples, etc.) and hostile to non-Christian minorities (paradigmatically, the Jews and Blacks).
  • Cultural forces are also important in explaining why ethnic suicide is a pan-European phenomenon. As I noted in the first part of my talk, the revolution has been top-down—promoted by elites in politics, the media, and the academic world, with a major role for Jews with their traditional hostility toward the peoples and cultures of Europe. At TOO (and in The Culture of Critique), we have repeatedly provided evidence that throughout the West (e.g., Sweden, France, Australia, the U.K., the U.S.) the organized Jewish community and individual Jews influential in academia, the media, and politics  have been a necessary condition (not sufficient) in successfully promoting immigration, multiculturalism, and the idea that Western nations ought to be proposition nations—i.e., nations dedicated only to certain abstract conceptions of universal human rights rather than having any ethnic basis. For a variety of reasons, from taking advantage of the incentives that are now built into the system to pathological altruism, many non-Jews have been actively complicit in this project.
  • Understanding why particular countries are going along with this project is difficult and requires a detailed analysis for each country. For example, are the Croatian people, the Greeks, the Hungarians or even the U.K. eagerly accepting African immigrants and eagerly embracing multiculturalism, or are the policies of their government dictated by their membership in the EU and by elites within these countries whose self-interest coincides with adopting the ideology of multiculturalism and ethnic suicide? I think the latter.
  • Finally, I am not saying that Christianity is the way forward. As far as I can see, all Christian sects are either corrupted or misguided at this time on the subject of race, and race is the key issue. It is true that, as noted above, quite a few serious Christians are behaving in an implicitly White manner, but it is very doubtful that at the end of the day that will be enough.


85 replies

Comments are closed.