Below is an excerpt from my book Human Sin or Social Sin. It will be of interest to those concerned with the intersections of politics, immigration, and ethnicity. The book is endorsed by Paul Gottfried and Tom Sunic. See the Amazon page for more information regarding endorsements.
During the nineteenth century, sex and the body were viewed as evil, but notions of race, class, gender, or “society” were viewed as good and legitimate. With sexual liberation, we displaced evil to the public sphere. With the displacement or socialization of evil, now the body is viewed as legitimate, even glorious, but race, class, gender, and “society” are viewed as evil, illegitimate and to be purged. As “society” during the nineteenth century was viewed as glorious, and the body as sinful, now the body is viewed as glorious and society as sinful. As the evils of the body were to be purged, now the evils of “society” or the social body are to be purged. As the individual was viewed as potentially sinful or “hegemonic,” so we now view the social body that way. Specifically, the resistance to race science, or any other “hegemonic discourse,” results, it is shown, from the perception that it is socially hubristic or evil.
This perception in turn resulted from the fact that the traditional Seven Deadly Sins were, with sexual liberation, displaced from the body to the social sphere, thereby creating the pathological Seven Deadly Social Sins, which need to be purged through social and political action. These deadly social sins are (1) Pride, which became Racism; (2) Covetousness: Class Elitism; (3) Lust: “Sexism” and “Gender” existing “Out There”; (4) Gluttony: Consumer Fetishism; (5) Vanity: Media Images of Beauty; (6) Envy: National Honor and Expansionism, the National Socialists’ irredentist impulses being notorious; and (7) Sloth: the Lack of Social Action: “Are you fighting for diversity?” As it was once imperative to purge the sins from our body, so it is now imperative to purge the sins from the social body.
As the Devil was the epitome of evil, now Hitler is the epitome of evil. As we were frightened by the Devil, now we are frightened by Hitler. As the Devil made our blood boil, now Hitler makes our blood boil. As we once could agree on little else besides the complete depravity of the Devil, now we can agree on little else besides the complete depravity of Hitler. As the Devil once had a lurid and educational presence in our lives, now Hitler has a lurid and educational presence in our lives. As it was viewed as savvy to have a disgusted awareness of the Devil, the serpent, now it is viewed as savvy to have a disgusted awareness of Hitler. As knowledge of the Devil and his minions was viewed as intellectually relevant, now knowledge of Hitler and his minions is viewed as intellectually relevant. As we could not learn too many moral lessons from that wily Devil, now we cannot learn too many moral lessons from that wily Hitler. The Salvation Army was founded during the nineteenth century, is still with us today, and has clearly moved its headquarters to the universities.
As our corrupt bodies were thrust upon us during the expulsion from Paradise, now “society” — our corrupt social bodies — are thrust upon us, inspiring purging social and political rebellion and socially redemptive love for the Blacks and other ethnic groups. But an essential category here is groups, which are a unified and compelling moral vision for Western identity. And today, as in the past, there are those who are “enlightened” and “progressive” and then there’s “the benighted, hopelessly lost to sin.” Whites are still the fulcrum and they remain morally stratified: as in the nineteenth century, women today are the moral avant-garde and badger men with ideals and stories of moral uplift.
This huge moral agenda is so imposing for people that the motto was and remains, “See no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil.” People no longer “see” race, gender, class, etc., and instead see menacing, “hegemonic” society or the social body. This is what people fear and attack. Mentioning the biological basis of “differences” raises eyebrows, since it evokes suspicions of hubris, or the sin of social pride, or a hegemonic discourse. Recall that pride was considered the root of all evil and a terrible temptation. As people once didn’t talk about sex except to contemn it, now people don’t talk about race, gender, or class — “society” — except to condemn it. So it’s not a coincidence that during the 1920s we jettisoned both the old puritanism and bio-determinism in the social sciences.
This schema of sin and redemptive love defines the culture’s ideals, philosophies, and visions of the sinful or righteous history, present and future. Hence, the common rewriting of history to get it in line with multi-cultural priorities and Whites’ social sins, and the new visions of the future with everyone together, defining “the rapture,” or the complete union and triumph of love. It was and is a commonplace in popular Christian culture that an individual must overcome pride with love. As for Plato, love was Jesus’ central teaching and doctrine. So what for an individual was a moral problem is for us today a “social” problem that implies different strategies of redemption politics than that of the nineteenth century. Non-Whites have a similar moral and educational role and seek to help benighted White males through militant “activism” or by setting a good example. Hence, the inspiration for groups like Black Lives Matter and their “relevant” social activism to raise our consciousness of our social sins. So today Whites have to heroically overcome the old social pride of racism with cross-group love.
As Whites were once above the body, and felt superior to it, now they are above the social body, or race, class, and gender, feel superior to it, and fear debasement. This is the new “cool” or dismissive attitude. This desire for transcendence is what drives a lot of the bizarre statements, like one from Derrida that culture should not be identical with itself. A documentary film on Foucault is entitled “Foucault against Himself”; it quotes him as saying, “Don’t ask me who I am, and don’t tell me to remain the same.” Social self-effacement or the new social modesty—the more extravagantly promoted the better—is the only thing that counts today as moral and intellectual insight. So science, with its “hegemonic” principles and differences, be damned.
As Jesus was both pivot and purpose of this moral and historical drama, the Blacks today, as Christ-types, are viewed as central — or so the sociologists intone, “They suffer for our social sins,” sufferings like poverty. So Whites yearn for redemption and pay for redemption, and desperately desire loving attachment with Blacks. On Taylor Swift’s two-hour music film 1989 World Tour, which is available on iTunes, the symbolic intersections of sex, race, and morals are clear; this is the norm in music videos; White musicians bend over backward to show how loving they are. Taylor Swift and her fans sometimes use their fingers to make a heart shape.
In the Justin Bieber music video Baby (Bonus Video), with the exception of two or three Whites, all of the extras are non-White. In the film Ghost (1990), the ghost of Patrick Swayze is resurrected in the body of Whoopi Goldberg to realize a relationship of love — with both Goldberg and his girlfriend. So, as we were to love one another in Jesus, now it is essential that Whites love one another in the Blacks, and this goal and unity for Whites defines redemption culture and politics — “Celebrate Diversity!” The Gwen Stefani music video, conveniently titled Hollaback Girl (Super Clean Version), available on iTunes, portrays her with her arm around a Black man as she points to him with a smile. And as in the Bieber video, the majority of the cast is non-White. So as loving Jesus cleaned our sins, now loving the Blacks cleanses our sins.
If this appears unlikely, its origins are clear in a quote from the Oxford Dictionary of Art about the Isenheim Altarpiece:
The hospital at Isenheim cared particularly for plague victims, and the concentration of Christ’s appalling physical agonies, his body gruesomely mangled and torn, must have bolstered the faith of the sick by reminding them that he too had suffered horribly before triumphing over death. In the Resurrection, Christ displays his nail and lance wounds, but the lacerations that cover his body in the Crucifixion have disappeared, affirming that the patients at the hospital could be cleansed of their diseases and sins.
In the central image of the Crucifixion in the Altarpiece, St. John points to Jesus, just as Stefani points to the Black man, to remind us of our moral duty and benefits.
In the Taylor Swift film, her band is composed of White males, but her singers and dancers are almost all either Black or have a tan or at least are not pure White. Swift is the only visibly very White person who is regularly on stage. This is the state of popular culture, and so is very important. This is what the largely White market expects. To do otherwise would apparently raise moral suspicions. Thirty years ago, tokenism was common, like having one crucifix on a wall, but today this impulse has reached manic levels.
To get a sense of how unrealistic this ethnic representation is, Blacks are 13% of the American population, Hispanics are 17%, Asians are 5%, and Euro-Whites are 62%. So if a music video has twenty people, thirteen should be White, two should be Black, four should be Hispanic, and one should be Asian. So thirteen Whites and seven non-Whites, but this is clearly not what is going on. Non-Whites have a special status, whose origins and nature this study will address.
In the film Bruce Almighty (2003), a Black man, Morgan Freeman, plays “God.” During the 2012 Democratic national convention, a group distributed literature describing Barack Obama as Christ; and on the cover of Newsweek magazine, Obama was portrayed as an Indian god, with a caption that read, “God of All Things.” If a White does not love the Blacks, or even presents scientific evidence that reflects negatively on them, he will be an outcast in most “proper” social circles as a threat to their moral fiber and salvation. Whites know who their moral leaders are today, and before whom to smile and defer on the critical moral issues facing “society.” Of course, the moral of the story is always that Whites are collectively guilty. It doesn’t make much difference what you say, so long as your heart is in the right place. This is a good example of Plato’s noble lie: running starry-eyed on this moral treadmill of ideals is what defines most of the activities of the “proper” social sciences. Heretics are not welcome.
This is why our schools have turned into huge Christian love factories, but now directed to outgroup members instead of ingroup members, as in the nineteenth century. (Recall our traditional moral dilemma regarding pride.) If a White individual wants to have a good reputation around school or work, he or she should never miss an opportunity to befriend a Black, and should make sure everyone else knows about it. The title of a recent news story was: “Paul Ryan [the current Speaker of the House] doesn’t want us acting like ‘angry reactionaries.’” We absolutely have to love, and not “hate,” outgroup members. During a classical music concert, I described a composer as an enemy, and a young woman said, through her teeth, “There are no enemies.” So Donald Trump, during his 2016 presidential campaign, was often portrayed as just a red-faced, screaming monster at the bottom of the pit in Dante’s Inferno, and of course he is presented for the moral edification of the “enlightened” and as a warning to the benighted of what also awaits them down below. A recent article in Elle magazine described Trump as a snake. There are rumors going around Berkeley that his supporters meet at night and eat human children. As supporters of the Anti-Christ were targeted, now supporters of the anti-Black are targeted. Newscaster Chris Mathews, and Noam Chomsky likened Trump to Hitler. People who think like this are always looking for “signs” of the end-times, or when the Anti-Christ will come and we can finally have it out.
As we socialized the seven deadly sins, we also socialized the Christian virtues, which were Faith, Hope, and Charity. So you just have to have faith in the salvific power of the Blacks. But don’t worry, Hollywood is never short of new ways of feeding our addiction to fantasy (after all, this has always been its job). If you don’t have faith, then you are a morally suspect person and not fit for proper society. Regarding “hope,” this is the holiest posture a White can have; he just has to sit on the edge of his seat, waiting in anticipation of the visions and miracles that always come from the Blacks and their elite priests, conjurers, or representatives in the “best” schools—though what has to take the cake is clearly, and literarily, “charity.”
 Quoted here from Anthony Pagden, The Idea of Europe (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 12.
 Ian Chilvers, Oxford Dictionary of Art (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 317.
Rachael Combe, “Cool Hand Maggie,” Elle, 32(11), July 2017, 94-142.