Personally, I am very biased against Muslims, Jews and Globohomo. I would defend America against the rule of all of them.
I agree too, Christianity has not been sufficient as a bulwark against any of these forces taking over America. I think we need a new religion for that, a new religion of the Americas.
Wonderful work, as usual. Some of your best, in the year or so I've been reading.
The central problem for AINO is that its leaders care not a damn about America or Americans. They cannot be expected to ever be drawn to isolationism since for them it has no benefit. Their benefit comes from the wealth of globalism, and when it comes to generating the loldollars (which is the thing they do care absolutely the most about), no isolationist strategy can compete with even a diminished and weakening version of globalism. Indeed, it was when the love of the loldollars displaced other values as Value #1 that this road we are on was preordained.
I don't think it's just nostalgia when I say that there was a time when America was ordered on other values. When its leaders cared about some things more than they cared about the loldollars. It was a long time ago, but it happened. The root cause of our present state of affairs is not necessarily more complicated than love of money, and its displacement of other values.
Thanks Martin. I agree with you that our leaders will chase greater power, wealth and control for themselves at the expense of the masses in this era, that they seem to be motivated beyond that by a sense of noblesse malice, and that America used to have better and stronger values... We can see this with the Bank War, where Andrew Jackson killed the second central bank in a brutal and very close fight. It was his greatest accomplishment and after the Rothschilds established the Federal Reserve, they put his face on their unbacked $20 note out of spite and revenge, something he would have hated...
... or maybe it's just as simple as "killing 30,000+ civilians for no clear reason is bad". Everyone should be against genocide against any other group. If you're not, something is wrong with your worldview.
Hi samoan, thanks for the comment. If the criteria for world attention and intervention is stopping one ethnic group from oppressing another, something that has been ongoing throughout human history, then one must be in favor of the U.S. or other countries as "Team America, World Police." One can't be focused on the horrors that occur around the world without then demanding action against it, which necessitates superpowers and world government. But as we're seeing, the U.S. is both broke (printing to infinity resulting in major inflation with much worse to come), and no one wants to join the military anymore to fight in these overseas wars. Even if one is in favor of such global intervention, the domestic trends are all pointing against it's continuation long-term...
Yes, the US shouldn't involve itself in every world conflict, but the least it can do is not fuel them which is the case with Israel/Palestine. The conflict would be over tomorrow if our government threated to stop giving military aid to Israel. Any libertarian should be anti-Israel on that logic alone.
Sure, I don't disagree. I just think it should be taken a step further: we can take the logic of not fueling military conflict worldwide and expand it to Ukraine, Armenia/Azerbaijan, India/Pakistan, Taiwan and South Korea and Japan and Saudi and Egypt and Germany .... Ron Paul has been principled against foreign aid and military bases around the world; I think it's a good position to take. Regardless, the U.S. will be forced into contraction sooner or later based on the monetary situation.
Do you think Muslims would do any different with the Jews? This is what cultures engaged in existential struggle look like. The group unwilling or unable to subjugate or destroy the other gets plowed under. The Jews and Muslims understand this and act accordingly.
Your view simply underlines the feebleness of the West and illustrates why it will get plowed under. We are unwilling to defend ourselves because doing so offends our effete bourgeoise sensibilities. We would rather take a deep hit off the normalcy bias crack pipe, while our competitors hold no illusions about how things work.
The only "culture" in an existential struggle is the US 1%. Contrary to popular belief, Jews, Muslims and Christians have lived in the area of Israel/Palestine in peace for over a thousand years.
I'm far behind in catching up on your posts. Just saw a Note you posted on this peace and noticed your subtitle: "The opposite of love is not hate but indifference". Calls to mind my favorite verse from the Bible: "But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth." — Revelation 3:16
“There is a fundamental split with respect to the Jewish strategy which is not reflected in the simpler Islamic conquest strategy. This split is between nationalist, Zionist religious Jews and globalist, anti-Zionist secular Jews.”
Biden Administration loaded with the latter. That being the anti Zionist secular types who identify as Jews but do not practice the religion.
Anti semites tend to lump Jews together in one pot not understanding the split.
Regenerated then converted (born again) Christians are called to bless the nation of Israel ( doesn’t mean every person who attaches themselves to Jewish identity nor Israel’s government). What that means is a whole other debate.
Fantastic overview and most appreciated. Im all for isolationism at this point in our history so we can attempt to fix ourselves before it’s too late.
Great work! I always have to work up to whatever you post. I want to have uninterrupted time to read all the footnotes and your various links. I am still working through all your other work. Know that it is read, valued, and appreciated. I’m glad someone else is articulating, and distilling things that I’ve been coming around to.
An interesting premise, one which leads one to a potentially more satisfying place than anything offered currently. Of course any worthwhile attempt at transition requires steps in this direction, and unfortunately I see none.
Honestly, I was somewhat surprised to note one omission, or at least what I think is an omission-Marxism. I cannot even glance at the social engineering efforts of woke, for example, without being confronted by Marxist propoganda.
Its all very odd, to observe near totalitarian corporate empires demanding their workforce adopt Marxist politispeak. Who is fooling who here?
Corporate woke agendas aside, standard religion is also inherently compromised.
Perhaps the greatest issue with christianity is its syncretic assimilative character. Christianity is a political identity. It is not nor ever has been a spiritual one. The same can easily be said for Judaism and Islam. Thus, the big three are attack institutions, they cannot function as rallying points other than for overt political objectives. As long as they are on the offensive, they are effective at mobilization. Reviewing the current condition, christianity is the only one that is backpedalling.
Finally, I do think you have a compelling point in theorizing that the current antihuman activities of the ruling elite stem from an infection by hostile entities, yet for reasons I previously stated, I am hesitant to label such the Demiurge.
I agree with you that any centralized, organized religion is primarily materialist and political, interested in power and expansion, as they must be to survive and thrive in this world. Connection to God is a secondary feature of such exoteric religion (if that). I also agree that the actions of our malevolent elite may simply be materialist in nature; it's hard to know whether to ascribe higher powers to such actions, there's an ambivalence or uncertainty that allows for multiple interpretations...
I suppose on a certain level, the most stunning disconnect regarding those espousing Marxist egalitarian ideology is the fact that it is sourced from some of the most rigidly hierarchical institutions derived from the mind of man.
However, as you point out, egalitarianism isn't historically Marxist alone, and this historic egalitarianism itself was promoted by hierarchies, which makes one wonder what the actual definition of egalitarianism is-in an actual practical application sense.
The most curious aspect, regarding the actions of the elite, and again purely from my own point of view, is the maniacal, tunnel vision kind of focus on achieving their goals. Once any particular objective is leaked-such as the case in the USA with establishing a private central bank, even if this goal requires decades, or more, they stick to it with a fanatical determination until achieved.
The suggestion therefore, is that the goals are required to advance an undisclosed strategy, one with a definite end in sight.
From what can be observed and experienced, the goals do not merely serve to establish temporal power. I find it a definite affirmative that this is very much on purpose-either via the actions supporting those goals, or inherently through the strategy itself.
This leaves the door open to "the imaterium" and that which manifests therein.
This is really too much for the comment section, however I can follow certain paths by which this could be true.
“There is a fundamental split with respect to the Jewish strategy which is not reflected in the simpler Islamic conquest strategy. This split is between nationalist, Zionist religious Jews and globalist, anti-Zionist secular Jews.”
Thanks Petronius. Yes, you are right that there are some anti-Zionist Orthodox, but their numbers seem pretty low. Satmar has 26,000 households according to the wiki page. There are others I've heard of such as Neturei Karta as well, but also very fringe (1,000-2,000 members per wiki). More interesting is the general Haredi sentiment about not working and not serving in the army even as their numbers grow enormously. Adam Green posits that the spread of Christianity was a way to make the gentile masses worship the Jewish God without becoming Jews: https://twitter.com/know_more_news .
Excellent job threading the needle and avoiding the “magician's choice” being foisted on Western whites by the hidden rulers. Let the zionists and jihadis fight their own wars in their own countries, and leave us out of it. Focus our attention and resources on cleaning up our own house, to include cleaning out the zionists and jihadis and undoing their corrupting influence on our culture.
Hi ikaruga, the links work for me but they are both archive.ph links -- give them a minute to load. This is because the underlying spandrell.com website is no longer functional, although the archived links are; Spandrell does have a new website, though, which is available at: https://spandrell.ch/
"But younger whites and Christians increasingly feel bitter toward Israel due to the destruction of western civilization which has been presided over by a hugely disproportionate number of Jews."
Darwin was not a Jew, and the belief that we are only advanced animals in an accidental universe is one of the key elements in modern decline. Darwinism is an acid that over time destroys what is unique and precious in the human personality. Also, the scientific revolution going back to the 16th century has had a huge influence in convincing people that the only real knowledge is scientific knowledge, which has led greatly to the decline of religion and to the decline of law and morality in society.
Many non-Jews were instrumental in that Marx had a huge influence but that was based on his repudiation of Judaism. If he had been an orthodox believing Jew he would never have come up with his theory. Freud had a great influence, but why did so many non-Jews receive his message so eagerly?
Modern technology has had a huge influence - the automobile, TVs and computers, entertainments of all sorts. I think technology has really corrupted society to a very great extent by allowing us to live such pampered lives, our minds filled with entertainment and rubbish - not to mention the destructive effects of our pathetic now openly corrupt educational systems. The Jews are not to blame for this.
I do agree Islam is an aggressive and expanding threat, with global ambitions. The founders of America who established freedom of religion did not have to deal with Islam, which is incompatible with a free society unless they are a strictly controlled minority with no nonsense tolerated - but that requires a strong and aggressive leadership and a strict regard for the rule of law, which we do not have.
Also, the globalists have their own false and destructive vision with themselves as the masters of a docile and obedient humanity - but is this not merely Hitler and Stalin but now on a global scale, made possible by modern technology?
Modern American Christianity is very weak, and very far removed from the Christianity of the New Testament, and attempts at political activism (like the Moral Majority or the Defense of Marriage Act have all failed (we can be thankful for some successes in the pro-life movement). The early Christians did not see themselves as called to save Western Civilization. They were more interested in the resurrection of the dead and a day of judgment, followed by heaven or hell - and with this emphasis they had much greater influence than they would have had with a program of social reform.
We are all going to die, and then all of these earthly problems will pass away - and then what? People who take these questions seriously and live appropriately are much less likely to be deceived by the lies of current society.
Hi Joe, thanks for the comment. While I think the evidence is conclusive that Jews are quite disproportionately represented among the globalist vanguard and have been for a very long time, I don't think they are exclusively responsible for the state of modern society. There is the egalitarian ratchet effect inherent within Christianity itself (https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-egalitarian-ratchet-effect-why ) , there is the corrosive, atomizing and nihilistic effects of technological advancement, there are the Hindu cycles that Guenon has discussed where reality increasingly becomes solidified and materialistic (https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/technology-as-the-accelerator-of ), there is the fact that there is always an elite skimming off the masses no matter the age or society, etc. But the Jewish issue is an important one and it is completely banned from being discussed within western society, unlike the others.
Many thanks for your interesting and substantive comments and for the links.
My comment is too long even though I tried to cut it, so I will have to make two posts.
It may be that the Jews are overrepresented among the globalist elite – but is Klaus Schwab a Jew? Obama and Biden are not Jews, and they are among the main facilitators of globalism in the USA. Bill Gates and many other leaders of the UN and big globalist corporations are not Jews. But, if Jews really are overrepresented in the ranks of the globalist elite, they are also overrepresented in the ranks of Nobel Prize winners and in other areas. Some have attributed this to having been brought up in a tradition that valued study, hard work, achievement and spiritual discipline. Then maybe you have heard the saying, “Jews are just like everyone else – only a little more so.” True or not? I only offer it up for speculation.
But certainly, the main tenets of modern secularist globalism do not have any roots in the Jewish biblical tradition. The belief in one God who created the heavens and the earth, and who has given us moral laws to which we are subject, as well as a day of judgment followed by heaven or hell are of no interest to those secular humanist geniuses. True, Judaism does not stress heaven and hell as much as Christianity does, but is found plainly stated in the Jewish Scriptures. To give only one example:
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. Daniel chapter 12
Thus, much of traditional Judaism is anathema to modern secularism, which is the main reason for the new secular anti-Judaism that emerged out of the Enlightenment. Kant and Voltaire and others were hostile to the Jews not because of the rejection and crucifixion of Christ (Christ was not important to them) but because they thought the Jewish idea of God was obnoxious and Judaism was false and anti-social at its core.
Marx would never have been a Marxist if he had been a truly religious man (of either the Christian or Jewish persuasion). It was out of his rejection of Judaism and Christianity that he developed his foolish hallucination of an earthly paradise without God. And Marx’s hostility towards Judaism and Christianity was well known and often expressed. Freud, too, emerged out of a rejection of religious Judaism, in which he did not believe.
But, we agree that the Jews are not “exclusively responsible for the state of modern society.” Darwin has played a huge role, as has the belief of atheism in general (also a direct denial of Judaism). Not many people recognize the extent to which so many problems of modernism are the direct result of the belief that the universe came about by accident, and the human race did as well, that we are purposeless beings in a purposeless universe. This allows everyone to create their own values and invent their own truths, robbing society of a shared narrative. In short, it is not religion but rather the rejection of religion which is the foundation of so much of what we see today.
Of course, there have been sins and evils of various sorts in every culture and every age, but they assume different forms: religious evils in the Middle Ages, secular evils in the modern secular age.
Along with Darwinism, modern technology and our increasingly artificial lifestyles have a lot to do with the spiritual illnesses afflicting our society. As you said in the second article linked in your comments, “increases in materialism and technology seem to decrease our connection to God.” This is really huge and cannot be overestimated in my opinion – and this does not come from Judaism and Christianity. Automobiles, TV and other entertainments, conveniences, luxuries, all of these have helped to isolate us from deeper spiritual realities and made us shallow, weak and soft, more satisfied with ourselves, less aware of our need for deeper spiritual resources.
Moving on to your next point, you say “There is the egalitarian ratchet effect inherent within Christianity itself” (https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-egalitarian-ratchet-effect-why ). You assert that the modern push for egalitarianism emerges from the Christian tradition – that the oppressed oppressor narrative so central to charges of racism, gender discrimination, and economic class discrimination come from Paul’s teachings stressing spiritual equality.
I personally believe that current manias for equality and social justice come not from biblical tradition, but from the rebellion against and denial of biblical truth.
You refer to Paul’s teachings about equality and service. Those are applicable to people who believe in Christ and have the mind and the Spirit of Christ. Paul makes it clear in the introductory verses of most or all of his letters that he is writing for those who have experienced and believe in the truth of Christ as the risen Son of God.
Thus, Galatians 3:28 is for those who are in Christ, and most people are not. They are especially not in Christ who deny his truth claims, his sacrifice on the cross for sin, his resurrection from the dead, and his final return as God manifest.
Hi Joe, thanks for the long comment. I think I've addressed many of your points you raise in prior posts, so for brevity sake I will reference them below (otherwise the response would be very long). I'm happy to answer any follow up questions you have.
Darwin was likely funded by the central bank owners as a way to discredit mainstream organized religion, although I havn't done a deep dive into this particular topic. Indeed, they seem to have favored funding certain topics and beliefs that would increase their degree of control.
You write, "I personally believe that current manias for equality and social justice come not from biblical tradition, but from the rebellion against and denial of biblical truth." To be fair, I can't argue with deontological beliefs; if you take the bible as literally true and then structure your analysis of society from that basis, I understand the impulse and I appreciate it, but it's the opposite of how I approach things, which is by studying cause and effect in a recursive manner until my beliefs synch up as closely as possible on a predictive basis with future events. As such, based on the way we process information we may end up arguing past each other...
Regarding Christianity and egalitarianism, I cover it more here (https://neofeudalism.substack.com/p/deeper-societal-trends-predating ) and in its follow up part 2. Specifically I note Tom Holland who writes that in Christianity “every human being had been made equally by God and endowed by him with the same spark of reason.” Brett Anderson's continues, "That “spark of reason” was intimately tied up with notions of moral equality. The connection of ideas goes something like this, in the form of a syllogism:
If divine soul = reasoning capacity
And moral equality = equality of souls
Then moral equality = equality of reasoning capacity"
This provided the basic impulse for the egalitarian ratchet effect, I think.
We could write books about these subjects, which neither of us are inclined to do. But I would like to touch on some key points.
About higher Jewish IQs, we can look at all of the many world problems in the modern age with which the Jews have had nothing to do: the disasters in China, Cambodia and Rwanda; World Wars 1 and 2 (I reject Hitler’s and Hamas’ theses that the Jews were to blame for those wars); the COVID catastrophe; and many other things. And if some Jews do introduce negative ideas (predicated I might add upon the denial of biblical Judaism), what have those ideas been so eagerly embraced, and so feebly opposed?
Even in the Middle East – if Israel would magically disappear that place would still be a nightmare of violence, with an imperialistic Iran aggressively pushing its ambitions. That place has been a battleground for centuries.
The fact remains that Bill Gates and Obama are not Jews, but they were and have been instrumental in pushing that agenda. And if Obama allowed Citigroup to appoint his entire cabinet, who voted for Obama? Who put him in power? And why did the Republicans roll over and play dead during the 8 years he was in office and do virtually nothing to oppose him? And why did so many American voters ignore clear red flags in his past career and associations?
A functioning democracy requires vigilance, strength of character, and basic intelligence to maintain our rights against foes from many directions, and if that will is gone, and the people passively allow themselves to be led down the wrong path, I do not blame that on the Jews, I blame that on us, on our culture and our character deficiencies.
About Darwin's hidden financial support, his theory was eagerly accepted by many people, aggressively advanced, and weakly opposed. It did not take a lot of money to get his theory off of the ground, and Darwin did not have a lifestyle or a research program that called for lavish funding.
Besides, your article “The Thousand Year Explosion” is be based on the truth of Darwin’s theory! So if the theory is true, who cares where Darwin got his money? Did a hidden group of bankers conspire to spread true science? But I argue that Darwin’s theory is false, and many of the ills we see in society today are directly attributable to the socially destructive idea that we are nothing but animals.
About your links to the central bank owners, I don’t deny that the malefactors of great wealth have had a harmful influence – but so have the entertainment industries and our whole educational system from top to bottom. So have our unhealthy modern technological lifestyles, as well as our false world views of a meaningless universe and us as meaningless creatures in it. This has done a lot to rob people of that strength of character and independence and love of liberty without which democracy dies, as we can see today.
You make a valid point, that with our completely different starting points “based on the way we process information we may end up arguing past each other....” If God does not exist, or if he exists but in a significantly different way than what the Bible describes him, then my whole approach is completely wrong. But, if the universe did not happen by accident; if there is a God and if the soul lives after death, for us to be judged as individuals for all we have said and done, then your approach is wrong.
However, true or false, the Bible does not call for the complete collapse of ordinary social norms we are witnessing today. The Bible reinforces those traditional norms, and the problems we see today come not from the logical extension of Christian ideas, but from the direct repudiation of those ideals. So, I think your understanding of what the Bible teaches and means is in some significant areas inaccurate, as is linking the Bible to people who overtly reject it.
About Christianity and egalitarianism, you mention spiritual bolshevism. That was one of Hitler’s ideas. He claimed that Jewish Christian egalitarianism undermined the natural hierarchy of the strong, and expressed that in very Nietzschean terms. But the moral equality of the bible does not mean social levelling, and did not have that effect for many centuries of Christian cultural domination. It was only with the turning away of Christianity in the modern era that people who rejected God began to conjure up false ideas of an earthly paradise.
Gibbon’s accounts of Christianity are very superficial and biased, and his “Enlightenment” hostility to a religion he did not understand is evident.
There are some elementary mistakes in your descriptions of Christianity. To give only one example, you quote Christ saying “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” That was prior to the crucifixion when he was in his earthly ministry. At the end of the gospel of Matthew we read something very different, where Christ said in Matthew 28:19 “Go and make disciples of all nations.” And I repeat, Nietzsche's description of Christianity is false from top to bottom, and his extreme hatred of it was possibly an effect of his mental illness.
The Bible does teach moral equality but only of a certain type. If I sin against a Jew or a Greek, a man or a woman, a rich man or a poor man, an African, an Asian or a Caucasian, I am just as guilty. We are all humans and all of equal moral value – but the Bible does not teach overturning of the natural order, and is in fact very conservative in this respect. This is why modern manias for false ideas of equality emerged not out of Christianity, but out of the rejection of Christianity.
The real basis for the egalitarian ratchet effect is those who believe that we are not sinful; that we are basically good; that injustices are the fault of the system and all we need to do is change the system; that we can rewire humanity to reach imaginary goals; that we can remake humanity in our image. The modern evils you see today are precisely that – modern and secular, the result of rebellion against God and his laws.
About the problem of evil, it is of course impossible for me to respond to that adequately here. I will point out that you are relying only on your own intelligence and human wisdom – whereas these are spiritual mysteries too great for the independent human mind to grasp. This is why we need the revelation of God in Christ for a fuller understanding. In the light of this revelation we see that your statement “pure spiritual God who does not and will not interfere in the Demiurge’s control of this world unfortunately lines up with observable facts” is not correct.
(1) the world is not controlled by an imaginary demiurge. It is controlled by God, and he allows evil temporarily before finally destroying it, because it is not his will for us to live in a paradise where everything goes are way and there is never any danger, illness, hardship or suffering.
(2) He will intervene with the final destruction of evil and also a resurrection from the dead and a day of judgement in which all will receive the due reward for what they have done in this life. We read in John 5: “Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”
And I believe Christ’s teaching here to be authoritative and definitive, far beyond ordinary human wisdom.
About the nature of the soul, the human spirit is like anything else unseen in nature. Love, hate, good, evil, emotional and spiritual needs unknown to any of the beasts – these come from God having breathed the breath of life into Adam. There is a divine origin to the soul, and without this, there is no real understanding of human nature on its deepest levels.
Paul’s spiritual concepts of equality of love and faith in Christ are drastically different from gender role reversal and unisex (which Paul expressly and repeatedly denied) and from social leveling and obliteration of class distinctions (which Paul also denied). In fact traditional gender and social roles are humanized by love, faith, patience and charity but are not obliterated. Thus Paul sets clear boundaries to the ratchet effect, and it is no accident that modern obsessions with a false political and social equality emerged simultaneously with the decline of biblical Christianity.
Christ’s call to servanthood in Matthew 20 refers to service as members in the Christian community. The wisdom of today’s destroyers of boundaries is human wisdom, and not the wisdom of God in Christ.
When Christianity flourished and was dominant the social structures of home and family, and upper and lower classes were firmly intact. In fact, they were accepted and taught as God’s design for the human race. This has nothing whatever to do with the desired worldly egalitarianism of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, and Pol Pot, all of whom hated religion and sought to eliminate it. Their vision came from the denial of God and replacing spiritual equality of love and faith in Christ with something completely different.
Your first link goes into Nietzsche’s analysis of Christianity in the Genealogy of Morals in some detail. I believe Nietzsche’s analysis of the origins of morality and of Christianity are wrong. Human ethics of kindness, mercy, love, patience and forgiveness did not emerge as the result of the weak attempting to impose their values on the strong. Rather, those virtues answer the deepest needs of the human heart, and come from our Creator and correspond to our souls made in his image. Nietzsche’s glorification of war and violence as the true virtue of natural and unspoiled men is a big mistake, from the Christian standpoint.
In section 2 of the Antichrist (the last book Nietzsche wrote before he went completely insane) he literally calls for the extermination of the weak and the unfit. He also says in that section that sympathy for the weak is “more harmful than any vice.”
Also, I don’t think it is reasonable to see the French Revolution as a result of Luther. It was rather a direct repudiation of biblical morality and divinely revealed laws. Neither are atheists who expressly reject Christ “Christians in denial.” The atheists can’t help having some kind of ethics because that is how we are made, and we cannot function without them. But it does not come from Christianity. It comes from their consciences which persists in showing some shadows of their divine origins.
As to the cross, secular people can adopt it to various uses. It can represent different things to different people. But for Christians who believe in the Bible the cross is the instrument of a divine sacrifice by God in the flesh to atone for the sins of the world.
About Christ’s teaching of the last being first and the first last, that refers to the final reckoning on the day of judgment, when people will be punished or rewarded not according to worldly standards but to God’s standards. It does not refer to human schemes of political reform.
People who deny Christ are not Christians – but they are still human beings made in the image of God. Thus, if Richard Dawkins were to feel moral outrage at some obvious injustice, he would do so in complete denial of his false values which have nothing to do how we really live. But that does not make him a Christian.
About declining birthrates, religious people have more children. I have been going to a conservative independent church as a visitor for the past few weeks, and there are lots of families with young kids. Religion gives people something higher to aim for than self indulgence, convenience. It makes children welcome, valued and appreciated as beautiful gifts of God, not as nuisances and burdens that prevent people from enjoying themselves. And abortion is the direct result of denying the spiritual value of each individual human life.
Transsexualism is also nothing but rebellion against God. It is defiance of Christian values, not an outgrowth of them.
About Christianity succeeding in the Roman Empire because it appealed to valueless people, it appealed to all levels and attracted some of the finest minds of men who had classical educations and could meet the pagan philosophers on their own grounds. It did appeal to people without value, but it also appealed to people who knew the Greek and Roman myths were impossible to take seriously as guides to life. And Christianity has always appealed to many people from all walks of life.
Well, I could say more but have to stop somewhere. You do say at the end that
“There is nothing outwardly that can be done on a political level; any populist revolution is guaranteed to fail, just as Trump’s did, due to Kynosargas’s accurate criticisms about the weaknesses of right-wing populism. It is a time for inward focus and education about the transformation of values that must occur if there is to be a hope for future change.”
You could very well be right there. It may be that the forces of decay are too far along and there is nothing that can be done politically. Right wing populism does have many weaknesses, and the forces of globalism and authoritarianism are very strong. But in biblical Christianity there are biblical truths that transcend all of these things, even though modern American Christianity is not doing too well for various reasons. But in the teachings of Christ himself, without the admixtures of American culture found in so many churches, there is eternal life.
What we need is not a Nietzschean transvaluation of values. What we need is regard for the values taught by Christ and the apostles, and by Moses and the Old Testament prophets.
I’ve been of the belief for a while now that Ivy League schools should be a measure of adherence to group rather than of gaining intelligence or a place of “higher learning”. It may well be the highest level of institutionalization one can expect to achieve but rarely does it foster an environment for one to learn critical thinking skills. In addition this amongst other things should be an indicator of a public persons motives when their actions don’t match their words.
It’s ironic to me that in the grand scheme that these people really do not matter, nor do their beliefs. They do not nor will never have the ability to perform functions that are necessary to create or maintain a society, much less a healthy one. What I’ll never understand however is why so many normal people that do contribute to society believe otherwise.
Personally, I am very biased against Muslims, Jews and Globohomo. I would defend America against the rule of all of them.
I agree too, Christianity has not been sufficient as a bulwark against any of these forces taking over America. I think we need a new religion for that, a new religion of the Americas.
A pox on both their houses.
Wonderful work, as usual. Some of your best, in the year or so I've been reading.
The central problem for AINO is that its leaders care not a damn about America or Americans. They cannot be expected to ever be drawn to isolationism since for them it has no benefit. Their benefit comes from the wealth of globalism, and when it comes to generating the loldollars (which is the thing they do care absolutely the most about), no isolationist strategy can compete with even a diminished and weakening version of globalism. Indeed, it was when the love of the loldollars displaced other values as Value #1 that this road we are on was preordained.
I don't think it's just nostalgia when I say that there was a time when America was ordered on other values. When its leaders cared about some things more than they cared about the loldollars. It was a long time ago, but it happened. The root cause of our present state of affairs is not necessarily more complicated than love of money, and its displacement of other values.
Thanks Martin. I agree with you that our leaders will chase greater power, wealth and control for themselves at the expense of the masses in this era, that they seem to be motivated beyond that by a sense of noblesse malice, and that America used to have better and stronger values... We can see this with the Bank War, where Andrew Jackson killed the second central bank in a brutal and very close fight. It was his greatest accomplishment and after the Rothschilds established the Federal Reserve, they put his face on their unbacked $20 note out of spite and revenge, something he would have hated...
... or maybe it's just as simple as "killing 30,000+ civilians for no clear reason is bad". Everyone should be against genocide against any other group. If you're not, something is wrong with your worldview.
Hi samoan, thanks for the comment. If the criteria for world attention and intervention is stopping one ethnic group from oppressing another, something that has been ongoing throughout human history, then one must be in favor of the U.S. or other countries as "Team America, World Police." One can't be focused on the horrors that occur around the world without then demanding action against it, which necessitates superpowers and world government. But as we're seeing, the U.S. is both broke (printing to infinity resulting in major inflation with much worse to come), and no one wants to join the military anymore to fight in these overseas wars. Even if one is in favor of such global intervention, the domestic trends are all pointing against it's continuation long-term...
Yes, the US shouldn't involve itself in every world conflict, but the least it can do is not fuel them which is the case with Israel/Palestine. The conflict would be over tomorrow if our government threated to stop giving military aid to Israel. Any libertarian should be anti-Israel on that logic alone.
Sure, I don't disagree. I just think it should be taken a step further: we can take the logic of not fueling military conflict worldwide and expand it to Ukraine, Armenia/Azerbaijan, India/Pakistan, Taiwan and South Korea and Japan and Saudi and Egypt and Germany .... Ron Paul has been principled against foreign aid and military bases around the world; I think it's a good position to take. Regardless, the U.S. will be forced into contraction sooner or later based on the monetary situation.
Actions have consequences. We have been playing stupid games for so long that eventually we are going to start winning the stupid prizes.
Do you think Muslims would do any different with the Jews? This is what cultures engaged in existential struggle look like. The group unwilling or unable to subjugate or destroy the other gets plowed under. The Jews and Muslims understand this and act accordingly.
Your view simply underlines the feebleness of the West and illustrates why it will get plowed under. We are unwilling to defend ourselves because doing so offends our effete bourgeoise sensibilities. We would rather take a deep hit off the normalcy bias crack pipe, while our competitors hold no illusions about how things work.
The only "culture" in an existential struggle is the US 1%. Contrary to popular belief, Jews, Muslims and Christians have lived in the area of Israel/Palestine in peace for over a thousand years.
I'm far behind in catching up on your posts. Just saw a Note you posted on this peace and noticed your subtitle: "The opposite of love is not hate but indifference". Calls to mind my favorite verse from the Bible: "But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth." — Revelation 3:16
“There is a fundamental split with respect to the Jewish strategy which is not reflected in the simpler Islamic conquest strategy. This split is between nationalist, Zionist religious Jews and globalist, anti-Zionist secular Jews.”
Biden Administration loaded with the latter. That being the anti Zionist secular types who identify as Jews but do not practice the religion.
Anti semites tend to lump Jews together in one pot not understanding the split.
Regenerated then converted (born again) Christians are called to bless the nation of Israel ( doesn’t mean every person who attaches themselves to Jewish identity nor Israel’s government). What that means is a whole other debate.
Fantastic overview and most appreciated. Im all for isolationism at this point in our history so we can attempt to fix ourselves before it’s too late.
Great work! I always have to work up to whatever you post. I want to have uninterrupted time to read all the footnotes and your various links. I am still working through all your other work. Know that it is read, valued, and appreciated. I’m glad someone else is articulating, and distilling things that I’ve been coming around to.
Thanks Simon, I very much appreciate the feedback and encouragement.
An interesting premise, one which leads one to a potentially more satisfying place than anything offered currently. Of course any worthwhile attempt at transition requires steps in this direction, and unfortunately I see none.
Honestly, I was somewhat surprised to note one omission, or at least what I think is an omission-Marxism. I cannot even glance at the social engineering efforts of woke, for example, without being confronted by Marxist propoganda.
Its all very odd, to observe near totalitarian corporate empires demanding their workforce adopt Marxist politispeak. Who is fooling who here?
Corporate woke agendas aside, standard religion is also inherently compromised.
Perhaps the greatest issue with christianity is its syncretic assimilative character. Christianity is a political identity. It is not nor ever has been a spiritual one. The same can easily be said for Judaism and Islam. Thus, the big three are attack institutions, they cannot function as rallying points other than for overt political objectives. As long as they are on the offensive, they are effective at mobilization. Reviewing the current condition, christianity is the only one that is backpedalling.
Finally, I do think you have a compelling point in theorizing that the current antihuman activities of the ruling elite stem from an infection by hostile entities, yet for reasons I previously stated, I am hesitant to label such the Demiurge.
Thanks for the comment, Mike. I attribute Marxism to the egalitarian ratchet effect: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-egalitarian-ratchet-effect-why
I agree with you that any centralized, organized religion is primarily materialist and political, interested in power and expansion, as they must be to survive and thrive in this world. Connection to God is a secondary feature of such exoteric religion (if that). I also agree that the actions of our malevolent elite may simply be materialist in nature; it's hard to know whether to ascribe higher powers to such actions, there's an ambivalence or uncertainty that allows for multiple interpretations...
I suppose on a certain level, the most stunning disconnect regarding those espousing Marxist egalitarian ideology is the fact that it is sourced from some of the most rigidly hierarchical institutions derived from the mind of man.
However, as you point out, egalitarianism isn't historically Marxist alone, and this historic egalitarianism itself was promoted by hierarchies, which makes one wonder what the actual definition of egalitarianism is-in an actual practical application sense.
The most curious aspect, regarding the actions of the elite, and again purely from my own point of view, is the maniacal, tunnel vision kind of focus on achieving their goals. Once any particular objective is leaked-such as the case in the USA with establishing a private central bank, even if this goal requires decades, or more, they stick to it with a fanatical determination until achieved.
The suggestion therefore, is that the goals are required to advance an undisclosed strategy, one with a definite end in sight.
From what can be observed and experienced, the goals do not merely serve to establish temporal power. I find it a definite affirmative that this is very much on purpose-either via the actions supporting those goals, or inherently through the strategy itself.
This leaves the door open to "the imaterium" and that which manifests therein.
This is really too much for the comment section, however I can follow certain paths by which this could be true.
Best-M.
“There is a fundamental split with respect to the Jewish strategy which is not reflected in the simpler Islamic conquest strategy. This split is between nationalist, Zionist religious Jews and globalist, anti-Zionist secular Jews.”
There is also the anti-Zionist Orthodox community: https://torahjews.org/mission - They condemn the secular democracy supported by a pagan empire. Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum (founder of Satmar) said the Holocaust was Divine wrath for Zionism. The Rabbis Speak Out is a collection of similar pronouncements: https://www.yhe.center/_files/ugd/c396a3_9b45d8c77b4d49aba22ca455cc17c9e7.pdf
Paul was encouraging people to worship a dead heretic (possibly the evil prophet Deuteronomy 13 warns about). Noahide Law prohibits the worship of any gxd but HaShem: https://estimatedprophet1977.blogspot.com/2022/07/a-noachides-response-to-christianity.html
Thanks Petronius. Yes, you are right that there are some anti-Zionist Orthodox, but their numbers seem pretty low. Satmar has 26,000 households according to the wiki page. There are others I've heard of such as Neturei Karta as well, but also very fringe (1,000-2,000 members per wiki). More interesting is the general Haredi sentiment about not working and not serving in the army even as their numbers grow enormously. Adam Green posits that the spread of Christianity was a way to make the gentile masses worship the Jewish God without becoming Jews: https://twitter.com/know_more_news .
Excellent job threading the needle and avoiding the “magician's choice” being foisted on Western whites by the hidden rulers. Let the zionists and jihadis fight their own wars in their own countries, and leave us out of it. Focus our attention and resources on cleaning up our own house, to include cleaning out the zionists and jihadis and undoing their corrupting influence on our culture.
Did the China fetishist links not work for me only, or are they broken?
Hi ikaruga, the links work for me but they are both archive.ph links -- give them a minute to load. This is because the underlying spandrell.com website is no longer functional, although the archived links are; Spandrell does have a new website, though, which is available at: https://spandrell.ch/
"But younger whites and Christians increasingly feel bitter toward Israel due to the destruction of western civilization which has been presided over by a hugely disproportionate number of Jews."
Darwin was not a Jew, and the belief that we are only advanced animals in an accidental universe is one of the key elements in modern decline. Darwinism is an acid that over time destroys what is unique and precious in the human personality. Also, the scientific revolution going back to the 16th century has had a huge influence in convincing people that the only real knowledge is scientific knowledge, which has led greatly to the decline of religion and to the decline of law and morality in society.
Many non-Jews were instrumental in that Marx had a huge influence but that was based on his repudiation of Judaism. If he had been an orthodox believing Jew he would never have come up with his theory. Freud had a great influence, but why did so many non-Jews receive his message so eagerly?
Modern technology has had a huge influence - the automobile, TVs and computers, entertainments of all sorts. I think technology has really corrupted society to a very great extent by allowing us to live such pampered lives, our minds filled with entertainment and rubbish - not to mention the destructive effects of our pathetic now openly corrupt educational systems. The Jews are not to blame for this.
I do agree Islam is an aggressive and expanding threat, with global ambitions. The founders of America who established freedom of religion did not have to deal with Islam, which is incompatible with a free society unless they are a strictly controlled minority with no nonsense tolerated - but that requires a strong and aggressive leadership and a strict regard for the rule of law, which we do not have.
Also, the globalists have their own false and destructive vision with themselves as the masters of a docile and obedient humanity - but is this not merely Hitler and Stalin but now on a global scale, made possible by modern technology?
Modern American Christianity is very weak, and very far removed from the Christianity of the New Testament, and attempts at political activism (like the Moral Majority or the Defense of Marriage Act have all failed (we can be thankful for some successes in the pro-life movement). The early Christians did not see themselves as called to save Western Civilization. They were more interested in the resurrection of the dead and a day of judgment, followed by heaven or hell - and with this emphasis they had much greater influence than they would have had with a program of social reform.
We are all going to die, and then all of these earthly problems will pass away - and then what? People who take these questions seriously and live appropriately are much less likely to be deceived by the lies of current society.
Hi Joe, thanks for the comment. While I think the evidence is conclusive that Jews are quite disproportionately represented among the globalist vanguard and have been for a very long time, I don't think they are exclusively responsible for the state of modern society. There is the egalitarian ratchet effect inherent within Christianity itself (https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-egalitarian-ratchet-effect-why ) , there is the corrosive, atomizing and nihilistic effects of technological advancement, there are the Hindu cycles that Guenon has discussed where reality increasingly becomes solidified and materialistic (https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/technology-as-the-accelerator-of ), there is the fact that there is always an elite skimming off the masses no matter the age or society, etc. But the Jewish issue is an important one and it is completely banned from being discussed within western society, unlike the others.
1/2
Many thanks for your interesting and substantive comments and for the links.
My comment is too long even though I tried to cut it, so I will have to make two posts.
It may be that the Jews are overrepresented among the globalist elite – but is Klaus Schwab a Jew? Obama and Biden are not Jews, and they are among the main facilitators of globalism in the USA. Bill Gates and many other leaders of the UN and big globalist corporations are not Jews. But, if Jews really are overrepresented in the ranks of the globalist elite, they are also overrepresented in the ranks of Nobel Prize winners and in other areas. Some have attributed this to having been brought up in a tradition that valued study, hard work, achievement and spiritual discipline. Then maybe you have heard the saying, “Jews are just like everyone else – only a little more so.” True or not? I only offer it up for speculation.
But certainly, the main tenets of modern secularist globalism do not have any roots in the Jewish biblical tradition. The belief in one God who created the heavens and the earth, and who has given us moral laws to which we are subject, as well as a day of judgment followed by heaven or hell are of no interest to those secular humanist geniuses. True, Judaism does not stress heaven and hell as much as Christianity does, but is found plainly stated in the Jewish Scriptures. To give only one example:
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. Daniel chapter 12
Thus, much of traditional Judaism is anathema to modern secularism, which is the main reason for the new secular anti-Judaism that emerged out of the Enlightenment. Kant and Voltaire and others were hostile to the Jews not because of the rejection and crucifixion of Christ (Christ was not important to them) but because they thought the Jewish idea of God was obnoxious and Judaism was false and anti-social at its core.
Marx would never have been a Marxist if he had been a truly religious man (of either the Christian or Jewish persuasion). It was out of his rejection of Judaism and Christianity that he developed his foolish hallucination of an earthly paradise without God. And Marx’s hostility towards Judaism and Christianity was well known and often expressed. Freud, too, emerged out of a rejection of religious Judaism, in which he did not believe.
But, we agree that the Jews are not “exclusively responsible for the state of modern society.” Darwin has played a huge role, as has the belief of atheism in general (also a direct denial of Judaism). Not many people recognize the extent to which so many problems of modernism are the direct result of the belief that the universe came about by accident, and the human race did as well, that we are purposeless beings in a purposeless universe. This allows everyone to create their own values and invent their own truths, robbing society of a shared narrative. In short, it is not religion but rather the rejection of religion which is the foundation of so much of what we see today.
Of course, there have been sins and evils of various sorts in every culture and every age, but they assume different forms: religious evils in the Middle Ages, secular evils in the modern secular age.
Along with Darwinism, modern technology and our increasingly artificial lifestyles have a lot to do with the spiritual illnesses afflicting our society. As you said in the second article linked in your comments, “increases in materialism and technology seem to decrease our connection to God.” This is really huge and cannot be overestimated in my opinion – and this does not come from Judaism and Christianity. Automobiles, TV and other entertainments, conveniences, luxuries, all of these have helped to isolate us from deeper spiritual realities and made us shallow, weak and soft, more satisfied with ourselves, less aware of our need for deeper spiritual resources.
Moving on to your next point, you say “There is the egalitarian ratchet effect inherent within Christianity itself” (https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-egalitarian-ratchet-effect-why ). You assert that the modern push for egalitarianism emerges from the Christian tradition – that the oppressed oppressor narrative so central to charges of racism, gender discrimination, and economic class discrimination come from Paul’s teachings stressing spiritual equality.
I personally believe that current manias for equality and social justice come not from biblical tradition, but from the rebellion against and denial of biblical truth.
You refer to Paul’s teachings about equality and service. Those are applicable to people who believe in Christ and have the mind and the Spirit of Christ. Paul makes it clear in the introductory verses of most or all of his letters that he is writing for those who have experienced and believe in the truth of Christ as the risen Son of God.
Thus, Galatians 3:28 is for those who are in Christ, and most people are not. They are especially not in Christ who deny his truth claims, his sacrifice on the cross for sin, his resurrection from the dead, and his final return as God manifest.
Hi Joe, thanks for the long comment. I think I've addressed many of your points you raise in prior posts, so for brevity sake I will reference them below (otherwise the response would be very long). I'm happy to answer any follow up questions you have.
I covered the argument for higher Jewish average verbal IQ (although lower spatial IQ) in the second half of this post: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-10000-year-explosion-rapid-selection
Klaus Schwab's mother is Marianne Rothschild. It's unclear if it's of the same relation to the famous Rothschild family; information on the internet is inconsistent. Gates, Obama etc. are not close to the top of the neo-feudal hierarchy, which is delved into here: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-global-world-order-is-centralized . Remember that although Obama ran on a hope and change platform, he let Citigroup appoint his entire 2009 cabinet: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/10/15/wiki-o15.html
Darwin was likely funded by the central bank owners as a way to discredit mainstream organized religion, although I havn't done a deep dive into this particular topic. Indeed, they seem to have favored funding certain topics and beliefs that would increase their degree of control.
I covered the complicated relationship between Jews and the central bank owners here: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/the-complicated-relationship-between . The motivations of the central bank owners are covered here: https://neofeudalism.substack.com/p/goals-motivations-and-strategies
You write, "I personally believe that current manias for equality and social justice come not from biblical tradition, but from the rebellion against and denial of biblical truth." To be fair, I can't argue with deontological beliefs; if you take the bible as literally true and then structure your analysis of society from that basis, I understand the impulse and I appreciate it, but it's the opposite of how I approach things, which is by studying cause and effect in a recursive manner until my beliefs synch up as closely as possible on a predictive basis with future events. As such, based on the way we process information we may end up arguing past each other...
Regarding Christianity and egalitarianism, I cover it more here (https://neofeudalism.substack.com/p/deeper-societal-trends-predating ) and in its follow up part 2. Specifically I note Tom Holland who writes that in Christianity “every human being had been made equally by God and endowed by him with the same spark of reason.” Brett Anderson's continues, "That “spark of reason” was intimately tied up with notions of moral equality. The connection of ideas goes something like this, in the form of a syllogism:
If divine soul = reasoning capacity
And moral equality = equality of souls
Then moral equality = equality of reasoning capacity"
This provided the basic impulse for the egalitarian ratchet effect, I think.
Lastly, just to offer where I am coming from, my beliefs best align with gnostic Christianity, a topic I will be covering more in depth later, although I offer my beliefs about the problem of evil here: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/meditations-on-the-problem-of-evil and the nature of the soul here: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/ruminatons-on-the-nature-of-the-soul
I hope you find these links helpful.
Hi Neoliberal,
We could write books about these subjects, which neither of us are inclined to do. But I would like to touch on some key points.
About higher Jewish IQs, we can look at all of the many world problems in the modern age with which the Jews have had nothing to do: the disasters in China, Cambodia and Rwanda; World Wars 1 and 2 (I reject Hitler’s and Hamas’ theses that the Jews were to blame for those wars); the COVID catastrophe; and many other things. And if some Jews do introduce negative ideas (predicated I might add upon the denial of biblical Judaism), what have those ideas been so eagerly embraced, and so feebly opposed?
Even in the Middle East – if Israel would magically disappear that place would still be a nightmare of violence, with an imperialistic Iran aggressively pushing its ambitions. That place has been a battleground for centuries.
The fact remains that Bill Gates and Obama are not Jews, but they were and have been instrumental in pushing that agenda. And if Obama allowed Citigroup to appoint his entire cabinet, who voted for Obama? Who put him in power? And why did the Republicans roll over and play dead during the 8 years he was in office and do virtually nothing to oppose him? And why did so many American voters ignore clear red flags in his past career and associations?
A functioning democracy requires vigilance, strength of character, and basic intelligence to maintain our rights against foes from many directions, and if that will is gone, and the people passively allow themselves to be led down the wrong path, I do not blame that on the Jews, I blame that on us, on our culture and our character deficiencies.
About Darwin's hidden financial support, his theory was eagerly accepted by many people, aggressively advanced, and weakly opposed. It did not take a lot of money to get his theory off of the ground, and Darwin did not have a lifestyle or a research program that called for lavish funding.
Besides, your article “The Thousand Year Explosion” is be based on the truth of Darwin’s theory! So if the theory is true, who cares where Darwin got his money? Did a hidden group of bankers conspire to spread true science? But I argue that Darwin’s theory is false, and many of the ills we see in society today are directly attributable to the socially destructive idea that we are nothing but animals.
About your links to the central bank owners, I don’t deny that the malefactors of great wealth have had a harmful influence – but so have the entertainment industries and our whole educational system from top to bottom. So have our unhealthy modern technological lifestyles, as well as our false world views of a meaningless universe and us as meaningless creatures in it. This has done a lot to rob people of that strength of character and independence and love of liberty without which democracy dies, as we can see today.
You make a valid point, that with our completely different starting points “based on the way we process information we may end up arguing past each other....” If God does not exist, or if he exists but in a significantly different way than what the Bible describes him, then my whole approach is completely wrong. But, if the universe did not happen by accident; if there is a God and if the soul lives after death, for us to be judged as individuals for all we have said and done, then your approach is wrong.
However, true or false, the Bible does not call for the complete collapse of ordinary social norms we are witnessing today. The Bible reinforces those traditional norms, and the problems we see today come not from the logical extension of Christian ideas, but from the direct repudiation of those ideals. So, I think your understanding of what the Bible teaches and means is in some significant areas inaccurate, as is linking the Bible to people who overtly reject it.
About Christianity and egalitarianism, you mention spiritual bolshevism. That was one of Hitler’s ideas. He claimed that Jewish Christian egalitarianism undermined the natural hierarchy of the strong, and expressed that in very Nietzschean terms. But the moral equality of the bible does not mean social levelling, and did not have that effect for many centuries of Christian cultural domination. It was only with the turning away of Christianity in the modern era that people who rejected God began to conjure up false ideas of an earthly paradise.
Gibbon’s accounts of Christianity are very superficial and biased, and his “Enlightenment” hostility to a religion he did not understand is evident.
There are some elementary mistakes in your descriptions of Christianity. To give only one example, you quote Christ saying “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” That was prior to the crucifixion when he was in his earthly ministry. At the end of the gospel of Matthew we read something very different, where Christ said in Matthew 28:19 “Go and make disciples of all nations.” And I repeat, Nietzsche's description of Christianity is false from top to bottom, and his extreme hatred of it was possibly an effect of his mental illness.
The Bible does teach moral equality but only of a certain type. If I sin against a Jew or a Greek, a man or a woman, a rich man or a poor man, an African, an Asian or a Caucasian, I am just as guilty. We are all humans and all of equal moral value – but the Bible does not teach overturning of the natural order, and is in fact very conservative in this respect. This is why modern manias for false ideas of equality emerged not out of Christianity, but out of the rejection of Christianity.
The real basis for the egalitarian ratchet effect is those who believe that we are not sinful; that we are basically good; that injustices are the fault of the system and all we need to do is change the system; that we can rewire humanity to reach imaginary goals; that we can remake humanity in our image. The modern evils you see today are precisely that – modern and secular, the result of rebellion against God and his laws.
About the problem of evil, it is of course impossible for me to respond to that adequately here. I will point out that you are relying only on your own intelligence and human wisdom – whereas these are spiritual mysteries too great for the independent human mind to grasp. This is why we need the revelation of God in Christ for a fuller understanding. In the light of this revelation we see that your statement “pure spiritual God who does not and will not interfere in the Demiurge’s control of this world unfortunately lines up with observable facts” is not correct.
(1) the world is not controlled by an imaginary demiurge. It is controlled by God, and he allows evil temporarily before finally destroying it, because it is not his will for us to live in a paradise where everything goes are way and there is never any danger, illness, hardship or suffering.
(2) He will intervene with the final destruction of evil and also a resurrection from the dead and a day of judgement in which all will receive the due reward for what they have done in this life. We read in John 5: “Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”
And I believe Christ’s teaching here to be authoritative and definitive, far beyond ordinary human wisdom.
About the nature of the soul, the human spirit is like anything else unseen in nature. Love, hate, good, evil, emotional and spiritual needs unknown to any of the beasts – these come from God having breathed the breath of life into Adam. There is a divine origin to the soul, and without this, there is no real understanding of human nature on its deepest levels.
2/2
Paul’s spiritual concepts of equality of love and faith in Christ are drastically different from gender role reversal and unisex (which Paul expressly and repeatedly denied) and from social leveling and obliteration of class distinctions (which Paul also denied). In fact traditional gender and social roles are humanized by love, faith, patience and charity but are not obliterated. Thus Paul sets clear boundaries to the ratchet effect, and it is no accident that modern obsessions with a false political and social equality emerged simultaneously with the decline of biblical Christianity.
Christ’s call to servanthood in Matthew 20 refers to service as members in the Christian community. The wisdom of today’s destroyers of boundaries is human wisdom, and not the wisdom of God in Christ.
When Christianity flourished and was dominant the social structures of home and family, and upper and lower classes were firmly intact. In fact, they were accepted and taught as God’s design for the human race. This has nothing whatever to do with the desired worldly egalitarianism of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, and Pol Pot, all of whom hated religion and sought to eliminate it. Their vision came from the denial of God and replacing spiritual equality of love and faith in Christ with something completely different.
Your first link goes into Nietzsche’s analysis of Christianity in the Genealogy of Morals in some detail. I believe Nietzsche’s analysis of the origins of morality and of Christianity are wrong. Human ethics of kindness, mercy, love, patience and forgiveness did not emerge as the result of the weak attempting to impose their values on the strong. Rather, those virtues answer the deepest needs of the human heart, and come from our Creator and correspond to our souls made in his image. Nietzsche’s glorification of war and violence as the true virtue of natural and unspoiled men is a big mistake, from the Christian standpoint.
In section 2 of the Antichrist (the last book Nietzsche wrote before he went completely insane) he literally calls for the extermination of the weak and the unfit. He also says in that section that sympathy for the weak is “more harmful than any vice.”
Also, I don’t think it is reasonable to see the French Revolution as a result of Luther. It was rather a direct repudiation of biblical morality and divinely revealed laws. Neither are atheists who expressly reject Christ “Christians in denial.” The atheists can’t help having some kind of ethics because that is how we are made, and we cannot function without them. But it does not come from Christianity. It comes from their consciences which persists in showing some shadows of their divine origins.
As to the cross, secular people can adopt it to various uses. It can represent different things to different people. But for Christians who believe in the Bible the cross is the instrument of a divine sacrifice by God in the flesh to atone for the sins of the world.
About Christ’s teaching of the last being first and the first last, that refers to the final reckoning on the day of judgment, when people will be punished or rewarded not according to worldly standards but to God’s standards. It does not refer to human schemes of political reform.
People who deny Christ are not Christians – but they are still human beings made in the image of God. Thus, if Richard Dawkins were to feel moral outrage at some obvious injustice, he would do so in complete denial of his false values which have nothing to do how we really live. But that does not make him a Christian.
About declining birthrates, religious people have more children. I have been going to a conservative independent church as a visitor for the past few weeks, and there are lots of families with young kids. Religion gives people something higher to aim for than self indulgence, convenience. It makes children welcome, valued and appreciated as beautiful gifts of God, not as nuisances and burdens that prevent people from enjoying themselves. And abortion is the direct result of denying the spiritual value of each individual human life.
Transsexualism is also nothing but rebellion against God. It is defiance of Christian values, not an outgrowth of them.
About Christianity succeeding in the Roman Empire because it appealed to valueless people, it appealed to all levels and attracted some of the finest minds of men who had classical educations and could meet the pagan philosophers on their own grounds. It did appeal to people without value, but it also appealed to people who knew the Greek and Roman myths were impossible to take seriously as guides to life. And Christianity has always appealed to many people from all walks of life.
Well, I could say more but have to stop somewhere. You do say at the end that
“There is nothing outwardly that can be done on a political level; any populist revolution is guaranteed to fail, just as Trump’s did, due to Kynosargas’s accurate criticisms about the weaknesses of right-wing populism. It is a time for inward focus and education about the transformation of values that must occur if there is to be a hope for future change.”
You could very well be right there. It may be that the forces of decay are too far along and there is nothing that can be done politically. Right wing populism does have many weaknesses, and the forces of globalism and authoritarianism are very strong. But in biblical Christianity there are biblical truths that transcend all of these things, even though modern American Christianity is not doing too well for various reasons. But in the teachings of Christ himself, without the admixtures of American culture found in so many churches, there is eternal life.
What we need is not a Nietzschean transvaluation of values. What we need is regard for the values taught by Christ and the apostles, and by Moses and the Old Testament prophets.
I’ve been of the belief for a while now that Ivy League schools should be a measure of adherence to group rather than of gaining intelligence or a place of “higher learning”. It may well be the highest level of institutionalization one can expect to achieve but rarely does it foster an environment for one to learn critical thinking skills. In addition this amongst other things should be an indicator of a public persons motives when their actions don’t match their words.
It’s ironic to me that in the grand scheme that these people really do not matter, nor do their beliefs. They do not nor will never have the ability to perform functions that are necessary to create or maintain a society, much less a healthy one. What I’ll never understand however is why so many normal people that do contribute to society believe otherwise.