Introduction
In recent posts, I have made a series of arguments that the Christianization of the Roman Empire was good for the Jews (here and here) and bad for the Gentiles (hereand here), and that it has paved the way for the subversion and subjugation of Western civilization by Jewish Power. Since Christianity is a Jewish invention, it is hard to resist the theory that it was part of a grand Jewish conspiracy (that “aggressive and vindictive conspiracy … against the rest of the world” that is written “plain and clear” in the Hebrew Bible, as H. G. Wells tried to warn us about in The Fate of Homo Sapiens, 1939). However, no matter how hard I look for some clue that Christianity was from the start a Jewish psy-op to alienate the Romans rather than to save them, I do not find it. The vast number of Jews (mostly Hellenized Jews from the Diaspora) who converted to Christianity in the first century runs contrary to that theory. I find no reason for suspecting Paul, the real founder of Gentile Christianity, of being some sort of Israeli asset trying to deceive the gullible Goyim into believing things that he didn’t believe himself. The fact that he wrote “This is the truth” (Romans 9:1) doesn’t mean he’s lying. Yet, we do find in his letters the conviction that with the massive conversion of Gentiles to Christ, “all will be restored to [the Jews]” in the end (Romans 11:12).
So we are left with the firm conclusion that Christianity provided a decisive selective advantage to Israel in its millennia-long war against Rome, but no proof that it was secretly manufactured for that purpose. It is time, therefore, to call on professor Kevin MacDonald to help us solve this riddle. I will here discuss whether Christianity can fit within the general theory that he has developed in A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, With Diaspora Peoples (1994) and his subsequent volumes.
The great advantage of MacDonald’s evolutionary psychology approach is that it bypasses the question of intentionality and therefore allows us to study “group evolutionary strategies” without having to look for evidence of a conspiracy. Evolutionary psychology postulates that the various strategies that kinship-based groups (clans, tribes, nations) develop for survival, reproduction, expansion and dominance in a competitive environment can be, at least in part, subconscious rather than clearly articulated. There is, in any ethnic group, a collective, transgenerational will to power operating below the threshold of individual consciousness. The group’s collective mentality is not purely the product of biology, but involves ideology: through generations, culture becomes a second nature.
These assumptions coincide with the conclusions of sociology (Durkheim, Levi-Strauss, Le Bon), that the average cognitions, emotions and behaviors of individuals are subconsciously determined by some form of group mind. To some extent which depends on the cohesion of the group, when individuals think, feel and want, it is the group that thinks, feels and wants through them. Western individualists are least likely to have a strong connection to the group, highly ethnocentric groups like Jews are the most likely. In the case of a highly sophisticated group such as the Jewish community, this principle works in highly sophisticated ways, but it still applies at some level. The paradigm of evolutionary psychology therefore makes it possible to understand Jewish strategies as involving a fair amount of self-deception, rather than mere deception.
As a national group, the Jews have two distinctive features. One is that they are a worldwide community. In their vast majority, they have lived and strived in the midst of foreign nations for more than two thousand years (since the Hellenistic period). For this, they have elaborated unique strategies that have become part of their ancestral cognitive habits. It is almost like they have developed a dual personality: a core personality for their Jewish environment, and a more flexible one for their Gentile environment. They do not necessarily experience this complexity as inconsistency or hypocrisy.
The other special feature of the Jews is that they are both an ethnic and a religious community, with the unique advantage that their most essential strategy for survival in foreign environments is also the central commandment of their religious scripture: strict endogamy.[1] In From Yahweh to Zion, I have argued that the Jews’ peculiar collective behavior is not genetically determined, but culturally programmed. Their Bible tells the Jews that what is good for the Jews is good in absolute terms, and therefore must be good for the Gentiles too, even when they don’t like it. The mission of the Jews is to obey the Jews’ god by destroying the Gentiles’ gods, meaning whatever is sacred to them, including their ethnic or national identities, because these gods are either evil or fake, contrary to the Jews’ god who is the one and only true God.
Beside the elementary strategy of endogamy, MacDonald distinguishes two major sets of group strategies among Diaspora Jews: strategies by which they adapt to their environment, and strategies by which they modify their environment. The first kind of strategy is akin to the crypsis or mimesis that can be observed in the animal world. The second kind has no equivalent in the animal world and can even be considered a special faculty of the Jews.
I will show that, if we analyze the early diffusion of Christianity as a Jewish “group evolutionary strategy”, it fits both categories: Jews who converted to Christianity were adapting to their dangerously “anti-Semitic” environment, by making themselves less Jewish and more Graeco-Roman (Christianity being, to some degree, an imitation of Graeco-Roman mystery cults), while preserving their core belief in Jewish chosenness and their primal hatred of the pagan gods. And Jews who converted Gentiles to Christianity during the same period altered their environment by making Roman society more Jewish and less pagan, and, above all, more credulous of the Jews’ central role in God’s providence. In a very deep sense, Christianity convinced Romans that “salvation is from the Jews” (John 4:22), an idea that Hellenistic Jews like Philo of Alexandria were already promoting a century earlier, saying that “the Jewish nation is to the whole world what the priest is to the state.”[2]
How Jewish is Christianity?
Obviously, the theory that Christianity was a Jewish evolutionary strategy can only apply to the Christianity of the first centuries, when Jews were creating and leading Christianity. Jews cannot reasonably be held responsible for the conversion of the Roman Empire in the fourth century, let alone the conversion of the barbarians. By the time Christianity became Rome’s official religion, Jews were not in charge of it. We are entitled to suspect a number of influential crypto-Jews in the courts of the Constantinian and Theodosian dynasties, but no case can be brought to light. Without doubt, the Church was then predominantly of Gentile extraction, and Gentile Christianity had taken a life of its own. The Jews only provided the initial impetus.
But it is important to realize that the leadership of Jews on Gentile Christianity was much more intense and enduring than Church historians have led us to believe. Let’s break down the state of our knowledge on that matter.
The first thing to recognize is the importance of the Jewish population in the megacities of the Roman Empire, where Christianity first thrived. In the first century, it is assumed that there were a million Jews in Palestine and about five million in the Diaspora, particularly in big cities such as Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome. A part of Rome’s Jewish population descended from the thousands of Jewish captives that Pompey brought after capturing Jerusalem in 63 BC, and their number increased in AD 70, when Vespasian and Titus brought to Rome an additional 97,000 Jewish captives, according to Flavius Josephus (Jewish War VI,9). Many of them would be freed, as was Josephus, who worked tirelessly to promote his nation to Gentiles. There is debate about the reality and extent of Jewish proselytism in the first and second century, but we know from Cassius Dio that a member of the imperial family, Flavius Clemens, was executed by the emperor Domitian for “atheism” and “deviation toward Judaic customs” (Jews were regarded as atheists for their contempt of the gods), while his wife Flavia Domitilla was banished.
The next fact to consider is that we have very little information about the way Christianity spread in Roman cities from the time of Paul to the middle of second century. In fact, as Bart Ehrman noted in The Triumph of Christianity: “outside of Paul’s work itself, we do not know of any organized Christian missionary work—not just for the first century, but for any century prior to the conversion of most of the empire. … That may be hard to believe, but in fact, if you were to count every Christian missionary about whom even a single story is told, from the period after the New Testament up through the first four centuries, you would not need all the digits on one hand.”[3] This is remarkable in itself.
As Rodney Stark argues in The Rise of Christianity, there are many reasons to believe that Jews, who were highly mobile and interconnected, were the main propagators of the gospels throughout the Empire, even after the second century.[4] Archaeology confirms that Christian churches and artefacts are always found in Jewish quarters. Eric Meyers reports that data from Rome and Venosa show that “Jewish and Christian burials reflect an interdependent and closely related community of Jews and Christians in which clear marks of demarcation were blurred until the third and fourth centuries C.E.”[5]
In the second half of the second century, both Jews and Christians were only beginning to see each other as belonging to different religions, and the first known apologists, though Gentiles, were still engaged in dialog with Jews, as illustrated by Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho, Aristo of Pella’s Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus (now lost), or Origen’s later mention of having taken part in a theological debate with Jews before “umpires”.[6]
In support of his view that Christianity was predominantly controlled by Jews until the mid-second century and beyond, Rodney Stark mentions the defeat of the Marcionites, who wanted to discard the Old Testament:
Indeed, the speed with which Marcion built a substantial movement suggests that his solution pleased many. But the crucial point is this: the traditional Christian faction seems to have easily ousted Marcion and successfully condemned Antitheses as heresy. I do not believe that the traditionalists won out because of superior theology. Rather, the whole affair suggests to me that in the middle of the second century the church still was dominated by people with Jewish roots and strong current ties to the Jewish world. Notice that this was after the Bar-Kokhba revolt.[7]
Stark suggests that the final break between Jews and Christians happened under Constantine, and didn’t go without resistance. When in the 390s St. John Chrysostom complains that many Christians “join the Jews in keeping their feasts and observing their fasts” (First Homily i,5), or even get circumcised (Second Homily ii,4), we should see him as “an early leader in the movement to separate a church and synagogue that were still greatly intertwined.”[8]
Having established that Christianity was a Jewish movement targeting both Jews and Gentiles during the first and second centuries, and was still under strong Jewish influence during the third and fourth centuries, we can examine if it fits MacDonald’s criteria for a Jewish “group evolutionary strategy”.
Christianity good for the Jews
Jews who converted to Christianity in the early centuries were very much comparable to those who converted in later centuries, while remaining attached to the purity of their Jewish blood. MacDonald makes the following remarks, highlighting the premise of evolutionary psychology:
Indeed, one might note that New Christians who maintained group separatism while sincerely accepting Christianity were really engaging in a very interesting evolutionary strategy—a true case of crypsis entirely analogous to crypsis in the natural world. Such people would be even more invisible to the surrounding society than crypto-Jews, because they would attend church regularly, not circumcise themselves, eat pork, etc., and have no psychological qualms about doing so. … Psychological acceptance of Christianity may have been the best possible means of continuing Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy during the period of the Inquisition.[9]
Whether sincere, duplicitous, or something in-between, Jews who converted to Christianity in the Middle Ages reaped immediate social advantages. In the eyes of the Gentiles, they could hope to be seen as equals while under no obligation to marry their offsprings to non-Jews. The same applies to the early days of Pauline Christianity (as opposed to the Jewish Jesus movement that evolved from the Jerusalem church), which portrayed itself as breaking the barriers between Jews and Gentiles. Claiming that “there is neither Jew nor Greek” (Galatians 3:28) was especially useful for Jewish converts.
Pauline Christianity is best understood as an extension of Hellenistic Judaism, which was already engaged in weakening the barriers between Jews and Greeks. Before, during and after the devastating Jewish Wars (66–135 CE), most Hellenistic Jews, especially in Alexandria, took their distance from the messianic fever of Jewish nationalism and tried to make their tradition look as Greek as possible. Flavius Josephus’s obsequious theory that the nationalist Jews failed to understand that their own prophecies were actually pointing to Vespasian as the true Messiah (Jewish WarIV), is a good example. Christianity is another. According to Rodney Stark, “many Hellenized Jews of the diaspora found Christianity so appealing precisely because it freed them from an ethnic identity with which they had become uncomfortable.”[10] This is why “a steady and significant flow of Hellenized Jewish converts to Christianity probably continued into the late fourth or early fifth century.”[11] Jews who converted to Christianity were not converting out of Judaism entirely, as long as Christianity was still connected to its Jewish matrix, and they were emphatically not converting to another God, but simply to a new, flexible Jewish identity with a universalist claim.
By spreading Christianity among Gentiles, Jewish Christians were also contributing to the general effort of Hellenistic Judaism to make Gentile society more accepting of the Jews’ uniquely positive contribution to the world. Ultimately, the conversion of the Roman Empire would imply the sacralization of the Jewish nation as the once-chosen people of God. Judaism became the only legal non-Christian religion. By the “witness theory”, the Church declared that the Jewish nation had a divine right to exist until the end of days, and that Church and Empire shared a divine responsibility to protect them. This was a radical improvement compared to the repeated attempts by Roman emperors, from Vespasian to Hadrian, to eradicate Jewish nationality altogether. This witness theory was enshrined in Catholic soteriology by Augustine, and repeatedly reaffirmed to combat anti-Jewish popular sentiments. When informed of persecutions of Jews in Cologne and Mainz during his campaign for the second crusade, saint Bernard of Clairvaux protested: “The Jews are for us the living words of Scripture, for they remind us always of what our Lord suffered. They are dispersed all over the world so that by expiating their crime they may be everywhere the living witnesses of our redemption. … If the Jews are utterly wiped out, what will become of our hope for their promised salvation, their eventual conversion?”[12]
Certainly, the Church also gave Gentiles a new reason to hate the Jews as Christ-killers. And Christianity didn’t make Romans less “anti-Semitic” than they had been as pagans. But from an evolutionary strategic viewpoint, this was not a negative, for Gentile hostility has always been the best incentive for Jewish cohesion. Diaspora Jews need to feel “chosen for universal hatred” (Leo Pinsker, Auto-Emancipation, 1882) as much as they need to feel chosen by God. The ideal situation, from an adaptationist point of view, is a Gentile society that makes Jews feel excluded while minimizing the violence against them. Church policy was actually very supportive of Jewish ethnic interests by forbidding Gentiles to intermarry with non-baptized Jews, while at the same time forbidding Gentiles to force Jews into baptism.
All in all, the Christianization of the Roman Empire has been very favorable to the development of the Jewish community, from a demographic as well as an economic point of view. The great historian of Late Antiquity Peter Brown writes:
In the legislation of the period, rhetorical humiliation of Judaism as a religion coexisted with extensive corporate privileges for Jewish leaders and for Jewish synagogues. Although Judaism was repeatedly branded as a “mad impiety” (Codex Theodosianus xv.5.5), the leaders of the Jewish community — a succession of patriarchs in Palestine, and other groups of representatives in other provinces — received from all Christian emperors repeated reassurance that Judaism, unlike polytheism and many forms of heretical Christianity, was “not a sect prohibited by the laws” (C. Th. xvi.8.9). Jewish synagogues enjoyed the exemptions associated with “holy places” (C. Th. vii.8.2). The personnel of the synagogues enjoyed the same privileges as did the Christian clergy: for they also were persons “truly devoted to the service of God” (C. Th. xii.1.99).[13]
A case can even be made that the prohibition of usury for Gentiles provided a tremendous selective advantage to Jews, and this is exactly what the Fourth Lateran Council admitted in 1215, in its Constitution 67, “On Jewish usuries”: “The more Christians are restrained from the practice of usury, the more are they oppressed in this matter by the treachery of the Jews, so that in a short time they exhaust the resources of the Christians.”[14]
Christianity bad for the Gentiles
The Roman Empire was an extensive network of cities connected by nearly 200,000 miles of roads, in addition to navigation across the sea medius terra. In The First Urban Christians, Wayne Meeks writes that “the people of the Roman Empire traveled more extensively and more easily than anyone before them did or would again until the nineteenth century,” and reports a merchant’s grave inscription in Phrygia attributing to him seventy-two trips to Rome, a distance of well over a thousand miles. This high mobility created a cosmopolitan urban population of uprooted individuals suffering from “status inconsistency”. It was among them, Meeks believes, that most converts to Pauline Christianity originated. In the Church they found a family of substitution, brothers and sisters to care for each other. “The natural kinship structure into which the person has been born and which previously defined his place and connections with the society is here supplanted by a new set of relationships.”[15]
The back side of this is that Christianity contributed in no small manner to desacralize and destabilize the traditional Roman family. This is a well-discussed issue, on which I have written before. One need only recall Matthew 10:35–37: “For I have come to set son against father, daughter against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law; a person’s enemies will be the members of his own household. No one who prefers father or mother to me is worthy of me. No one who prefers son or daughter to me is worthy of me.” Here you have the essence of what E. Michael Jones calls “the Jewish revolutionary spirit.” Pitting sons against fathers, and wives against husbands, is exactly what the Jewish “culture of critique” has been doing in recent decades, as MacDonald has abundantly documented in The Culture of Critique.
As much as it attracted desocialized individuals to resocialize them by conversion, Christianity aggravated the desocialization that it fed upon. As a salvation religion, Christianity taught that man was not primarily a social being who found fulfillment in the city, as Aristotle had taught, but a spiritual being who longed for the “city of God”, where kinship counts for nothing. Roman religion was family-centered as much as city-centered. There were domestic cults of Vesta (who symbolized the continuity of the family life), of dipenates (who expressed the continuity of the household’s means of subsistence), of di Manes (the ancestral dead), and of the genius of the paterfamilias.[16] But Christianity called these cults demonic, and in 391, Emperor Theodosius enacted a law forbidding them even in the privacy of the home.[17]
It may be counter-intuitive to blame Christianity for the increased deemphasis on kinship bonds, since today’s practicing Christians are the defenders of family values in the West. That is because of the paradox that Christianity is both revolutionary and conservative. It was revolutionary at the beginning, and conservative at the end. All established religions are conservative. But Western Christianity’s conservatism is about preserving the nuclear family, the final stage before complete social disintegration.[18] In a very fundamental way, Christian individualism competes with blood kinship. The Christian morality of universal altruism is also inherently hostile to the values of race, kinship, genealogy and procreation. This hostility influenced the Church’s social policy. As Jack Goody has documented[19] and as Kevin MacDonald has himself recognized in Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition, the influence of the Catholic Church “was directed at altering Western culture away from extended kinship networks and other collectivist institutions,”[20] although MacDonald also emphasizes a primordial tendency toward individualism and its implications for family structure. Thus Christianization has influenced the psychological and sociological vulnerability that later Jewish intellectuals and activists would exploit to weaken the syngeneic cohesion of White nations. If “making the United States into a multicultural society has been a major Jewish goal beginning in the nineteenth century,”[21] then it is logical to recognize the same Jewish goal in the foundation of Gentile Christianity by Paul of Tarsus. Again, this is not to say that Paul and his associates were conspiring against the Romans. Because Diaspora Jews feel safer in a multicultural society with individualistic and universalist values, they sincerely think that such a society is healthier—as long as Jews can keep the upper hand. From that point of view, Christianity was definitely helpful.
Conclusion
MacDonald wrote: “Any discussion of Jews and Judaism has to start and probably end with this incredibly strong bond that Jews have among each other—a bond that is created by their close genetic relationship and by the intensification of the psychological mechanisms underlying group cohesion. This powerful rapport among Jews translates into a heightened ability to cooperate in highly focused groups.”[22] If we ask ourselves what Christianity has done to weaken this incredibly strong bond of Jewry, the obvious answer is: absolutely nothing. On the contrary, it has provided the ideal environment for the sustainment and reinforcement of this bond. And while no educated pagan Roman had ever taken seriously the Jews’ ridiculous claim of being specially loved by the Creator of the Universe, Christians have been compelled to believe the truth of that claim. The Jews had written a book saying that God chose the Jews, and Christians have accepted it as God’s word. By so doing, Christians have not only paid tribute to the Jews; they have comforted them in their delusion. A strong argument can be made that without Christianity, the Jewish nationality would have effectively dissolved in the fourth or fifth century.
In short, Christianity introduced into the operating system (the dominant cognitive paradigm) of Roman society two trojan horses that both gave the Jewish nation a decisive selective advantage: it taught Gentiles that, by virtue of their divine chosenness, the Jewish nation was uniquely qualified to remain distinct, separate, and in many ways privileged; and it has taught Gentiles that, contrary to the Jews, they have no ethnic identity of any spiritual value. On the one hand, it has been assumed that the Jews are one nation and will be saved collectively at some point, and on the other hand, it has been affirmed that nationality is irrelevant for the Gentiles, since their salvation is strictly individual. The Jews can continue to sacralize the purity of their blood, while Gentiles are told every Sunday that only the (Jewish) blood of Christ will save them. Christians has given a handle to the Jews for driving them to their doom.
Seen in this light, Christianity surely looks like a Jewish conspiracy. But it is not a conspiracy in the traditional sense: rather, it is a Jewish group evolutionary strategy.
Notes
[1] The commandment of eighth-day circumcision is also a powerful, because traumatic, factor of cohesion and separation.
[2] Scot McKnight, A Light Among the Gentiles: Jewish missionary activity in the Second Temple period, Fortress Press, 1991, pp. 39, 46, quoted in Kevin MacDonald, A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples, Praeger, 1994, p. 63.
[3] Bart D. Ehrman, The Triumph of Christianity, Simon & Schuster, 2018, p. 99.
[4] Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History, Princeton UP, 1996.
[5] Graydon F. Snyder, Ante Pacem: Archaeological Evidence of Church Life Before Constantine, Mercer UP, 1985, p. 2, and Eric M. Meyers, “Early Judaism and Christianity in the Light of Archaeology,” Biblical Archaeologist 51, pp. 69-79, quoted in Stark, The Rise of Christianity, op. cit., p. 9.
[6] Stark, The Rise of Christianity, op. cit., p. 70.
[7] Stark, The Rise of Christianity, op. cit., p. 64.
[8] Stark, The Rise of Christianity, op. cit., p. 66.
[9] Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, Praeger, 1998, p. 277.
[10] Stark, The Rise of Christianity, op. cit., p. 214.
[11] Stark, The Rise of Christianity, op. cit., p. 138.
[12] Leonard B. Glick, Abraham’s Heirs: Jews and Christians in Medieval Europe, Syracuse UP, 1999, p. 122.
[13] Peter Brown, “Christianization and religious conflict”, in Averil Cameron and Peter Garnsey, eds., The Late Empire (The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. XIII), Cambridge UP, 2008, p. 632.
[14] John Gilchrist, The Church and Economic Activity in the Middle Ages, MacMillan, 1969, p. 182, quoted in MacDonald, A People That Shall Dwell Alone, op. cit, p. 243.
[15] Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul, Yale UP, 1983, pp. 17, 88.
[16] William Warde Fowler, Roman Ideas of Deity in the Last Century before the Christian Era, MacMillan, 1914.
[17] Bart D. Ehrman, The Triumph of Christianity: How a Forbidden Religion Swept the World, Oneworld Publications, 2018, p. 252.
[18] David Brooks, “The Nuclear Family was a Mistake,” March 2020, The Atlantic.
[19] Jack Goody, The Development of the Family and Marriage in Europe, Cambridge UP, 1983. Joseph Henrich builds up on Goody’s work in The WEIRDest People on the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous, Farrar, Strauss & Giroux, 2020.
[20] Kevin MacDonald, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition: Evolutionary Origins, History, and Prospects for the Future, rev. ed., KDP, 2023, p. 159.
[21] Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, Praeger, 1998, p. 259.
[22] Kevin MacDonald, Cultural Insurrections: Essays on Western Civilizations, Jewish Influence, and Anti-Semitism, The Occidental Press, 2007, p. 34.
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Laurent Guyénot Comments via RSS
As a bet, let’s start the Corrie Movement.
Video Link
After the Iranians nuke Tel Aviv it might even become a dominant world religion. She stood up to Jews but got murdered and she’s suitably obscure enough that by the time Tel Aviv is a smoking hole anything could be said about her in mythological and miraculous terms.
Laurent Guyénot: “Evolutionary psychology postulates that the various strategies that kinship-based groups (clans, tribes, nations) develop for survival, reproduction, expansion and dominance in a competitive environment can be, at least in part, subconscious rather than clearly articulated. There is, in any ethnic group, a collective, transgenerational will to power operating below the threshold of individual consciousness. … Seen in this light, Christianity surely looks like a Jewish conspiracy. But it is not a conspiracy in the traditional sense: rather, it is a Jewish group evolutionary strategy.”
Certainly there is, and has always been, such a thing as tribalism, and such a thing as ethnic hostility, but the whole concept of evolutionary “strategy” itself seems to be an intentional attempt to deceive. The word “strategy” comes from the Greek (στρατηγία), which derives ultimately from the word for general (στρατηγός), and generalship is by definition conscious. That the Jews are conscious of the destruction they allegedly work on white society is a point that MacDonald emphasizes. This “Marx of the anti-semites” has built his reputation on it. So, like it or not, MacDonald’s idea is in fact a conspiracy theory. It’s just one that’s been dressed up in scientific terminology.
But if we take this very dubious idea of unconscious “strategy” seriously, then the question must surely also be asked: “What is the white group evolutionary strategy?” Various answers are possible to this question that MacDonald himself never asks, but they all boil down to one thing: racial self-destruction through assimilation of alien races. A universalist ideology such as Christianity, which regards all featherless bipeds as brothers under the skin and equal in the eyes of God, has proven to be a great aid in that regard. To twist a phrase from Voltaire, one might even say that if there had been no Christianity, it would be necessary to invent it.
First of all, most Hebrews were not “Jews”. “Jews” came about when Moses delivered the laws (Ten Commandments). A faction of those Hebrews that had other values (from the Chrisitan perspective, they were degenerate, destructive and backward values) were destroyed or partially destroyed in the Golden Calf incident.
Consequently, official Judaism was largely antisemitic, off and on, from Moses through the Prophets that followed, with Christ and the Crucifixion symbolizing the final nail in what finally had become totally corrupt and apostate “Israel’s” coffin.
http://www.judeofascism.com/2010/09/god-is-anti-semite-anti-jewish-polemics.html
The “Jews” since (and most Hebrews even before, since these Golden Calf Hebrews had methodically and systematically corrupted all who were receptive to their message of subversion and poison ever since the Golden Calf incident) have basically been the “undead” — and behaved as such. Satanists. Holdovers. Sick, wondering, hated and hateful “dead enders” from the primitive past.
So these “Jews” and their stooges are actually physical, mental, emotional, spiritual and temperamental heirs to the Evil Ones (sorry to inform you, Guyenot).
That’s addressed in the book.
Altruistic Nords, Scandinavians.
With all due respects for Guyent’s “Our God is Your God, But He Has Chosen Us: Essays on Jewish Power” (2020) and “JFK-9/11: 50 Years of the Deep State” (2014), I would direct his attention to the 2008 book of Phillip Jenkins “The Lost History of Christianity”, wherein he documents that Christianity had spread to India and China, to South Africa and the African continent, as well as Europe and Britain. Then mysteriously it was all eliminated from memory.
Imagine what it might have been like in the 1st century where the advancing Roman army with its equivalent of a nuclear bomb (its brigades and formations). The only way to signal the Romans that your country was pacifistic and not an enemy was to construct religious towers with a cross at the top.
Moreover, Christianity may have spread through the scribes and “conversos” within the Roman Empire who arguably morphed Christianity into Judeo-Christianism by the Council of Nicea (circa approximate 325 AD); ergo “salvation comes from the Jews” (John 4:22). I argue Christianity began as a Roman attempt to convert the militant and Sicarii Jews to pacifistic Christianity (Joe Atwill, Caesar’s Messiah). What we call Christianity today is a hybrid of syncretism.
This is to say nothing about Catholic Matteo Ricci’s invention of Confucius and Confucianism by his clandestine and scholarly evangelization of China in the late 1500’s- early 1600’s – see Lionel M Jensen, Manufacturing Confucianism (1997).
As Giambatista Vico wrote:”the true and the made are convertible”.
Source:
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003395836-19/use-lose-cory-clark
Congratulations, Laurent Guyénot,
You’re destroying Darwinism’s credibility – Christians (oh, the irony!) couldn’t have done it if they tried!
Wokechoke: “That’s addressed in the book. Altruistic Nords, Scandinavians. ”
Perhaps that would explain why whites find Christianity so appealing. But MacDonald only addresses it in a kind of half-assed way, finding the racially destructive effects only a negative (i.e., so-called “pathological” altruism). Yet whites have conquered the entire world with their technological system, of which Christianity as a social technology has been an integral part. What I’m suggesting is that within the “group evolutionary strategy” paradigm in which Jews “unconsciously” are hostile to out-groups, one could just as well say that whites are “unconsciously” hostile to their own perpetuation as a race. By persisting in their Christianity, they are cooperating with the Jews, not just being exploited by them. They are willing accomplices to their own racial extinction.
In reality though, group evolutionary “strategy” is a false paradigm, and trying to cast everything in those terms only confuses things. As I’ve explained in other comments, whites themselves developed the technology that led to the destruction of the geographical barriers to race mixing that previously existed. Once various races begin to cohabit in the same territory, race mixing is inevitable given man’s sexual nature, which resembles that of the bonobo. Thus, white technological ingenuity is causing their demise. Rather than a strategy, race mixing is better understood as just an unforeseen side effect of technological development. The techniques that led to it weren’t developed in order to cause racial self-destruction, but that’s been the effect, and it would have taken place with or without Jews.
Women who – rightly or wrongly – recognise other women as ‘competitors’ or ‘threats’ advise them:
Consciously, subconsciously or unconsciously isn’t such womanly “advice” – in reality – simply plotting, scheming, machinating (in short, a “conspiracy”) to advance their owninterests vis-à-vis their advisees?
Source:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188692300329X
I just groan my way to these impractical, hopeful isoflavones. These vexations are similar to psoriasis, where scratching and applying topical creams do not solve anything. Tomorrow, the Jews’ Private Equity will cheerfully relieve you of more of your money, assets, sovereignty, and sense of hope and future.
How different all of this would have been if some Eastern army had swept and shlept through, converting or proselytizing the Teachings of The Buddha. Absent that, Eastern Orthodoxy seemed and seems to have internal buffers to the invasive species of pathogens Jacteria and Jirus. I know why, and you all – ya’ll – ought to seek and search to find out.
Video Link
Vergissmeinnicht: “Consciously, subconsciously or unconsciously isn’t such womanly “advice” – in reality – simply plotting, scheming, machinating (in short, a “conspiracy”) to advance their own interests vis-à-vis their advisees?”
The comparison isn’t valid because a conspiracy by definition involves more than one person. MacDonald’s conspiracy theory involves not only more than one person, but it extends over thousands of years and is global in extent.
Certainly one person may be hostile to another, and even an entire group hostile to another group, but an unconscious strategy is like unconsciously playing a game of chess. It can’t be done. If you’re unconscious, you have no strategy, although events may nevertheless, by chance, work out in your favor. Describing it as unconscious is the only thing that distinguishes MacDonald’s idea from the protocols of the elders of Zion.
That’s like a series of arguments that 1 + 1 = 2. It’s not necessary.
The real question should be, it seems to me, why in hell are we debating/studying/classifying the relationship between two preposterous bronze age or thereabouts religions. Christianity are Judaism ae prima facie preposterous, there is not and cannot be a shred of evidence, or rational reason, for believing any aspect of these absurd fantasies for one minute.
I was ‘brought up’ as a Christian, that is, my parents and I went to Church/Sunday School on Sundays, and I realized by the time I as 12, shortly after discovering that Santa Claus was not real, that Christianity was just utter nonsense.
Why do the rational among us, now that the religions maniacs are on the verge of destroying the planet, continue to act if their fantasies were real ?
It would be unbelievable if it were not happening.
We humans are rapidly evolving out of religion. What fool still buys the salvation myth that could put you on the front line in Iran? Die for what? Flag? Nation? God? Trump? How about none of the above, how about if you want war, go fight your own. How about Trump send his sons first. When talking about the Jews and Christians, who is dumb and who is dumber? How dumb is it be a self chosenite in Israel right now? How about these dumb Christian boys being sent to their deaths for the Greater Israel project? Why the hell are we so damn dumb fighting for nation or god? Not my god, not my nation. My plan is to survive the pedo death cult and WW3.
What no one talks about and probably have never even thought about, is why wild animals are perfectly happy without God, church, worship, and all the things we humans can not be without. Just what the hell is wrong with us? A Gorilla (or chimp) does not give a shit about God, church, worship, war, etc. A Gorilla is a wild animal perfectly content existing in the jungle with no money, no rules, no praising the lord. But we share 98% the same DNA, why are we so strange? Why do we feel we have to get right with God to get into heaven, and why doesn’t the Gorilla give as shit about those things?
The answer is our creation, which the Bible has duped us. The Bible gives us a false mythological story. God made us in one day by breathing into some dirt. This is obviously false yet it is believed by everyone until Darwin and Evolution came along. Now we have two competing ideas of how we got here, and I argue both are false. Man was not created by some magical God, and man did not evolve on earth. Man was created by another intelligence race, and given their traits, like a big brain and ability to reason. But we were never told honestly how we came to be, this is one of the biggest crimes of all time, our fathers from the heavens never informed us why they created us.
Finally, some good fucking food.
I haven’t read MacDonald’s books, nor I intend too.
(I’ve read a lot about them, though.)
As my understanding goes:
MacDonald postulates that “Jewish Genetic Interests” do not necessarily converge with “European Genetic Interests”, and in fact, often they are at odds.
Reasonable. But, I think it is really incomplete.
(After all, there are many groups of Jews and as well many groups of Europeans…)
Of course, MacDonald’s Theory gets more and more far-fetched as he finally names what “Jewish Genetic Interests” comprise of…
The part that irks me the most – is:
«Parasitism is present in Nature; Humans are but animals – therefore, in theory, there is no impediment to parasitism occuring in humans as well.»
Yeah, we all know where this is going…
Kevin MacDonald posits, «Jews are akin to parasites.»
Anyway,
MacDonald’s Theory, of course, can be true or false…¹
I don’t think seriously about it – since: For now, we just do not know (that’s the responsible position, BTW) – as to know it “for sure” would require decades of research!²
1. Personally, I hope with all my heart that it’s false!³
2. Yes, I realise such research will never get done to begin with, unfortunately. The mere possibility of “The Culture of Critique” being true frightens every academic under the Sun.
3. As you can see, I’m no anti-Semite; In fact, I consider myself a “Zionist”.
That was just introductory…
…It was needed to answer your concern regarding “unconsciousness”.
So,
To act upon one’s own “Genetic Interests” don’t require a brain or consciousness – as insects select for “Genetic Similarity”, in fact, even plants do!
In short, I don’t think that that specific critique of MacDonald’s Theory holds water.
Correct. Which means you absolve Jews of responsibility for Europid senescence: yes or no?
Christianity and the Talmud (the real Jewish bible of the Pharisaism religion) emerge from fundamentally different religious frameworks, historical contexts, and theological commitments.
https://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/judaica/judaism-or-pharisaism/
Christianity centers on the belief in Jesus Christ as the incarnate Son of God, whose life, death, and resurrection fulfill the Hebrew Scriptures and establish a new covenant accessible to all people through grace and faith.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/07/27/jesus-was-not-a-jew/
The Talmud, by contrast, is a vast compilation of rabbinic debates, legal rulings, and commentaries that developed within post-Second Temple Judaism, specifically addressing Jewish civil law, ethics, customs, and scriptural interpretation without any reference to Jesus as Messiah or divine figure.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/07/14/are-jews-the-israelites-of-the-bible/
While Christianity reveres the Old Testament as prophetic and preparatory, it does not recognize the Talmud’s authority, which emerged from Pharisaic and rabbinic Judaism centuries after Christ and explicitly rejects core Christian claims such as the atonement through Christ’s death and the abrogation of ceremonial law.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/a-brief-history-of-the-kingdoms-of-israel-and-judah/
Thus, despite occasional historical interactions or polemics, the two belong to separate religions with distinct sacred texts, authoritative traditions, and ultimate objects of worship, making any essential or doctrinal connection between Christianity and the Talmud untenable.
https://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/08/29/the-word-jew-is-not-in-the-bible/
I have not yet read this article but just looking at the headline provokes this response. The great imperial powers of Spain and England both conquered the globe on behalf of their Christian convictions. It’s not the fault of those nations that the Christian vision has faltered but rather of the United States, which was founded as a Judeo-Masonic anti Christian revolutionary society. The United States is the first imperial power to conquer the globe on behalf of Jewry and to the detriment of Christianity. Note that throughout the Cold war the United States avoided open war with communist Russia but since Russia renounced Communism and has restored its Russian Orthodox Christian roots, the United States has assumed a posture of profound belligerence against the nation whose capital is called the Third Rome. Without the United States acting as a global behemoth, undermining Christianity wherever it can, Jewry would never have succeeded in subverting the global Christian order. E Michael Jones denounces Judaism as a dangerous global revolutionary force, but without the subversive power of the United States that force would have accomplished little to nothing in its determination to destroy Christianity. The United States with its secular revolutionary ideology is the real culprit in the collapse of global Christianity and the rise of a satanic global order to replace it.
Laughing. What is your beef exactly with Christ. Oyy veh.!
Perhaps “unconscious” is a poor choice of word. How would you refer to an inclination or orientation that has been so ingrained throughout one’s life that it comes as second nature, dictating actions without the need of an overt conspiracy?
Laurent Guyénot you do not know the message of The Gospel of Christ Jesus. If you knew you would not be writing so many articles about it as some kind of Jewish conspiracy to subvert the world.
You treat Christianity as religious bodies , looking from the point of someone who sees believers as
; diffusion of Christianity as a Jewish “group evolutionary strategy”.
Take your time and get the message from Christ Jesus and digest it in order to understand, it is not about joining religions but about establishing spiritual relationship with God The Father who is spirit.
Looking from outside on Christian religions one can make an error that the Gospel is cultural only , made by men and for men to subjugate them. But the aim of The Gospel is to renew men and bring him into the Truth, which will set him free.
As someone coming from religious upbringing i must admit religions are to enslave people, but one has to put an effort to distinguish between following religion and following truth and faith.
Look, I am a Hindu- and I cannot stand any religions. It boggles my mind why religion should be mixed with politics and state but it seems nobody is bothered as much as me on this issue so clearly I am overthinking.
My issue is….how can the white man, a man of higher average IQ not see what Christianity is? How can the race that created all technological innovations we take for granted not challenge the status quo in America? The Christian sheeple are a different issue- and they can be tackled later(what are they gonna do- pray together?) but the Jewish issue makes no sense. I can forgive the white men of the past who simply didn’t have the knowledge or collective means of understanding – but with the internet everything changed. Last 25 years despite seeing so many whites awaken, so many on this blog alone (and american renaissance for example) and yet….nobody does anything. The Jews dictate. The goyim morality obsessed Christian agrees with the master and sends their children to die in faraway lands. Presidents change. Same shit. Doesn’t matter democrat or republican- same shit. It boggles my mind.
I’ve repeatedly said this: the zionazi “Samson option” is nonsense. jews, as a species, will never, under any circumstances, risk suicide. If or rather when “israel” collapses, they’ll scatter across the world like cockroaches in a cellar when the light is turned on, going to places they’re forcibly taking over now for that very eventuality (Patagonia) or to their countries of origin in Europe or North America, where the governments they control will give them shelter and every privilege that they could possibly ask for. If, there too, things change for the worse, they’ll without hesitation conceal their jewness, pretending to be areligious or even convert; they will put on a façade of liberalism, camouflage themselves as no different from those around them, and wait, for centuries if necessary, to find another opportunity to rise again.
If that sounds familiar, it should; jews are no different from pathogenic viruses that reduce in virulence when antibodies spike in host populations, camouflaging themselves as asymptomatic infections and waiting for the opportunity to flare up into epidemics again.
Putin’s most convincing argument on why Russia is the good guys is the religion angle.
Look, Russia’s enemy ukraine had a trans spokeperson and celebrate pride parade on easter, backed by globohomo controlled gay west and gay neocon like lindsey graham. Meanwhile Russia and countries friendly to Russia are known to lack lgbt rights (Hungary) or outright ban lgbt parades (Belarus, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Sahel countries, etc).
I have yet to find any good rebuttal from the mostly gay nafos who’s main reason of hating Russia and its backers is the fact that they refuse to celebrate sodomy unlike the “free” west (and its vassal puppets like the “gay marriage legal” taiwan).
The argument that the west is “christian countries” falls short. Nazi germany was the last christian country of the west because it’s the last one who tried to enforce the bible by closing down trans clinics and putting gays in camps. Since then the west has always been less liberal and less christian over time.
For that very reason; as Schopenhauer and the Jesuits agree, it is almost impossible to reprogram (as we would say today) someone who’s spend his most formative educational years absorbing nonsense. Schopenhauer even included novels and poetry in this category; one’s early education should involve nothing but the absorbing of as many facts as possible.
It’s not just a lingering fear of Hell, or that sex is somehow “dirty.” I think this explains the servile attitude of even normies to the Jewish project, as in Iran today. While places like Tierra del Fuego or people like the Tutsi evoke (esp. in Americans) not associations at all, mention of Jews or Jerusalem invokes warm and snuggly memories of Christmas cookies, dark churches filled with candle light and incense, etc. The response is postively Pavlovian.
In extreme cases, like Lindsey Graham or John Hagee, there are reports of explosive public orgasms at the mention of “the Holy Land” or “where Jesus walked.”
Jerusalem is built as a city strongly compact,
It is there where the tribes go up, the tribes of the Lord
The Lord has done wonders for me, holy is His name
Absent such preparation, contact with actual Jews invokes nausea and trepidation. As for Jerusalem etc., the news documents how ugly Tel Aviv is, a nightmare of cheaply constructed modernist junk, well worth blowing to bits; not to speak of the inbred “setters” living in storage units in the Gaza hills.
Why are we attacking Iran? You might as well ask, why did mediaeval kings, knights and peasants travel half-way across the world to die in the attempt to “liberate” their “true” capital, Jerusalem.
Oh Lord, here we go again; Mr Guyenot spewing his usual regurgitation of antichristian myths debunked and disproved shortly after being popularised by Edward Gibbons in the eighteenth century. Let’s get this straight; Christianity had nothing to do with the decline of Rome. It was the Romans themselves, with their rampant infanticide of baby girls, and their preference for having only one child, who placed the Empire on the brink of a demographic precipice. And the Great Plague of Cyprian, in the Third century, followed by that of Justinian in the fifth, pushed it over the edge. As Rodney Stark notes, Christianity was actually a positive force, greatly improving the birth rate, and revitalising culture.
There’s no such thing as an “evolutionary strategy”.
And Russia has prostitution, murdering children in the womb, same relational conduct, pedophelia
Show me the scripture scripture where Christ calls on christians to mount and slay the evil doers . it does not exist. The armor Paul calls on to wear in preparation for battle is hardly suited to hand to hand combat.
Look, I understand that it very difficult to get one’s head around Christ and what a life in him means. But the constant hopscotch to link it to some jewish demand has no weight. A christian doen’t beed to lick one of the Old Testament to know Christ. And no christian is beholden to obey any jew anywhere when it comes to matter of faith and practice.
As a regular reader of the UR, I don’t remember reading so many lengthy reader comments as I see in this issue. The passion that toxic religion generates is astounding to say the least.