Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Christianity and the alt-right

sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2016 2:34:01 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Stefan Molyneux, after being an outspoken atheist, with a philosophy built largely around enlightenment values and secular morality, has been slowly becoming more positive about christianity. As far as I know, he still doesn't define himself as one, but he seems to take every opportunity to defend them, and all videos addressing the theme fall on the spectrum of apologetics.

Milo Yiannopoulos, although admitting that his lifestyle is largely unchristian, insists that Christianity is the cornerstone of all the western values he promotes. With a worldview seemingly in direct conflict with the ethos of christianity, he insists upon identifying it with all the good forces in Western culture, applying none of the same critical resources he would apply to feminism, when calling it a cultlike article of faith.

Gavin Mcinnes, who previously identified as an atheist and an anarchist, after slowly becoming ingratiated into the "alt right" hipster conservative movement, claimed to have a "sudden realization" that he was a christian. This is even though he clearly does not seem to have much interest in the religion - whenever the issue is brought up he says he "doesn't like talking about it" because it's too personal. This being in direct contrast with his personality in every other context.

Many deeper elements of the alt-right, more entrenched within conservatism, were always clearly already christian from the start. However, this repeating phenomenon where libertarian-oriented "alt right" guys show a sudden tendency to "realize" their christianity makes it seem like this is a condition of entry for the alt-right inner circle. In what meaningful sense are these commentators christian? Do they make this change in order to widen their audience base? Perhaps it's just the increasingly black-and-white thinking, which is brought to claim that anything "western" is synonymous with the morally superior.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
NHN
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2016 4:47:40 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/2/2016 2:34:01 PM, sdavio wrote:
However, this repeating phenomenon where libertarian-oriented "alt right" guys show a sudden tendency to "realize" their christianity makes it seem like this is a condition of entry for the alt-right inner circle. In what meaningful sense are these commentators christian? Do they make this change in order to widen their audience base? Perhaps it's just the increasingly black-and-white thinking, which is brought to claim that anything "western" is synonymous with the morally superior.
Reactionary positions are by their very nature irrational. No matter how much time you spend trying to analyze their arguments, you'll never encounter a coherent ideology.

Rather, the alt-right and its followers are (unconsciously) attracted to the irrational underbelly of Western society: traditions (of the white majority), common-sense morality (secular Christianity), brotherhood (white ethnicity), equality (under white supremacy), cultural heritage (Christian and ethnic white) and so on.

Wherever the above instances appear in any other way, they become the subject of attack, e.g., African American heritage or the feminist redefinition of equality. And where the alt-right strikes the hardest is against public intellectuals of Jewish ethnicity. It is no small coincidence that they trump the meme "Cultural Marxism" (from the Nazi Party's term Kulturbolschewismus), which is indicative of so-called degeneracy in society, a vast conspiracy controlled by the (((Cathedral))).

In sum, these reactionaries see the spectral image of the conspiring Jew lurk around every corner (http://en.rightpedia.info...) and attack in the manner of rabid dogs, albeit with smug frog memes and YouTube videos.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2016 5:35:57 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
As an atheist... I love Jesus's teachings. Not the crap used in his/her name. The message right , wrong, indifferent...

Humanity can achieve more. Incessant bickering achieves nothing
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 5:15:50 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/2/2016 5:35:57 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
As an atheist... I love Jesus's teachings. Not the crap used in his/her name. The message right , wrong, indifferent...

Humanity can achieve more. Incessant bickering achieves nothing

Do you think the alt-right is consistent with Jesus' teachings? Why do you think so many lean toward being Christian?
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 6:26:50 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/3/2016 5:15:50 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 10/2/2016 5:35:57 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
As an atheist... I love Jesus's teachings. Not the crap used in his/her name. The message right , wrong, indifferent...

Humanity can achieve more. Incessant bickering achieves nothing

Do you think the alt-right is consistent with Jesus' teachings? Why do you think so many lean toward being Christian?

No I don't think the alt-right espouses universal love of all, including 'enemies'. Additionally, they seem to be much more exclusionary vs inclusionary which is pretty counter to teachings attributed to Jesus.
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 6:29:41 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/2/2016 4:47:40 PM, NHN wrote:
At 10/2/2016 2:34:01 PM, sdavio wrote:
However, this repeating phenomenon where libertarian-oriented "alt right" guys show a sudden tendency to "realize" their christianity makes it seem like this is a condition of entry for the alt-right inner circle. In what meaningful sense are these commentators christian? Do they make this change in order to widen their audience base? Perhaps it's just the increasingly black-and-white thinking, which is brought to claim that anything "western" is synonymous with the morally superior.
Reactionary positions are by their very nature irrational. No matter how much time you spend trying to analyze their arguments, you'll never encounter a coherent ideology.

Rather, the alt-right and its followers are (unconsciously) attracted to the irrational underbelly of Western society: traditions (of the white majority), common-sense morality (secular Christianity), brotherhood (white ethnicity), equality (under white supremacy), cultural heritage (Christian and ethnic white) and so on.

Wherever the above instances appear in any other way, they become the subject of attack, e.g., African American heritage or the feminist redefinition of equality. And where the alt-right strikes the hardest is against public intellectuals of Jewish ethnicity. It is no small coincidence that they trump the meme "Cultural Marxism" (from the Nazi Party's term Kulturbolschewismus), which is indicative of so-called degeneracy in society, a vast conspiracy controlled by the (((Cathedral))).

In sum, these reactionaries see the spectral image of the conspiring Jew lurk around every corner (http://en.rightpedia.info...) and attack in the manner of rabid dogs, albeit with smug frog memes and YouTube videos.

While I can applaud your concern with these dark motivations in the movement, these kinds of problems seem to me sociological. In this sense, I would view much of this social tension as being an epiphenomena of the real economic and ontological dialectic which is occurring behind, and to which these problems eventually reduce. An obvious example would be "gay marriage" - to which the economic solution would be, what libertarians call "dissolving" the institution of marriage, but could also be called an infinite expansion of it. Just as straight marriage has an economic function of accounting for different social circumstances, such a metric can be detached from its original signification and used to measure all other forms human relationship. The issue of closing or opening immigation, as well as racial profiling, which is where the issues you've brought up concerning race would seem to come most to the fore, for me would find the solution in much of the same kind of reframing. In ancapistan, not only would issues of prejudiced evaluation such as racism be a rare occurrence, at a sociological level, their very import would be nullified by the constant metric which reveals the actual market value coordinates of the part of human life being misrepresented. For instance, clearly an issue of prejudice like the underhiring of certain races, who are actually qualified, would be solved by an expansion of the market system so that their abilities could be measured according to a more advanced metric than mere race categorization. So while I agree that the issue of discrimination is subject to horrendous misfires, these misfires I view as ultimately issues of a lack of articulation in the market system, resulting in insufficient metrics of value. To put this whole point simply, I view the true end of prejudice, not when the minority gets the opportunity to thank the oppressor for looking down upon them with kindness, but when the minority can freely express their values even if the majority deeply hated them.

That is the economic side of it, but I'm also interested in your view of the spiritual side, in which as I pointed out in the OP, the alt-right seems almost compulsively biased toward christian theism. How do we square these two phenomena - is it just the influence of the older conservatives giving them a hard time? I don't really see the link between Jesus' philosophy and Milo's etc at all. Also I've noticed alt-right types seem to also like "occult" / "esoteric" witchcraft type stuff. This seems to me a clearly outmoded way of organizing a political philosophy, and derails a supposedly "capitalism" focused movement into ideology. People like Milo take up the "libertarian" label quickly, but do not seem willing to, e.g., give up a label like "marriage" or "god" where these no longer prove themselves in the market. They want to artificially prop them up with the state through nationalism, and demographic control. Again, this is a sociological prejudice which winds up as a deficient mode of economic measurement.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
NHN
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 3:44:43 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/3/2016 6:29:41 PM, sdavio wrote:
While I can applaud your concern with these dark motivations in the movement, these kinds of problems seem to me sociological. In this sense, I would view much of this social tension as being an epiphenomena of the real economic and ontological dialectic which is occurring behind, and to which these problems eventually reduce.
Well, of course the problem is of a sociological nature -- as well as the inability of irrational individuals to articulate coherent thoughts.

What is "really going on" is the shaky transition to the Universal Homogeneous State, or the technocratic-bureaucratic superstate, which we have so often touched upon in our encounters. The experience of loss in culture, alongside the crisis of liberalism/Enlightenment values, opens a wound to pre-Enlightenment thought -- and that is precisely where the alt-right fits in. And the greatest source of counter-Enlightenment thought -- from Joseph de Maistre to Carl Schmitt -- is Roman Catholic theology. The other alternative is Ancient Greek and Nietzschean (neo-)paganism, and then there is the theosophy of Madame Blavatsky, Western Buddhism, and various other superstitious Aryan-esoteric movements.

With this in mind, the alt-right unconsciously draws on three conflicting traditions that consistently undermine each other. This is why, in the last analysis, the alt-right can never form a cohesive ideology. Like fascism and Nazism, it regards a gut reaction in which logic shuts down and a series of pathological defense mechanisms (denial, projection, conversion, etc.) determines the outpouring.

An obvious example would be "gay marriage" - to which the economic solution would be, what libertarians call "dissolving" the institution of marriage, but could also be called an infinite expansion of it. Just as straight marriage has an economic function of accounting for different social circumstances, such a metric can be detached from its original signification and used to measure all other forms human relationship.
Yes, and the standard libertarian position will involve, as you put it, an infinite expansion: monogamy, bigamy, polygamy, polyamory, etc.

But this still relies on the presupposition that the alt-right precludes libertarianism, which it doesn't. Rather, we Americans are intellectually sloppy and absorb terms without thinking them through. Colloquially, "I'm a libertarian" most often means don't tax me, bro.

The issue of closing or opening immigation, as well as racial profiling, which is where the issues you've brought up concerning race would seem to come most to the fore, for me would find the solution in much of the same kind of reframing. In ancapistan, not only would issues of prejudiced evaluation such as racism be a rare occurrence, at a sociological level, their very import would be nullified by the constant metric which reveals the actual market value coordinates of the part of human life being misrepresented. For instance, clearly an issue of prejudice like the underhiring of certain races, who are actually qualified, would be solved by an expansion of the market system so that their abilities could be measured according to a more advanced metric than mere race categorization. So while I agree that the issue of discrimination is subject to horrendous misfires, these misfires I view as ultimately issues of a lack of articulation in the market system, resulting in insufficient metrics of value.
Those who previously were libertarian-oriented now speak in favor of feudalism and monarchy, such as Hans-Hermann Hoppe of the Ludwig von Mises Institute (http://www.vdare.com...). Hoppe also thinks "limited government" is an illusion. What he and the "techno-libertarians" (Peter Thiel, for instance) want is the total state power of a monarchy.

This is what many leftists criticized an-cap for in the past, that its vast freedoms required absolute power of some institutional mechanism, and it turns out they were right.

That said, free market economics has a subordinate role. What matters is white power.

That is the economic side of it, but I'm also interested in your view of the spiritual side, in which as I pointed out in the OP, the alt-right seems almost compulsively biased toward christian theism. How do we square these two phenomena - is it just the influence of the older conservatives giving them a hard time? I don't really see the link between Jesus' philosophy and Milo's etc at all. Also I've noticed alt-right types seem to also like "occult" / "esoteric" witchcraft type stuff. This seems to me a clearly outmoded way of organizing a political philosophy, and derails a supposedly "capitalism" focused movement into ideology.
But that is because the movement is derivative of Nazism. Hitler himself, esoterically oriented and influenced by Madame Blavatsky, was pathologically superstitious.

Drawing on these influences, the alt-right is creating its own sectarian, Indo-Aryan religion (https://atlanticcenturion.wordpress.com...). But it involves kek (lol) and and memes. For example, some alt-right conjurers believe they successfully gave Hillary Clinton pneumonia and made her collapse on 9/11 (http://www.sacellumkekellum.org...).

People like Milo take up the "libertarian" label quickly, but do not seem willing to, e.g., give up a label like "marriage" or "god" where these no longer prove themselves in the market. They want to artificially prop them up with the state through nationalism, and demographic control. Again, this is a sociological prejudice which winds up as a deficient mode of economic measurement.
Again, "libertarian" has become a meme indicative of non-party affiliation in America for people who don't want to pay taxes. My impression in England is that it barely exists, and rather takes the form of a tongue-in-cheek libertine position (as pornography is outlawed since January 2015). It's like the Pirate Party members in Germany and Sweden. Extremely conspiratorial and staunchly authoritarian in their support for dictatorship and invasive state measures around the world. But when online hate speech, racism in society or foreign surveillance enters the conversation, any form of second thought or criticism renders you a pariah who must be silenced immediately. And where there is an inconsistency followed by a gut reaction to shut down debate, we know that we are in fact dealing with reactionaries/fascists. And Milo fits this to a tee.

Politics always involves a double message. Patriotism (nationalism), pro-life (demographic control), traditional values (Christendom and the European heritage); these are the standard conservative positions, which nevertheless allow for a moderate, Whiggish transition toward more liberal values: marriage equality, LGBT rights, etc.

Milo, however, as a reactionary, is irrationally blocked from understanding the double nature of political messaging as well as the transition of history. He is a fundamentalist. There is one vision of society -- dominated by one religion and populated by one people. "Cuckservatives," he may say, "are disloyal to the fundamentals (one, one, one) of Western society. They are leftists/liberals in sheep's clothing. What we, the alt-right, propose is the real thing."

It is in this sense that Milo may appear "libertarian" (low taxes, freedom of hate speech and pornography) while simultaneously a right-wing populist (no Arab/Muslim immigration, evisceration of LGBT rights) and a reactionary (moving the West toward a new "Golden Age"). As such, what Milo appears to be will always lie in the eyes of the beholder.