Dishonesty begins when the committee mentality kicks in: we need enough votes to make this proposal work, so offend no one, even if — especially and as is usually the case — this means ignoring big, real problems instead of chasing after trends and what will promote our own careers.
Once your society gets any egalitarianism in it, it has become poisoned, and lies rule the day. This means that no one can say what is actually real or what they actually want, and instead they must rationalize what they want from accepted trends and public symbols of good.
For that reason, everyone uses surrogates and proxies. No one will say they want to avoid a neighborhood full of drug addicts, race war, graffitti, and anonymous numbered bathhouses; they will instead talk about how they want to live in a better zip code.
All of the politics of modernity come down to this kind of non-language. We must serve the pretense of humanity that each of us are important and should be able to do whatever we want because we desire it, not because it achieves something good, and so we cannot point out reality to anyone lest it offend them.
The Right has sought a suitable proxy for decades. We preserve continuity with the founding of our society, which includes homogeneity and hierarchy, two things that are total opposites to egalitarianism, or the idea that everyone is equal and important and society should sponsor them in being so.
In the 1960s, conservatives backed off of the idea of preserving genetics, culture, and social order by instead embracing “muh freedom” as “Christian Libertarians.” Most people think of conservatives by this definition today because everyone who did not cuck, duck, and roll got voted off the committee.
By doing this, conservatives were able to avoid getting deplatformed. Societies hate conflict because it means that there will be winners and losers, and everyone fears being the loser except the few on the right side of the Bell Curve who know they will win. Conservatives bowed to their audience and dodged the conflict.
However, turning conservatives into “Christian Libertarians” pretty much reduced the conservative platform to being pro-defense, pro-economy, and having personal liberty to be Christian Libertarian, but only if you want to, you know. This allowed the growth of the egomaniac society that took over in the 1960s.
You would think they would learn. The politicians? No… the voters. By demanding no conflict and that everyone get along, they created a political system with two very similar options. Then they complained about how they had no options. One wonders if the whole country sustained a brain injury (the world wars might count).
Currently, the “far-Right” is attempting this again with a movement known as Christian Nationalism:
Christian nationalism is a cultural framework that idealizes and advocates a fusion of Christianity with American civic life. Christian nationalism contends that America has been and should always be distinctively “Christian” from top to bottom — in its self-identity, interpretations of its own history, sacred symbols, cherished values, and public policies — and it aims to keep it that way.
But the “Christian” in Christian nationalism is more about identity than religion. It carries with it assumptions about nativism, white supremacy, authoritarianism, patriarchy, and militarism.
The National Review style “conservatives” fear being forced to leave behind Christian Libertarianism. They are old, and they know only the situation as it was when they were young, so they assume it is the same nowadays and that conflict will get them voted out but being Leftists who like personal conservatism is good.
Instead of confronting the issue of the decline of the West directly, they choose to equate Christianity with the West, and use it as a replacement for our culture, genetics, aesthetics, morality, and philosophy. They are not the only ones using proxies; the Left also sees the Right as a Christian extremist movement:
Americans who embrace Christian nationalism are more likely to:
- Approve of authoritarian tactics like demanding people show respect for national symbols and traditions
- Fear and distrust religious minorities, including Muslims, Atheists, and Jewish people
- Condone police violence toward Black Americans and distrust accounts of racial inequality in the criminal justice system
- Believe racial inequality is due to the personal shortcomings of minority groups
- Report being “very uncomfortable” with both interracial marriage and transracial adoption
- Hold anti-immigrant views
- Fear refugees
- Oppose scientists and science education in schools
- Believe that men are better suited for all leadership roles while women are better suited to care for children and the home
Information from Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States, by Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry (Oxford University Press, 2020).
All of the things they describe above are shorthand for genetic realist positions:
The Left has simply restated these positions from its old viewpoint that those who are afraid to deny reality are more afraid than they are realistic, since the only way one would accept something as illogical as “equality” would be if it were portrayed as some kind of new scientific, spiritual, and artistic “higher truth” than reality.
Humanity uses pretense as a form of projection. When it wants to do something insane, it portrays it as more moral as a method than whatever methods are necessary to achieve good results, and in doing so, tosses the idea of good results. In this view equal poverty is better than some being wealthy.
“Christian Nationalism” is a similar pretense, which is why the Left are so careful to define it, knowing that the Right will pick it up again. A healthy society has aristocracy, social hierarchy, ethnonationalism, individual not collective reward, and strong culture. No proxy can stand in for that.
A proxy however like any symbol becomes a goal in itself. In this way, you are the bull charging the red flag and not the matador. Christian Nationalism stands in for what we need, and so we will achieve Christian Nationalism instead and not get what we need, if we pursue it.
Our civilization is in decline and has been for a long time. You do not get things like democracy, individualism, and equality (DIE) if your people are healthy and oriented toward healthy things. You get rule-followers, sophists, bean-counters, nanny states, and pharisees instead.
There is not an easy solution to this decline. The solution will be dual: stop doing the destructive stuff so that at the same time we can nurture a spirit oriented toward the positive. Without protecting our people by ending the rule of egalitarianism, we will get nowhere, and to do that, we must discuss genetics including race and social class.
“Christian Nationalism” is popular because it ducks this issue entirely and uses a proxy instead. Like other false symbols, it seems to lead to victory but does not, and then we find we have wasted our opportunity by chasing a symbol instead of reality.
If you ever wonder why mice and other prey animals defecate when attacked, it is this: you can get the predator to lunge for the turd instead of the tail a lot of times, and escape that way. Christian Nationalism is the turd; the real goal is to resurrect Western Civilization by paying attention to the genetic issue in all forms.