I was watching a video from RT News which reported on the recent study which found that 1 in 4 Germans has “anti-semitic” beliefs. Now, this article won’t be about that topic in particular, rather it is about a type of comment that repeatedly caught my eye beneath the video.
It’s telling that people such as “Zarfii” make the distinction as “Jews vs. Christians” instead of “Jews vs. Russians, Ukrainians, Slavs, Europeans.” What about all the Russians and Ukrainians who died who weren’t Christians? Especially with state-enforced atheism? Do they just not count or something? Are they not just as Russian as the Orthodox Christian ones?
It’s important to remember that Jews are an ethnic group, but Christians, with the possible exceptions of the Copts, are not. So, when you put it in the way Zarfii does, in the English language, you are saying “This ethnic group of people murdered millions of believers in a thing.” This dehumanizes the latter party, reducing them to an amorphous thing, and puts the former as a distinctly human party.
This brings me to my point of contention with otherwise upstanding people like Orban, Giorgia Meloni, Ann Coulter, etc.
In her Italian ranting, Giorgia remarks on the Islamic hatred of Christian symbolism and says “If you are offended by the Cross or Manger, then it’s not here you should live.”
How about, “If you are not Italian, then it is not here you should live?” The issue with Giorgia is the same that exists among several other anti-immigration politicians in Europe right now, “Christianity” is what they see as defining their nation, rather than the unique group of people responsible for its existence in the first place. My fear is that, while these people are some of the best we have on fighting the migrant invasions right now, there is reason to believe they would sell us out down the road for “Christian” brown migrants instead. That’s a huge problem.
In Giorgia’s case, I suspect it is because of her neo-fascist roots — she was a member of the Italian neo-fascist party’s youth wing in the 90s — and fascists like Mussolini believed race to be irrelevant. Mussolini believed that “Italy”, as a state, was the source of greatness, but Hitler disagreed and believed that it was (in his case) the German people who were responsible for the greatness of the state and so, if the German people did not control Germany, Germany was no more.
Adolf, minus the futurism sorta stuff, was right, Benito was wrong.
This is a continuous problem that exists among anti-immigrant voters today, and one that is unique to Christianity as far as religions go: It fails to understand the point of religion, and reduces unique peoples to one under its banner — Christianity is the religion of globalism.
Most Christians see their religion as being a set of values based on the teachings of a historical figure. While these values are generally quite good, and values are not something science can provide you with, it is also true that these values were not inherent to Christianity, and can be found in various forms through most pre-Christian religions as well.
The mistake that — by design — Christianity makes that other religions do not, is that it sees itself only as a faith and not as antiquity’s method of identifying and describing ethnic groups.
In antiquity, it was generally of little concern to people what gods the others believed in. Most people weren’t even going to see such people in their lifetime anyway, and there was no great crusade against foreign religions before the Christians and Muslims existed.
For example, the farther you got from Ancient Egypt, where Egyptians lived, eventually, you just saw no more Egyptian Polytheism at all. You didn’t have to go very far, either. It was understood in antiquity that “The Romans have the Roman gods, the Egyptians theirs, the Germanic people have theirs” etc. and that was basically that.
When Alexander conquered most of the known world in his day, he actually adopted the role of whatever God or god-chosen king the people he conquered believed in, which many scholars and historians argue may have been responsible for his increasingly-severe God complex toward the end of his life. He attempted this against the Persians post-victory as well, adopting some of their dress and religious customs, a move which drew him the ire of both the Persians (who clearly did not think this meant he was “one of them”) and his fellow Greeks who basically saw him as a race traitor for adopting the ways of foreign, conquered people. There were numerous insurgencies and attempts on his life from both his conquered subjects and from his own men.
In Ptolemaic (Greek-ruled) Egypt, the Ptolemys not only tolerated, but adopted much of the Egyptian religion and customs and even created a new god “Serapis” in their wake, but this god was almost exclusively worshipped by the Greek population.
Oh, and the Greeks were still seen as foreigners, and they largely kept to themselves in the new capital of Alexandria anyway.
So we can see that, in antiquity, people did not accept you as “one of us” just because you chose to respect their traditions and religion, and the conquerors didn’t see themselves as “one of you” either. Self-segregation and conflict of interest, and social atomization still occurred. In the same way that the Persians and Egyptians understood the Greeks as being outsiders even if they accepted their gods, the Germanic people would not have accepted you just because you prayed to Freya or Odin. They understood that the differences were deeper and more firmly-rooted than belief and mythology, which was more so just seen as an explanation for natural phenomena they could otherwise not explain, even then.
Christians, on the other hand, can’t wait to welcome you into their home so long as you love Jesus.
To this day, most of the world’s religions still operate on the religious understanding of antiquity and see their religion as a secondary, even tertiary element to their collective identities. The Japanese do not describe themselves as “Shinto”, even though that’s still the most-dominant religion; they describe themselves as “Japanese” or “Yamato”. The Jews do not see their people as simply a set of “ideas”, and the Arabs absolutely see themselves as “Arabian” even before Muslim. Even African-Americans, who have a very-high church attendance, still see themselves as “black” before Christian.
It is only white Christians who can be led to believe that the other, biological descriptions of themselves, are irrelevant — just as it is whites who are the only people who can be led to believe in the possibility of a proposition nation.
It is only us who will toss aside what truly makes our people unique and reduce them to a set of beliefs — dehumanization of our own people.
If we are to survive, we have to fight this natural inclination to see thought as more virtuous than the tribe —we must reject ideologies that put themselves and their “ideas” above the existence of our people, the right to our own homes and destiny.