TheBookOfAllan
No bio...
User ID: 802
Good question, and one I have been thinking about for some time. There does seem to be a larger semblance of integration that Islam seems to be achieving in the west in certain circles, and Muslims seem to be the only religious/ethnic group that is reproducing over levels of replacement. Like you said, I think it's adherence to a strict dogma and it's insane ability to deflect liberal criticisms make it extremely likable/humorous if you are in any way a dissident to liberal orthodoxy. Muslims seem to be the only group of people that simply tell the emperor he has no clothes on. I find the recent uptick in social media celebrities to be more generally influenced by political reasons than religious ones. Andrew Tate for example made a large deal about his Islamic religious conversion, but did not seem to make any tangible behavioral changes that usually result from genuine conversions. He still promotes having pre-marital sex with multiple women and engages in alcohol consumption.
On the other hand, Islam has number of problems which make it difficult for it to fundamentally ingratiate itself within personal imagination and cultural relevance.
-
It's aesthetics are terrible. From a purely outsider perspective, Muslim appearance is extremely unappealing. The long gowns and unkempt beards are extremely unattractive for the average white/western person. In both my WASP and secular social circles it comes with an extreme amount of mockery. They are constantly made fun for "looking like they smell" and seemingly having no social awareness of public norms. No white male (even if he was a genuine religious believer in Islam) would ever be caught dead looking like a traditional Islamic man, simply because it would be absolute social suicide and would act as pussy repellent for the vast majority of white women. Since the connotation in the western mind (even if most wont outwardly admit it) is the degradation and subjugation of women, it is extremely difficult to imagine it would ever lead to genuine conversions for both white men or women. Now i understand that traditional Islamic garb is not primarily worn by most Muslims in most social settings, but it is worn regularly enough in their religious practice that it is attached to it within the western mind.
-
In a more technical aspect, the theological implications of Islam are extremely radical compared to more traditional Christianity, and also much more confusing. The Quran is considered to be exclusively revealed in Arabic, and as such any translation of it to other languages are not considered to be as 'legitimate' as in the original. Compared to the christian bible, all translations are considered to be as genuine as one another, and still transfers the message of Christianity as authentically as each other. If a genuine Muslim upheaval was undertook in the west it would require millions of people to learn Arabic, something which is almost more ridiculous to imagine then swarms of white men wearing thobes. There is also a strong semblance within Islam to have the government and religious system be thoroughly connected with one another, and even among most religious believers that does not seem to be a desire they have, and among secular people that is literally something i feel they would go out and die to prevent.
It is true that Islam seems to be far more comfortable than it was in previous decades, but just like western hegemony is hell bent on destroying christian moral attitudes, they will do the same to Muslims through the next generation. While fundamentalist Muslims may resist the more outlandish demands of modern liberalism, they will still have control over their children and they will be just as thoroughly indued with materialist attitudes, sexual liberation and consumerist pop-culture like the Christians were who proceeded them.
TheBookOfAllan
3mo ago
In the same way, the person that initiates the divorce isn't necessarily the person that ended the marriage. For a variety of reasons, I speculate that is more likely for men to "quiet quit" on a marriage, in a way that is less possible/likely for a woman. The woman might be the one who files the divorce papers, but in a lot of cases the man checked out a long time ago and has been, sometimes willfully sometimes passive-aggressively, baiting her into filing
The problem I have with this response is that it essentially encourages one to disregard hard empirical evidence and then advocates for the exact opposite of what that evidence suggests. Now i understand that marriage and divorce are extremely complicated and also deal with two human beings that can never really be quite understood through sheer empirical analysis, but your point essentially boils down to "majority of women file for divorce, men to blame".
While this is true, unlike many republics, Canada's provinces have a huge degree of power that even many other federations don't usually have. When Canada merged the western provinces into the Federation in 1867 they gave many powers that didn't seem consequential at the time into the hands of the provinces, ones that they probably wished they hadn't done so in hindsight. Civil rights, for example, is in large part up to provincial discretion. Education in all forms as well. So in theory there is only so much the federal government could enforce, and it's not just a matter of keeping one opposing party in check, but many in different provinces.
TheBookOfAllan
4mo ago
It's highly dependent on what kind of immigrant you are and your background for sure. It's difficult for people with certifications to easily transfer to another province let alone from another country. There's a running joke here in Canada about the Indian engineer who now works as an uber eats driver. Canada is also the leading in the immigrants who leave as well. Over 20% of immigrants have left in the last twenty five years.
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/immigrants-are-leaving-canada-at-faster-pace-study-shows-1.1991965
TheBookOfAllan
4mo ago
One of the implications of the housing crisis is that many people who do want children are never going to be able to have them. It is extremely expensive to live even by yourself, let alone to support and provide for any children you may have.
TheBookOfAllan
4mo ago
Yes, i agree. We currently build around 150,000 homes annually. However In order to keep up with immigration we would have to triple our current manufacturing efforts. It is also not a matter of resources but of manpower. There is a huge shortage of experienced blue collar workers and they simply can't keep up with the demand. The government has tried many ways to increase supply but none of them have seemed to work.
The Creeping Barrage
Canada is currently undergoing a soft awakening to many of the difficulties that are projected in the next fifty years. I have seen a change in the way many talk about the political issues facing our country that even four or five years ago I would have thought impossible.
Inflation hit Canada hard, and the cost of living is reaching unbelievable proportions. Although many have a picture of Canada as this rough outdoorsman like nation, most of the population of Canada live in urban centers. Cities which are becoming almost impossible to live in. In Toronto, the largest city in Canada, the costs of a family of four is $4,515 not including rent. Even people making over $100,000 annually are living paycheck to paycheck.
https://wowa.ca/cost-of-living-canada
Rent and the housing shortage is a compounding problem. The average cost of a home in Canada is $656,625. This is a bubble that has actually been developing since the early 2000’s but got increasingly worse over the lockdown. All attempts by the government to do anything substantial about this has been like putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound. There is now an understanding by anyone younger than 35 that we will essentially never be able to afford a home, and essentially be rent and debt slaves for the foreseeable future.
All in all, most Canadians have now become inexcusably aware that our country is in serious decline and will not have a greater living standard than our parents. While this isn’t a surprise to everyone (we have had people attempting to pull the brakes on many of the policies that caused this for many years) it seems that political opinions have changed dramatically over the course of what seems like overnight.
Trudeau and the liberal party have been in power for almost ten years, getting elected three times since 2015. His support began high and has steadily decreased until today. While his criticisms when he was first elected surrounded his unserious and dilettante demeanor, he has been plagued with a number of high-profile scandals that he somehow managed to evade, including the SNC Lavelin case, the blackface debacle and the RCMP investigation scandal following the 2020 Nova Scotia shootings.
Trudeau is now extremely unpopular. Recent polls indicate that over 72% of Canadians want him to step down, up 12% from just last month, and the liberal party is significantly trailing the conservative party for the first time in almost 15 years.
https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/growing-proportion-canadians-want-trudeau-step-down
One of the greatest issues that have cursed the liberal party is their policies regarding mass immigration. For those who don’t understand just how serious the problem is, we have brought in over 430,000 immigrants just in 2022 alone. If you compared the number of immigrants into the country on a per capita basis, it would be the equivalent of America taking in 20 million immigrants over the last two years. This doesn't even include the millions who are let into the country on student visas and then gain their permanent residency after they have graduated.
The opinions towards mass immigration have quickly turned, in a way that has left me equal parts shocked and ecstatic. One of the reasons housing prices are so unreasonable is simply because the demand for homes outweighs the supply we currently can sustain. Canadians are correct in assuming that immigration is a host of all sorts of problems that we are currently experiencing. All of our major social welfare systems are under heavy load, including our infrastructure, education, and health care system.
75% of Canadians are now against mass immigration.
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/liberal-mismanagement-turns-canadians-against-immigration
This is not simply a quiet trend as it was before. Even two years ago you had to speak about these things quietly because accusations of prejudice and racism would be enthusiastically thrown out. They still are, but they simply don’t have the bite anymore. I have seen more real-life discussion about this in the last two months than I have in the last five years. Even on places like Reddit and twitter I’m seeing a lot of popular comments I never would have thought I would see on mainstream platforms, many of which are not simply against immigration for it's economic factor, but have taken a more racially charged approach than expected.
Here are some examples
Just a few months ago I would have been horrified to hear myself say what I'm about to say. But here we go. I am tired of being the only Canadian in my workplace. I am tired of insane traffic jams every morning because my city's population grows by 30% every year in new immigrants alone. I recently went through hell trying to find a place to rent because most of the places listed had already been snatched up. I want to get out of my line of work, but have no choice but to continue, because I can't even get an entry level retail job. I'm tired of struggling to find a family doctor, who has the time to actually make sure that my aging ass isn't sick before shit gets to stage 4. I am tired of people gaslighting me and saying that mass immigration will improve the economy, or that there are still more jobs than people when I can't get a fucking job. I am tired of being afraid to say any of this for fear of being called a racist. My life is getting harder every day, and that's not all because of immigration. But a lot of it is. I am tired of this anger, fear and helplessness that gets stronger every day.
Mass immigration is ruining this country. It drives down our wages and pushes up our rents and mortgages. We don't have the infrastructure, healthcare, or services to support mass immigration. It's also diluting Canada's social cohesion. It's turning us into isolated, atomized consumers who have little in common with their neighbours.*
But we are faced with a problem. The government has absolutely no plans to stop this. It has already been announced that Canada will take in another million immigrants in the next two years. In fact they are currently planning to have over 100 million people in Canada by the year 2100, a program they call the century initiative.
https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/about/who-we-are
Without immigration, Canadas economy would go though a historic collapse. 100% of our economic growth is dependent on immigrants, the housing bubble only keeps going because of this scarcity they bring, and they account for 75% of Canada's demographic growth. Now while obviously this collapse would be absolutely worth it, no politician in their right mind wants to be the one who is helming the ship as it goes down. They would be blamed for everything, and the moment a conservative or reactionary did the things necessary to remedy the situation the media conglomerates and leftist politicians would swarm in and poison everyone against him. He would be ousted from power, the government would be given back to some other flavor liberal, and the immigration would flow mightily on again, this time with growth numbers to boot. The conservative party which everyone is now sweet on is not going to stop it either.
That being said, I don’t see how the ruling class thinks they will be able to play this con for damn near 80 years when it is already becoming extremely unpopular and have legitimately no way to remedy the problems without drastically changing domestic policy. That's also not even mentioning things like the crime rate and wage stagnation. I have a nagging feeling in my head that this is all a slow-moving train to disaster in one way or another.
The point is I don’t see any option where Canada can remedy this democratically. We are in for a long time of political stress here in the great white north, and I don’t think anything is off the table at this point in time.
Your example is specific to a certain type of Mexican immigration in the United States. Whether you're looking at something logistically or morally are completely different issues. There are 10.5 million Mexicans currently in the United States, which is 5x larger than the largest standing army in the world. How would you do that logistically without causing an all out civil conflict? Once again I'm arguing that whatever way you think that will play out in theory will not play out that way in practice. Even if you want to pretend that it's not a moral position, it absolutely is, and you will have to morally justify that to a large portion of the United States population that will not be in favour of such drastic policies and will risk losing a large portion of your support to the immigrants you are attempting to displace.
I'm not even American btw, my thoughts on this are based on Canada where I live who don't have such easily displacable immigrants. How would we get rid of millions of immigrants from places like China and India? Send them down to the United States border? Have a centralized agency responsible for the displacement of all non-whites over a 10 million km radius?
TheBookOfAllan
5mo ago
It's not their existence that is contentious, it is their location.
Yes, in theory, but In practice that's nearly identical. I find the distinction between existence/location to be marginal at best. Just in the same way I don't wish for all mice to be eradicated off the earth, I would kill all of them that are in my house, for the very same reason that I don't like their location.
if they choose to stay they can be forcibly removed
Exactly my point. Think about the practical implementation of these policies. Force them where and how? Tell them all to pack their bags? Send them to other nations that don't want them? What if these nations refuse to take them in? What if these minorities refuse under all circumstances? What about the large proportion of minorities that are second or third generation immigrants who do not have a place to go if displaced? What starts out simple in theory quickly becomes murderous in practice.
TheBookOfAllan
5mo ago
I disagree. My objection is not that they would use violence to achieve their goals, but that mass violence is *inherent *to their political goals. I understand violence is necessary for any political power to hold on to their positions of authority, but it's not simply a matter of political subjugation.
Yes, making an ethnostate would require reprisals on people who don't want to obey.
The consequences for non-whites who subjugate themselves to a ruling class of White Nationalists would be identical to those who don't, because it is not their consent that is contentious, but their existence itself. The use of violence is therefore used not as a contingency for non-compliance, but as a tool used towards those who don't have the desired characteristics. There would not be 'reprisals,' because that would imply causation.
They are homogenous because they have continued to enforce a threat of violence against border crossers who do not meet their preferences.
Yes, I agree, and I would prefer the West to have the same type of policies, but the reality is that they don't. The question now remains, how you would reverse the effects of mass immigration without the overwhelming use of political violence? Comparing the use of force for the displacement or extermination of millions of ethnic minorities to registering your SUV is extremely disingenuous.
You know I’ve been waiting for a good time to talk about this, but I am usually hesitant because by now these discussions don’t ever lead anywhere and no one’s opinion is ever changed in any meaningful way, but I guess now is as good a time as ever.
At one point I would have considered myself a white nationalist, although only in the way a nineteen-year-old university student would consider themselves a Marxist. Just as I was reaching my twenties I got caught up in the counter-cultural alt-right sphere in 2016, and adopted many of the worldviews that were congruent with the political atmosphere of the time, including Ultra-nationalism, Antisemitism, and extreme social conservatism.
It is important to note that one does not become an ultranationalist following a genuine reading of Evola but comes about almost exclusively as a reaction to the failures, dishonesty, and excesses of modern progressivism. It is almost a meme at this point to talk about Anti-white propaganda that is constantly espoused from the left and influences their legislative policies and cultural creations in every aspect of society. It is difficult to ignore this when every social message from every institution is categorically opposed to your very existence in a very genuine way. It is not ironic or subtle, and it is very difficult to take criticism of racial prejudice seriously when the culture at large only considers discrimination legitimate when against ‘approved’ groups.
This is coupled with a domestic policy that also reflects those values, and actively promotes immigration programs that are intrinsically designed to weaken the amount of social and economic power that the majority holds. It is not fallacious to say that western governments are actively supporting causes and ideologies that are inherently anti-white. It is always in the back of people’s minds that their societies have gotten successively worse over the last twenty years and in the minds of the radical right this is correlated with the rise of multiculturalism. We have been so ingrained with the idea that it is morally wrong to even* conceive* of a nation strictly composed of a white majority that It is no surprise that it leads to strong political reactions such as white nationalism.
While I could go on infinitely about the failures of modern liberalism, the point of this thread chain is about why white nationalism is not a viable solution to the greater social trends we are currently seeing, or specifically why I became disillusioned with white nationalism.
The greatest problem I had with entire community is one of unspoken beliefs. Much like Marxists (who have legitimate grievances with neo-liberal capitalism, ones that they are correct in pointing out can not last without complete disaster), they hold beliefs internally that are completely malevolent. White nationalism is centered on a goal of a homogeneous nation that is composed of an ethnically white majority. While I do not consider this inherently immoral (much like how I wouldn’t consider nation such as Japan, India, or China's homogeneity as immoral), the reality is that due to modern immigration policies over the last thirty years, western nations hold a large number of visible minorities. Underneath many of the public facades of ultra-nationalists there lies a reality that is invisible under the surface. Ask a white nationalist what they would do to minorities who would refuse to leave the nations in which they have built a foundation for the future, and they will give you ambiguous solutions that never really sound satisfying to either you or them. They will deny this to no end, but If given complete political authority, they would do many of the things that leftists would accuse them of doing. In order to reach their preferred racial demographic goals, they would have no qualms in deporting, imprisoning, and ultimately murdering hundreds of thousands if not millions of people given the opportunity. Much like the far left in which they criticize, their public personas do not actually reflect the values in which they hold in their hearts, and the practical reality of their governance would result in a large amount of innocent bloodshed, which I do consider immoral.
White nationalism does not have an adequate plan for the future and their proposed solutions to problems will not simply vanish if given political control. Since I have explained that white nationalists come about primarily as a reaction to the excess of progressive ideology, they don’t really have a thought-out plan for the future, only the destruction of what is currently politically popular. Destroying a current political establishment, and actually governing are two completely different things, and they are often in sharp contrast with one another. It would not surprise me if they achieved political power that it would not last particularly long, because the modern world does not share the political realities of the interwar period. They seem to have this idea that the only thing stopping western nations from their previous economic and technological superiority is simply the racial makeup of the country. Now while it can be strongly argued that the social benefits of homogeneity would lead to better educational and economic outcomes, by no means is this guaranteed. Modern nation states are in constant competition with one another in all kinds of ways that are not obvious on the surface. They seem to have this opinion regarding almost all facets of society, that simply making western nations homogeneous will solve almost all of their political problems. This is not apparent to me. There are many serious issues that demographics don’t seem to solve. The birthrate for example, would seemingly skyrocket the moment western nations are ethnically homogeneous, never stopping to notice that these problems are worst within nations that are ethnically homogeneous, such as China, Korea, or Japan. The modern world has become far too complicated for such simple solutions, and in many ways White nationalist’s delusional world is only a reality within their minds.
This is not to say that modern liberal democracy is inherently better, as I would prefer almost anything to what we currently have. I believe modern progressivism to be a political and cultural dead end, and one that white nationalists correctly diagnose as being inevitable to die, either due to political revolt or societal collapse, given a long enough time frame. The dissident right has emerged as an evolution to this type of ideology and is a little more realistic in their goals and slightly more aware of the moral problems that come about as a result. White nationalism is an equal dead end, at least the fantasy of it that the adherents hold to in their heads.
TheBookOfAllan
6mo ago
Its been quite an interesting couple years. The Israel-Palestine conflict is by far the most complicated Geo-Political conflict of modern times, and there's really no good answer to how this will end. Even the best outcomes have incredible downsides. While there's much to say about the specifics of the conflict, I wanted to focus on a couple of general observations around the discourse about both this war and the ongoing war in Ukraine.
-
Does anyone else notice that the majority of online discourse about these foreign wars are often made as if they are being played out in some RTS video game? I see many takes that suggest that due to Israels military superiority, Hamas complete and utter destruction is simply inevitable, and will come swiftly once Israel deploys their infantry into Gaza. Does this not completely stand in the way of all prior evidence and attempts by far greater military powers to dismantle extremist terrorism in their territories? America controlled Afghanistan for twenty years and was still unable to dismantle the Taliban, and once they left they quickly took power in the region again. That's not even considering the actual logistical problems of waging an all out offensive within a dense, urban population of millions of people. I feel that war has become such an impossibility in the West that we have really lost the script on what it really entails.
-
On the rhetorical side of the debate, I find that Leftists are generally split between which side of the conflict they are supporting. Many of the hardline leftists are explicitly pro-Palestine, while more moderate leftists are explicitly pro Israel. It's not fallacious to say that if any minority group in America faced the same legal and administrative discrimination's that Palestinians face in Israel, they would call it a crime against humanity. Palestinians have quite strict guidelines on where they live, where they can work, are not granted Citizenship by birthright, and don't even have freedom of movement between Gaza and the West bank. The irony of Leftists supporting Israel while simultaneously blaming America for having systemic,institutional prejudices is not lost on me.
TheBookOfAllan
7mo ago
Don't really have any feedback due to my complete lack of knowledge about the subject but I enjoyed reading your analysis and its an extremely interesting topic, and one which can be extrapolated to all kinds of divides between older and younger generations. My father is a huge fan of remote controlled airplanes and helicopters but he could never quite get me interested in them growing up. I find it difficult to enjoy something so intrinsically simple when i could just download the newest flight simulator from Microsoft and experience a superior version that is as close to a 1:1 recreation that can be achieved.
TheBookOfAllan
10mo ago
The example you gave doesn't prove what you are saying. Jehovah's witnesses are non-political and are internally barred from holding any public office. They don't even vote. They have no influence on any town in the world.
TheBookOfAllan
11mo ago
A similar sentiment has been on my mind for the last few weeks as well. I was sitting around listening to music one day and just thought about the last two or three years of my life and how bizarre that period of time was. In real time we saw media conglomerates shape how millions of people thought and behaved, saw western democratic leaders reveal themselves to be authoritarians, forced millions of other people to get vaccines against their will, and now, just a couple years later, all pretend as if none of it ever happened at all. Trudeau recently came out at a press conference and explained how he never "actually" forced anyone to get the vaccine, and just "put the incentives" in front of them. Leaders of developed countries literally gaslighting the population. The worst part about it is that eventually everyone will believe that as well.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
This thought arose from watching the bodycam video of the heroic police officers that was posted below. It reminded me of actual first person shooters that I played back when I was young.
This reminds me when the christchurch shooting happened. I saw the go-pro footage on 4chan. I was absolutely chilled to the bone about how similar it looked to any FPS game I had played all throughout middle and high school. I had always scoffed at the idea that video games had any real psychological similarity to real violence, but actually watching a mass shooting through the eyes of the shooter felt equal parts horrific and familiar.
Ever since I've had this nagging feeling that maybe we had been a little to hasty in overlooking the effects of video game violence on developing minds. Regardless of the multiple studies that have found the opposite conclusions, every time i play an FPS I get these weird flashbacks to watching the Christchurch and later, buffalo shootings. They are remarkably similar. Is it merely a coincidence that school shootings saw a rise with the proliferation of FPS games? It's a meme to talk about Doom in connection with the columbine shootings, but I can't get over this suspicion that maybe we were a little too hasty to dismiss these concerns in hindsight.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
I don't believe she was, as she was remarking specifically about the ad campaign itself and that was not one of the videos shown during the superbowl.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
The things they said sound like Boomer-level excuses/groveling given by Rightists to Leftists for how "actually, Christianity isn't that bad because the founding figure shares what you claim your values are"
I unironically agree with this in a way. It is strange that leftists are usually extremely opposed to Christianity when it is the same belief system that championed many of the values that they espouse.
The book of Job is (from a certain point of view) "men will literally believe in an invisible, unfalsifiable, otherworldly power instead of going to therapy" and it's weird that nobody points this out.
No one points this out because that's not at all a genuine perspective of the Book of Job. Job is ultimately a explanation of why evil exists in the world and an ontological examination between the status of god and man.
A group that operates in/benefits from/is driven by conflict theory is tautologically incapable of questioning why people wouldn't want to submit to their power. This applies to both sides of the aisle.
true
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
Could you give me a little background on this? I am completely unaware of the conflicts within the catholic church atm.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
I agree with @hydroacetylene below me here. I'm writing from the perspective of someone in a conservative church, and from the perspective of Christians it really is black and white. All progressive or liberal churches are seen with roughly the same amount of skepticism regardless of their distinctive characteristics. Non-Trinitarian sects would not even be considered Christians at all.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
He Gets Us
There has been great controversy over a recent Christian ad that played during the Super Bowl.
“He gets us,” the ad in question, and the organization that created it, is a subsidiary of the ‘The Signatry,’ a fund that aims to spread biblical teachings around the planet, which is also a business alias by another organization called “The Servant foundation.” It is one of the largest Christian Grant foundations in the world, with donations from many of the top churches in the country as well as billionaires such as David Green, the owner of hobby lobby. It has pledged over half a billion dollars to the spread of their message on a global scale, with a large portion going to America exclusively.
This has caused habitual controversy within secular circles among those blue tribe adjacent, with many of their reactions being familiar to those already within religious denominations. What is ironic, however, is that these ad campaigns were modeled in a way that was specifically tailored to the leftist worldview by very modern sects of Christianity. The campaign focused on a perception of Jesus with traits that are explicitly progressive. Examine some of the perspectives given by the organization
-Jesus was a refugee and an Immigrant
-Jesus was an ‘influencer’ who got ‘cancelled’ after standing up for something he believed in
-Jesus was wrongly judged
-Jesus had to control his outrage too
Take a look for yourself at some of the ads in question.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0z0J-2P8a3s&ab_channel=HeGetsUs
https://youtube.com/watch?v=v1IJFJwexus&ab_channel=HeGetsUs
https://youtube.com/watch?v=QEEq5VTfmic&ab_channel=HeGetsUs
Since I assume most members of this forum are atheists, most would not look any deeper into the motivations or presentation of this ad campaign with any closer analysis than they would any other form of Christian evangelism. But the point of my post is not to examine this ad campaign, but to extrapolate on a current trend of modern Christianity that is exemplified within it.
To say that the ad campaign was a complete failure is an understatement. It resonated with very few non-religious people, failed spectacularly with leftists in general, and came with the same amount of pushback that any other Christian sentiments in popular media would receive.
AOC claimed that the ads “Makes fascism look benign.”
For full disclosure, I am a Christian who converted as an adult, and have perspectives of both religious and non-religious worldviews. There is a succinct lack of understanding of the goings on in the Christian community by non-religious people and I wish to shed a light on some of the current underpinnings.
Unbeknownst to many outside the church, Christians are dealing with a type of heretical civil conflict within their own faith. ‘Progressive Christianity’ has become commonplace in most urban centers around NA, and it is exactly as it sounds. They usually set up their own churches so they may freely practice their beliefs. Usually, they attract members with a more serious Christian appearance and then slowly ingratiate their own ideology as time goes by. They are a denomination that has made multiple doctrinal changes that are completely against more traditional Christianity.
-
They do not accept the divinity of Jesus. While traditional Christians believe Jesus to be the literal incarnation of God that walked the earth, progressive Christians merely believe that Jesus was a man who set a good moral example. This also implies that they deny the literal resurrection of Jesus. While these beliefs are not universal, the importance of faith in general is placed very low on the totem pole of progressive Christianity. This turns their interpretation of salvation into human self-actualization. Along with this, there comes with it a denial of the bible as ultimate authority. They believe the bible only goes so far as to give guidelines, but ultimately puts the bible secondary if it contradicts modern sensibilities.
-
Due to the first point, this lack of belief in the Divinity of Jesus and with the resurrection turns something that was once about salvation into simple moralism. This allows the Christian doctrine to be molded into something that fits more contemporary progressive worldviews, and gives them authority to shame and accuse other churches or Christians of not following 'correct' christian doctrine.
-
They embrace homosexuality. Gay people can become pastors and other authoritative figures within their churches. While traditional Christianity considers homosexuality a sin, progressive Christian will spout Jesus’ example of love and kindness to trump any biblical teachings that come from other writers in the New Testament. This allows them to still maintain some moral high ground that they accuse other churches and Christians of "unchristian like behavior" and "Not true Christians."
These are the churches that are heavily advertised on Tik-Tok and other social media websites and are extremely popular in that niche. The reality of the churches, however, is vastly different. I have been to many of these churches out of sheer curiosity, and I have never seen any of them survive for any significant period of time. The numbers they draw will repeatedly dwindle, as many of the congregation begin to understand the perspectives being espoused, and will leave the church for a more traditional one. I have many in my Church who are refugees from progressive churches and most of the stories are very similar. Over time their numbers will progressively dwindle, until they cannot afford to stay open and have no congregation. People who are not religious are not interested in becoming religious for simple political motivations, and people who are religious are interested in the legitimate spiritual traditions of the faith, not materialist interpretations of said traditions. Leftists who already hate Christianity are not going to be convinced by a softer form of it. Likewise, people who are already Christians are not going to be effected by people who don't even really believe in the core tenets of Christianity to begin with.
Everyone is familiar with the trend of progressive ideologues infiltrating certain niches and groups and slowly turning them into spokesman of their causes. Regardless of your views of religion or Christianity, it is an extremely durable belief system. It has survived for thousands of years, multiple empires, countless plagues, and disasters, and I don’t think far leftist types yet have an understanding of why that is. Christians don’t go to church or believe out of a hatred or dislike of Homosexuals. Christianity promises eternal life and spiritual salvation for just the simple belief in its figurehead. Progressive Christianity will always fail, because in order to justify their own inclusion of contemporary social beliefs they must subtract the very things about the philosophical aspects of Christianity that make it appealing in the first place.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
This topic hit way closer to home than I had anticipated. I have been experiencing my own type of delusional paranoia that is remarkably similar to the topic you explain. I had an acid trip around New Years that turned very bad, and long story short I then became extremely paranoid about my health, and particularly my heart and lungs. I've regularly vaped for more than five years and I became anxious to exercise because i believed that it would inflame my cardiovascular system. It got to the point where I had my first panic attack at 26 years old because of it, ambulance and all. I became convinced that I had some type of congenital defect or some vaccine related myocarditis. I got a full check up, EKG, X-rays, blood tests, you name it. Everything came out fine. 177 cm, 165 Ibs. My doctor told me that my health was immaculate. It was literally all in my head. But it was so real. I literally felt like I was going to collapse and die at any moment, I was convinced of it. I felt every heartbeat, and every bed pain from sleeping wrong was misinterpreted as a coming disaster. It turns out that all it really boiled down to was that I was spending a little too much time by myself in my apartment, and consumed a little too much nicotine and caffeine that elevated my heart rate. It is incredible what your mind can convince itself of in the right circumstances.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
While it sounds rather conspiratorial, i don't see any other major power that would have the incentive to blow it up other than the united states. Russia is not going to damage their own infrastructure that gives them leverage in Europe, and no mainland European power would damage such a vital piece in their economic structures. While there is no real legitimate proof, the United States is the only real player that can benefit from it. They damage Russia's soft power in Europe while also forcing the European countries effected to rely more on the United States resources than before. It's a win-win. I don't see any other alternative.
TheBookOfAllan
1yr ago
I mean obviously i can't decisively say its going to be a great game before its even released, but from the extensive gameplay trailers that have been released I can say that it's the most expensive Harry Potter game that has ever been made for sure. Regardless of the virtue of its gameplay it seems to encapsulate what so many people love about the universe, and that in of itself is enough reason it will probably sell like wild. It's almost like Star Wars, where regardless of the quality of the content, most people feel a draw towards simply existing in the world that it encompasses.
I don't think I do actually. I apologize if my tone seemed to be inflammatory, and It is important to note that i don't hold any personal hostility towards Muslims as a whole. But i will still stand by my previous statements that I admit are almost all influenced by my own personal experience and social circles. I don't think it is radical to notice that western women do not swoon over traditional Muslim men.
I think this could be argued against pretty confidently as well although like you say it often comes with cultural baggage and butthurt from everyone. But 89% of all white people marry within their race and i don't think it is inappropriate to claim that ethnic men face a certain degree of hostility from white women in general. I also don't put it out of the realm of comprehension that many white women could desire to date a black or muslim man but fear the loss of social status that could come a result of it. Once again my view of this comes from both empirical data and my own personal experience. I've heard white women say absolutely insane shit that they would never say in public when they are confident it will remain in strict confidentiality. I may also be completely wrong and be biased by these experiences.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/
You are correct in saying that Muslims will absolutely give grace to those who are genuinely attempting to learn, but thats the thing, i can't imagine in my mind a wide-scale movement of hundreds of thousands or even millions of westerners seriously attempting to learn Arabic that is motivated by genuine religious belief in Islam. If materialist/atheists can't even drum up the motivation to engage with the bible in a serious way, I don't see how they would have the discipline or religious belief necessary to engage in learning a language that is one of the most difficult for English speakers to learn, with an estimated 2000 hours to learn to even a simple degree of competency. It seems out of the range of belief for me to actually imagine.
More options
Context Copy link