Wednesday, January 04, 2012

How ambitious, conspiratorial Jewry broke the WASPs, but is now breaking upon itself

Introduction by Chris Moore:

In the following essay for the right-wing Occidental Observer, Andrew Fraser argues that the universalist (Bolshevik) interpretation of Protestantism has prevailed over the particularistic (Nazi) interpretation, leading to today's contemporary disintegration of Protestantism nearly in its entirety.

It's hard to find fault in his premise. This disintegration is echoed, for example, on the U.S. Supreme Court where, as Pat Buchanan has noted, the Court is now divided between three Jews and six Catholics, "but not a single Protestant, though Protestants remain half the nation and our founding faith."

As I see it, the universalist vs. particularist split within Protestantism is now starting to play out within Judaism, as well, with the "Nazi" interpretation of the faith (Zionism) vs. the growing cadre of left-wing, anti-Zionist Jews.

There are more than a few ironies, here. The first is that murderous Nazism rose up in many ways as a counterweight to murderous Jewish Bolshevism in the Soviet Union, and that Hitler modeled his Nazism on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which turned out to be essentially a propagandist caricature of Jewish conspiracy, albeit a not completely inaccurate depiction of how the Judeofascists actually operate. (As I noted here, Hitler is alleged by one time Nazi Hermann Rauschning to have modeled his own fascism on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which may or may not have been written by Jews, but which was clearly fashioned by parties well aware of the Jewish supremacist agenda and its technique.)

Hence, just as with Bolshevism, Nazism itself can be viewed as a manifestation of Jewish conspiracy.

Another irony is that the eradication of WASP prestige, leadership and moral authority in America, primarily to the benefit of Jewry, was then a consequence not of a natural internecine split within Protestantism, but rather a consequence of some WASPs essentially aligning with Bolshevism (a Jewish material and intellectual movement) and others essentially aligning with Nazism (an emulation of a Jewish conspiracy movement).

A third irony is, as I mentioned above, Jewry itself now seems to be fracturing along the same lines as Protestantism has, hence the particularistic Jewish plot to use left-wing, pseudo-universalism (Bolshevism) to fracture Christian cohesiveness has boomeranged back upon itself, and Jewry is again being attacked by a monster it had a major role in creating. -- C.M.

The Protestant Deformation of Christian Nationhood, Part 1

(Occidental Observer) -- by Andrew Fraser --


Contemporary Protestants try hard to be nice. Church leaders ceaselessly call upon Christians to be “inclusive” and “compassionate” when dealing with “the Other.” Introductory texts in theology teach that the “church is always threatened by a false unity that does not allow for the inclusion of strangers and outcasts.” Among White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, in particular, the compulsory embrace of humanity’s “rich diversity” is the prescribed antidote to “the ominous coupling of a shadowy religiosity with a militant nationalism or racism in such slogans as ‘God and Fatherland’ or ‘God, family, and country.”[1]

According to Princeton theology Professor Daniel L Migliore, such “vague but uniformly comforting references to God and religious values” shaped “the ideology of too many German Christians during the Third Reich and are still invoked by “chauvinistic movements in the United States and other countries.”[2] The notion that nationalism is a social pathology owes much of its all-pervasive influence to Karl Barth (1882–1968), a Swiss Protestant theologian who achieved fame and more than a little notoriety in the 1930s through uncompromising opposition to the National Socialist takeover of both church and state in Germany. The fact is, however, both Barth and Migliore seriously misrepresent the relationship between Christian communities of faith and the blood bonds of national identity.

The Bible provides ample warrant to designate “nations” and “peoples” as essential building blocks in the constitution of the holy, catholic, and apostolic church of Christ. Indeed, Christ directed his disciples to “make disciples of all the nations.”(Matthew 28:19) The Old Testament people of Israel thus became the prototype of the Christian peoples of God in the New Covenant creation. Accordingly, the Russian Orthodox Church affirms that all peoples have the “right to national identity and national self-expressions” within the Body of Christ. In the nineteenth century, even an Anglican theologian such as FD Maurice saw the Old Testament as the history of a “peculiar nation” whose destiny is fulfilled and completed in the New Testament. God’s covenant promises to Old Israel are fulfilled when “a universal Church [unfolds] itself out of that nation,” taking “root in other nations and peoples throughout the ancient world.”[3]

But during the twentieth century ethnonationalism lost its religious aura of sanctity. In the erstwhile “Anglo-Saxon countries,” in particular, few Protestants any longer believe that it is part of God’s plan to form the character of each nation by means of the “spiritual body” within it, giving rise to what the Germans call a Volkskirche. Even Anglicans reject the idea that the Church of England was and should be again the Church for England and the English people, at home and in the diaspora. That decisive break with the past is very largely due to the Protestant Deformation produced by the theological crisis afflicting the German church during the 1930s.[4]

Ideological Civil War and Theological Crisis

The Protestant Deformation in Germany was part of the collateral damage inflicted on Christian civilization by the “ideological civil war of the twentieth century” in which “the universalist extremism of Bolshevism provokes the extremism of the particular in Nazism.” Ernst Nolte portrays the role of German National Socialism in the europäische Burgerkrieg between 1917 and 1945 as an “excessive” reaction to Bolshevism. In his view, an “excess in what is justified at the outset leads to the unjustifiable.”[5] The same dynamic operated in the theological crisis which engulfed Protestant churches in Germany as growing numbers of academic theologians, pastors, and parishioners eschewed neutrality and took opposing sides in the ideological conflicts dividing society at large. Soon after the Machtergreifung (the Nazi seizure of power) of 1933 which endowed Hitler with dictatorial powers, open ideological warfare broke out between a breakaway Bekennende Kirche (Confessing Church, hereafter BK) under the intellectual leadership of the Karl Barth and the Deutsche Christen (DC) movement in mainstream Lutheran and Evangelical churches. The latter were soon united under a Reichsbischof sworn to serve the Führer.[6]

Emanuel Hirsch (1888-1972) was just one of many prominent theologians whose loyalty to the National Socialist regime placed them at daggers drawn with Barth and the BK. Very early on in the ideological civil war tearing Germany and Europe apart, Hirsch aligned himself openly with the right.[7] Meanwhile, on the left, Barth, began his life-long journey as a fellow-traveller, a radical anti-Nazi widely suspected to be soft on Communism. Early in his career, he was known “as the notorious ‘red pastor’ of Safenwil;” late in life during the Cold War he excused “his peculiar attitude towards aggressive Communism in Hungary” by reference to the “good intentions” that inspired leftist totalitarianism. Barth’s ideological allegiances account for his “excessive” reaction to the rise of the DC movement. Even “Barth’s ‘friends’ in the Confessing Church thought him too difficult and not diplomatic enough.” In fact, he was seen as the “greatest danger” to the church “because he picked too many specific battles with National Socialism.”[8] Few would call Barth’s “rationality” into question. Barth was not, however, always so generous to his DC opponents, whose teachings he dismissed contemptuously as a “blatantly nonsensical” and “irresponsible pseudotheology.” [9]...MORE...LINK

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

i'm a jew and i don't control mass media I just want to live my life and celebrate the shabbos
how about that