TLDR BLM co exist as surrogate religions and a lot of these traits are just evident in religious conflict writ-large. So a lot of these criticisms are really just “Christianity participated in a religious conflict with pagans!” and, yeah, no shit.
Okay, first of all, the ancient world did not have “orgies”. There is zero evidence that the Dionysian Orgy involved any sort of sexual element, it was much more akin to something like the Germanic spear dance. Just want to throw that out there. Human sacrifice, like other forms of sacrifice, is ritualized slaughter and among the Indo-Europeans was generally performed on criminals, was captives, homosexuals, and other disreputable people. Also, it was not common, it was an extraordinary religious activity. I don’t see why you think it is significantly worse than certain practices Christians did like burning people at the stake.
> What then, to make of Pagan statues? At best, they are visual manifestations of a broken culture from misled people. At worst, they are straight up demonic […] By this point, Rome was well on its way to being Christianized. Why should its citizens tolerate the remnants of pagan society visible in their streets, in their temples, at their stadiums, etc?
Okay, so Early Christians WERE the ancient BLM, it’s just that you don’t believe in the core beliefs of BLM but do believe in the core beliefs of Christianity. Destroying works of art that they associated with an unwholesome past that had to be buried. Alienating people from their demon-worshipping ancestors. Also, defacing art is in some ways worse than destroying it entirely, because it is an act of deliberate mutilation. Pagans, who had no value placed on the crucifix, melted it down for gold and other materials, not to pwn the Christcucks. When a Christian bashes the nose off of Augustus or etches a crucifix into his skull, he is telling the whole world that Caesar lost, and Christ won.
> The art is symbolic of the mistreatment of Christians
Yes, and the statues of Columbus and Robert E. Lee and now Thomas Jefferson are symbolic of the mistreatment towards BIPOCs. You are literally explaining exactly why Christians were like the ancient BLM, and titling this the contrary. It would make sense for someone to want to destroy the martyrs of foreigners like Trayvon Martin, but to want to destroy the statues of the virtuous emperors and heroes of your ancestors is clearly a product of subversion. Either you must conclude that, or that Christians actually recognized themselves as a foreign para-society which writhed its way into the dying imperial core. Germanicus, for example, was a hero of Rome, not a persecutor of Christians. Do you think the Christians who vandalized his statue even knew who he was? Probably not. Maybe they didn’t even speak Latin... Many Greeklings and Jews among the Christians. They just saw him as a Caesar and hated him for it.
And why shouldn’t Romans persecute Christians, who you admit are diametrically opposed to Roman traditional culture and religion and want to set it on its head? While the Christians recruited prostitutes and tax collectors and criminals to their cause, the religiously pious and good-natured people stuck to their gods in the face of civilizational decadence.
> Almost nothing remains from the pre-Constantine (300) era artwork. Again, this is just what Ancient people did. But, you don’t hear about the widespread destruction of Christian artwork and relics (even when it occurs today).
Christians didn’t make any good artwork anyways. Also, this isn’t about the sanctity of art. I’m not the Pearl-clutching type over destroying artwork, it’s the motives behind it. Christians were obviously being encouraged to identify with the Israelites over their own ancestors, and to view their ancestors as akin to the enemies of the Israelites. So they were encouraged to destroy what remained of the world their ancestors built. They were also operating on heavy resentment for the people who had perfectly rational reasons not to like them in the past. It was an act of revenge just as BLM today seeks vengeance because we taught their ancestors to eat with a fork and knife. You see this later on too, among the Anglo-Saxons missionaries would paint Christian Anglos as Israelites and their ancestors as enemies of Israel.
The use of martyrdom to allegedly garner sympathy, gaining traction through gibs to the poor, and heavy in-group networking to bribe politicians and whatnot heavily are also things we see today as very Jewwy and left-Machiavellian. It’s not necessarily bad, you do what you have to do I guess, but it demonstrates that Christianity’s spread was not some sort of intellectual victory. They outplayed the Pagan religious strata who weren’t even playing at first at all because as you said, they were not as zealous. They had no immune system to protect against proselytizing religions. Also, they had to stave off other foreign cults and were literally going bankrupt by the late empire due to these religious changes.
And frankly, I am yet to see evidence that martyrdom actually played a large role in the spread of Christianity. It is clearly one of the stupidest things Christians do, literally asking to be killed. This is suicide by any other name. Maybe it played a small role but clearly these other factors like networking and charity to the poor were more impactful on society. To traditional societies, the greatest thing is heroic virtue, not martyrdom. They’re almost polar opposites.
> In fact, the coming Christian (Byzantine) empire surpassed the original (stagnant) Roman republic and empire in a few ways. For example, the Romans made essentially zero technological innovations during their millennia+ years of power.
The Romans probably came the closest of any culture in human history to industrializing before the English in the 1700s. Nobody before ~1500 made a lot of technological innovations so it’s very stupid to argue this. Byzantines will never be a real woman— I mean Roman! Btw. And they were scumbags.
>Nazis, Lenin etc
Destroying people who were obviously progressive and unique for their time is not the same as destroying people who were ordinary in their historical context.
The reason martyrdom was so valued in early Christians is that it's seen as persistence, not letting ancient cops forcing you to believe something false
Early Christians were mostly swarthy levantines. For that fact alone I don’t like them, and I don’t care. I’m thankful Christianity morphed into somewhat of a “white religion” but it no longer is and something else must take its place.
I'm of the belief that in order for a return to Christ to take place, a return to European Folk values must take place (I don't mean a worship of pagan deities, just a return to moral traditions and synthesize it with Christian ones. Concepts like mercy, compassion, and forgiveness aren't bad in and of themselves)
P.S. I'm Catholic but I have no ill will towards traditional European folk practitioners.
I don't think you should base religion off of race politics. A lot of bagans use "muh latinx african christians" as a slam dunk but that's retarded and proves their theology is based off immediate problems and not actual objective truth. Not to mention that colonialism is the primary reason swarths even heard about the Bible, let alone convert. A British protestant colonizer would be mad that their descendants were calling them marxists for defending a missionary from Zulu raiders.
I don’t think Christianity is true, but the racial demographics of modern “Christendom” is definitely worth pointing out. Also by and large the religion is just straight up hostile to white people and their interests.
Not really, the reason brown people go to Church is because they were taught about it by white colonizers who conquered their lands. The reason Christianity declined in the west is because jews have been trying extremely hard since the 1700s to remove it's influence and have used their ideology as a bad substitute. This is why any mainstream media that isn't Veggietales constantly mocks christians 24/7 and portrays them as backwards crazy schizo rednecks who get defeated by le epic one-liners. When will Family Guy make fun of redditor atheists? Never! Also you didn't need to clarify you weren't christian
Christianity came from the Mediterranean, where swarthy whites came from. Colonialism is how Christianity went to Northern Europe from Southern Europe, not the other way around. The swarths didn’t hear about the bible from some outsider, they wrote half the damn thing. The Vulgate, Epistles and Revelation (New Testament) were written in Greek, cross-referencing the Torah and Tanakh (Old Testament), which were written in Hebrew by Jews.
As far as your complaint about race politics, you should be aware that nearly every religion before Christianity was built upon a given ethnic group’s relationship with its God/Gods, and the first religions were the worship of ancestor spirits, animal spirits, primordial spirits, and/or celestial spirits, with these spirits later manifesting and ascending into godhood.
Good article. Interesting how you connected the origin of wokeness with Africans in the American southeast. From what other people have said, many are of the opinion that secular Jews invented wokeness. What is your opinion on the relationship between Jews and Blacks, and how they contributed to wokeness?
To answer your question, I don't really agree with what Quantitative Agitator said. I think it's pretty clear that "woke" was created by Black elites and Jews later hijacked it for their own Marxist purposes. Saying that Jews secretly do everything bad denies the obvious agency that groups of tens of millions have.
Destroy statues without shame tbh. You can’t moral highground not destroying statues when your enemies are set on destroying your statues. Destroy them back and erase their clan from the gene pool. Build your statues back tenfold without competition. It’s how it’s been done since the dawn of time.
It is noteworthy that the somewhat recently created gothic cathedrals were smashed up by protestants. These same nutjobs morphed into the U Mass Amherst English department which birthed wokism which no continues the smashing
Christianity did nothing to stop rome from self destructing.
Were Europeans not white before they became Christian?
Thank you as always, MOGW!
TLDR BLM co exist as surrogate religions and a lot of these traits are just evident in religious conflict writ-large. So a lot of these criticisms are really just “Christianity participated in a religious conflict with pagans!” and, yeah, no shit.
Okay, first of all, the ancient world did not have “orgies”. There is zero evidence that the Dionysian Orgy involved any sort of sexual element, it was much more akin to something like the Germanic spear dance. Just want to throw that out there. Human sacrifice, like other forms of sacrifice, is ritualized slaughter and among the Indo-Europeans was generally performed on criminals, was captives, homosexuals, and other disreputable people. Also, it was not common, it was an extraordinary religious activity. I don’t see why you think it is significantly worse than certain practices Christians did like burning people at the stake.
> What then, to make of Pagan statues? At best, they are visual manifestations of a broken culture from misled people. At worst, they are straight up demonic […] By this point, Rome was well on its way to being Christianized. Why should its citizens tolerate the remnants of pagan society visible in their streets, in their temples, at their stadiums, etc?
Okay, so Early Christians WERE the ancient BLM, it’s just that you don’t believe in the core beliefs of BLM but do believe in the core beliefs of Christianity. Destroying works of art that they associated with an unwholesome past that had to be buried. Alienating people from their demon-worshipping ancestors. Also, defacing art is in some ways worse than destroying it entirely, because it is an act of deliberate mutilation. Pagans, who had no value placed on the crucifix, melted it down for gold and other materials, not to pwn the Christcucks. When a Christian bashes the nose off of Augustus or etches a crucifix into his skull, he is telling the whole world that Caesar lost, and Christ won.
> The art is symbolic of the mistreatment of Christians
Yes, and the statues of Columbus and Robert E. Lee and now Thomas Jefferson are symbolic of the mistreatment towards BIPOCs. You are literally explaining exactly why Christians were like the ancient BLM, and titling this the contrary. It would make sense for someone to want to destroy the martyrs of foreigners like Trayvon Martin, but to want to destroy the statues of the virtuous emperors and heroes of your ancestors is clearly a product of subversion. Either you must conclude that, or that Christians actually recognized themselves as a foreign para-society which writhed its way into the dying imperial core. Germanicus, for example, was a hero of Rome, not a persecutor of Christians. Do you think the Christians who vandalized his statue even knew who he was? Probably not. Maybe they didn’t even speak Latin... Many Greeklings and Jews among the Christians. They just saw him as a Caesar and hated him for it.
And why shouldn’t Romans persecute Christians, who you admit are diametrically opposed to Roman traditional culture and religion and want to set it on its head? While the Christians recruited prostitutes and tax collectors and criminals to their cause, the religiously pious and good-natured people stuck to their gods in the face of civilizational decadence.
> Almost nothing remains from the pre-Constantine (300) era artwork. Again, this is just what Ancient people did. But, you don’t hear about the widespread destruction of Christian artwork and relics (even when it occurs today).
Christians didn’t make any good artwork anyways. Also, this isn’t about the sanctity of art. I’m not the Pearl-clutching type over destroying artwork, it’s the motives behind it. Christians were obviously being encouraged to identify with the Israelites over their own ancestors, and to view their ancestors as akin to the enemies of the Israelites. So they were encouraged to destroy what remained of the world their ancestors built. They were also operating on heavy resentment for the people who had perfectly rational reasons not to like them in the past. It was an act of revenge just as BLM today seeks vengeance because we taught their ancestors to eat with a fork and knife. You see this later on too, among the Anglo-Saxons missionaries would paint Christian Anglos as Israelites and their ancestors as enemies of Israel.
The use of martyrdom to allegedly garner sympathy, gaining traction through gibs to the poor, and heavy in-group networking to bribe politicians and whatnot heavily are also things we see today as very Jewwy and left-Machiavellian. It’s not necessarily bad, you do what you have to do I guess, but it demonstrates that Christianity’s spread was not some sort of intellectual victory. They outplayed the Pagan religious strata who weren’t even playing at first at all because as you said, they were not as zealous. They had no immune system to protect against proselytizing religions. Also, they had to stave off other foreign cults and were literally going bankrupt by the late empire due to these religious changes.
And frankly, I am yet to see evidence that martyrdom actually played a large role in the spread of Christianity. It is clearly one of the stupidest things Christians do, literally asking to be killed. This is suicide by any other name. Maybe it played a small role but clearly these other factors like networking and charity to the poor were more impactful on society. To traditional societies, the greatest thing is heroic virtue, not martyrdom. They’re almost polar opposites.
> In fact, the coming Christian (Byzantine) empire surpassed the original (stagnant) Roman republic and empire in a few ways. For example, the Romans made essentially zero technological innovations during their millennia+ years of power.
The Romans probably came the closest of any culture in human history to industrializing before the English in the 1700s. Nobody before ~1500 made a lot of technological innovations so it’s very stupid to argue this. Byzantines will never be a real woman— I mean Roman! Btw. And they were scumbags.
>Nazis, Lenin etc
Destroying people who were obviously progressive and unique for their time is not the same as destroying people who were ordinary in their historical context.
The reason martyrdom was so valued in early Christians is that it's seen as persistence, not letting ancient cops forcing you to believe something false
Making a post dat replies to this in depth
I have no input on this besides finding "greeklings" to be a funny term. Lol
Your whole comment is gay but your very first point is just wrong. They did do sex and such.
Early Christians were mostly swarthy levantines. For that fact alone I don’t like them, and I don’t care. I’m thankful Christianity morphed into somewhat of a “white religion” but it no longer is and something else must take its place.
I'm of the belief that in order for a return to Christ to take place, a return to European Folk values must take place (I don't mean a worship of pagan deities, just a return to moral traditions and synthesize it with Christian ones. Concepts like mercy, compassion, and forgiveness aren't bad in and of themselves)
P.S. I'm Catholic but I have no ill will towards traditional European folk practitioners.
I don't think you should base religion off of race politics. A lot of bagans use "muh latinx african christians" as a slam dunk but that's retarded and proves their theology is based off immediate problems and not actual objective truth. Not to mention that colonialism is the primary reason swarths even heard about the Bible, let alone convert. A British protestant colonizer would be mad that their descendants were calling them marxists for defending a missionary from Zulu raiders.
I don’t think Christianity is true, but the racial demographics of modern “Christendom” is definitely worth pointing out. Also by and large the religion is just straight up hostile to white people and their interests.
Not really, the reason brown people go to Church is because they were taught about it by white colonizers who conquered their lands. The reason Christianity declined in the west is because jews have been trying extremely hard since the 1700s to remove it's influence and have used their ideology as a bad substitute. This is why any mainstream media that isn't Veggietales constantly mocks christians 24/7 and portrays them as backwards crazy schizo rednecks who get defeated by le epic one-liners. When will Family Guy make fun of redditor atheists? Never! Also you didn't need to clarify you weren't christian
Christianity came from the Mediterranean, where swarthy whites came from. Colonialism is how Christianity went to Northern Europe from Southern Europe, not the other way around. The swarths didn’t hear about the bible from some outsider, they wrote half the damn thing. The Vulgate, Epistles and Revelation (New Testament) were written in Greek, cross-referencing the Torah and Tanakh (Old Testament), which were written in Hebrew by Jews.
As far as your complaint about race politics, you should be aware that nearly every religion before Christianity was built upon a given ethnic group’s relationship with its God/Gods, and the first religions were the worship of ancestor spirits, animal spirits, primordial spirits, and/or celestial spirits, with these spirits later manifesting and ascending into godhood.
nordcucks buckbroken by itaryans
As always, superb stuff Layne.
I feel bad throwing out something from 2010
Good article. Interesting how you connected the origin of wokeness with Africans in the American southeast. From what other people have said, many are of the opinion that secular Jews invented wokeness. What is your opinion on the relationship between Jews and Blacks, and how they contributed to wokeness?
So, you are saying that Marxists (mostly Jewish) invented wokeness and Blacks took a liking to it; correct?
To answer your question, I don't really agree with what Quantitative Agitator said. I think it's pretty clear that "woke" was created by Black elites and Jews later hijacked it for their own Marxist purposes. Saying that Jews secretly do everything bad denies the obvious agency that groups of tens of millions have.
Interesting. Thank you for the clarification.
Destroy statues without shame tbh. You can’t moral highground not destroying statues when your enemies are set on destroying your statues. Destroy them back and erase their clan from the gene pool. Build your statues back tenfold without competition. It’s how it’s been done since the dawn of time.
Very good piece.
It is noteworthy that the somewhat recently created gothic cathedrals were smashed up by protestants. These same nutjobs morphed into the U Mass Amherst English department which birthed wokism which no continues the smashing