Sooner or later, in the midst of any long-term, entrenched, and bloody conflict, disheartenment is almost guaranteed to make an appearance among its combatants. The need for constant vigilance, the bursts of short but extensive action, and the resultant state of attrition that often appears to be the battle’s sole outcome can fray even the steeliest of nerves and deaden even the most steadfast of spirits. Once an army is gripped with the perception that its foe is an impervious monolith, morale takes a sharp swing south, and catastrophe can follow not long after if such Weltschmerz is not nipped in the bud.
The internecine war of worldviews within Christendom is no exception to this phenomenon. Indeed, given the stakes involved, such discouragement is all the more prevalent and thus all the more dangerous.
Of course, fundamental human nature is a two-way street of fallacy, and it well behooves those imperfectly but boldly standing fast for that which is True to remember that the enemy camp will always be rife with schisms, factions, envies, and strifes that will undermine his effectiveness. Paul, for one, understood this well, and took advantage of the doctrinal differences between Pharisees and Sadducees to foster a dispute among them and escape the machinations of both (Acts 23:6-10). Likewise, the motley collection of fervent egalitarian abolitionists, nativist patriotic ‘know-nothings’,and apathetic dollar-a-day men that constituted the Army of the Potomac resisted all attempts by that force’s perpetually weak leadership to meld it into an effective force – defects General Lee was not negligent in exploiting.
With all this in mind, and remembering that kinism is very adept at taking the offensive, here is a list of five areas of contention within the alienist camp for us to drive wedges through.
Patriots vs. Internationalists
This is probably the most common rift one is likely to run across, and is also easily the starkest reminder that in all such disputes kinists are not obligated to favour either side more. Older alienists, current or ex-military, and self-styled ‘realists’ of the David Bahnsen variety are more likely to be in the former camp, while the fedora-wearing ‘Christian liberty’ camp of the Joel McDurmon variety, and those whose readings of Acts 17:26 and Galatians 3:28 border on the mystical, are almost assured to be in the latter. The latter, not being wont to display much in the way of distinctiveness despite their churchian-Objectivist demeanour, seem to have one universal reason for their stance: a refusal to support a nation that supports abortion. While a perfectly legitimate protest point, it also appears to be a financially expedient one, as you will never hear similar indignation voiced against a nation determined to eradicate its white native Christian stock via unrestricted immigration for immigration’s sake. Nor will you hear such sentiments from the patriot camp. They might stand fast for Mom, flag, and apple pie, but they aren’t bigots, for heaven’s sake!!!
This conflict has recently reached Defcon 4 during the recent controversy over NFL demigod Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the national anthem in solidarity with #blacklivesmatter. Below is a portion of a discussion on this matter from Facebook’s Reformed Pub page, which, in typical alienist fashion, manages to bypass Kaepernick’s racial motivations entirely:
Patriot #1: Sitting down for the national anthem will not help America to stop slaughtering their babies. It will only be a slap in the face to the military, to those who died in war and to those who love and appreciate our country. You think it’s right to not stand for the national anthem because of problems in our country? So when has there not been problems? You will be sitting a long time. It’s not about that.
Globalist #1: If it were only about the military, then I doubt we would be having this discussion. But it isn’t. The flag, pledge, and anthem are representative of the country as a whole. This country is increasingly hostile to God’s revelation. At some point our first citizenship (in the kingdom of God) comes into conflict with our second citizenship (America) and cannot be reconciled. If anything, it is sad that the military is fighting and dying for a country that is increasingly unworthy of such sacrifice.
Patriot #2: Ah yes, let’s bring home all the military! Pull them all out and shut it down! Let’s see how much religious freedom you have a year after that, Globalist #1! And give it 2 years and lets see how much freedom you have ANYWHERE else in the world. How about you spend a year helping out at IJM and then we can have a legit conversation.
Globalist #2: I’m not sure which assumption is more false, the notion that America wouldn’t help people in foreign countries if it weren’t for US warmongering, or that America is free…
Patriot #3: the country as it is, is far from its foundations and from what God has called this nation to be. Although every country could salute their flag in a similar way, I see God’s hand of favor and blessing over America. I’m proud to be apart of it [proper spacing – it makes a difference! – CM] and what He has done and what I am believing Him to do in the future. As one who has traveled extensively doing mission trips we Americans forget how good we have it compared to other countries and other oppressive governments and societies. We should be proud of our country and have a sense of patriotism. If that clashes with God’s kingdom, His kingdom always is first. Yet I see how blessed I am to live here and have the freedoms I have. That’s why I will not dishonor the flag or the national anthem and our forming of the first nation to strive to base it’s laws and government on the very words of God.
The litany of cliches and ‘how dare yous’ continues on for over fifty responses and gets progressively more heated, prompting a most inspiring observation from one bystander: ‘We divide over the most foolish things.’ Kinists sit back, smile, and watch the carnage.
Chicago Economic School vs. Austrian Economic School
This second rift is closely related to the first rift, with most patriots Chicagoans and most internationalists Austrians. However, as there is a considerable amount of Austrian support within the patriot camp as well, I have classified it as a second bone of contention. The character of this fight is also markedly different. It rarely spills over into full-blown firefights, but it does manifest itself in finger-wagging and condescending chuckles. It’s a simmering pot with the lid still on, rapidly heating to a boil.
As both camps are proponents of capitalism, it can also be described as a ‘purity vs. pragmatism’ kerfuffle. The pragmatic Chicagoans tend to believe that economic history began on January 20, 1981, at Ronald Reagan’s first inauguration. They will sentimentally, and erroneously, reminisce about the golden age of trickle-down economics, lower taxes, and elimination of government ‘waste’ that defined the Reagan presidency and, suddenly turning hard-headed, will fervently and sternly endorse any and every Republican standard-bearer – except Donald Trump – as the Last Great Hope for Christian Reconstruction and the ushering in of a Solomonic era of plenty. They also have a tendency to curl their lip at any appearance of populist economic anger and denigrate the likes of Ron Paul as ‘isolationist crackpots’. Their standard-bearer, of course, is the one and only David Bahnsen and his put option posse.
The Austrians, naturally, go to the opposite extreme. Von Mises is their Calvin, and Ron Paul is his Rushdoony. Their creed is simple: no privately-owned businesses can possibly be doing wrong when pursuing policies in ‘their best interests’, provided governments are kept entirely out of the equation. Even Mylan’s notoriously sudden 400% increase in the price of its EpiPen can be explained away by Austrians via apologetics, and one of this clique’s devotees, Marcus Pittman, saw fit to repost the linked FB thread on his wall. Their conception of ‘Christian liberty’ comes perilously close to Aleister Crowley’s maxim ‘Do What Thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law’, and was recently lampooned in brilliant fashion in the Babylon Bee.
While there has long been an uneasy truce between these two camps, pressure cracks are beginning to appear, albeit ever so discreetly. In a FB thread from earlier this year Pittman advocated making as much labour as possible as cheap as possible, with comments questioning his wisdom in defending this practice. Likewise, occasional snipes against Bahnsen have also been spotted on Pittman’s wall in regards to his political pragmatism – something that would have been unlikely to occur even a year ago. As economic conditions continue to worsen in the coming year, expect these cracks to develop into fissures and, hopefully, into a sizable earthquake.
And speaking of Jolly Ol’ Saint Pitty leads directly into the third rift:
Hipster vs. Neo-Traditionalist
Or, to be even more precise, hipsters vs. everyone else. The likes of Pittman and McDurmon apparently didn’t get the memo that hipsterism’s unholy combination of social activism and ironic superciliousness has been officially confined to Portland and its environs since 2010. In their pathetic attempts to minister unto that most annoying of demographics, Millennials, they have adopted a ‘lite’ aspect of this movement – denigrating everything Confederate in particular and everything pre-Brown v. Board of Education in general, while lauding video games, sessions on Snapchat, hashtags, lame memes, non-racist craft beers, Reformed Thug Life, and Tim Keller on Kindle as the most efficacious means of ‘reclaiming the culture for Christ’. And tattoos, of course. Tattoos aplenty.
I label their opponents ‘neo’-traditionalists because, as with the neo-conservatives, their veneer of orthodoxy cloaks a core of pure Trotskyite vermilion. ‘Fifth columnist’ describes them perfectly. Among their ranks can be placed Doug Wilson, a man so besotted with the spirit of compromise he makes the Rainbow Confederates look like the first incarnation of the Klan. And a good demonstration of the contempt Calvinist hipsters harbor for neotrads can be found from their responses to an article of Doug Wilson’s condemning Christian tattoos, linked here. These comments in particular stand out in their smarmy antinomianism:
The argument by this author shows a predisposition toward legalism , proof texting and little or real understand of how to exegete scripture and understand the law in light of the gospel .
He uses circular reasoning and logical fallacies galore.
It’s spiritual abuse dressed up as pastoral advice .
I know a polished turd when I saw one and thus what I have seen here.
The passage that that verse from also says not to trim the sides of your hair , I wonder what the Author hair style is because if it’s not Jewish he’s broken the law.
Ah, but neotrads won’t abide pesky kids trampling on their lawns, and they won’t abide having their pretenses of conservatism laughed at, either! Pittman and Jeff Durbin’s pet project, Apologia Radio, has come under fire for posting vids of ebullient and x-treme wannabe theologians getting inked up on studio property and for promoting scriptural-themed ‘pub crawls’. Noted Old Guy Tim Hurd took umbrage with these practices, as reported here:
It’s nice to know the story behind the pub meet up. Durbin didn’t drink any beer, the bar owner is a committed Christian, nobody got drunk, apologia is against drunkenness and on and on. However, none of that addresses the question is it wise to raise funds via beer drinking?
It’s also nice to know the tattoo artist is a devoted Christian, the invite list was short, Pitman was ignorant til the tattoo artist busted out his equipment and nobody was drinking beer but that was never the concern being voiced. Pitman made a video stating the church is raising funds via tattoos, proclaimed how “It’s Pretty Cool” titled the video provocatively “Apologia Studios Tattoo Parlor?!” and posted it publicly to everyone save those that are blocked by him on Facebook. (Note. Durbin mistakenly has stated that the video was shared only with Marcus “friends” on Facebook implying he was “being sensitive to any weaker brothers” however this is false. The video is still posted to be viewed by Marcus’s thousands of FB friends, his 900+ followers and anyone who is not blocked by him. It’s posted as public.)
All great stuff but it doesn’t address the question is it wise to raise funds this way?
All this is especially amusing since, as the ironic tone of the above statements suggests, Hurd himself is a wannabe hipster who is fond of posting blue-tinged avatars of himself on his FB page in a failed attempt to appear ‘avant-garde’. No matter, though: Pittman’s crew responded with hostile cries of ‘Loser!’, ‘Legalist!’, ‘You’re a poor representation of the Church!’, ‘Fuddy-Duddy!’, etc.
More than any other, this strife is a generational one, and thus can only worsen as time progresses and the moral fabric of the neo-Church inevitably decays. Stay tuned!
Feminist vs. Patriarchalist
Like conflict #2, this one is still in its infancy, but it has the potential to become substantially more potent. In my Concerned Presbyterians piece I made mention of the multitude of women – there were certainly no gentleladies among them – who showed up for no discernible reason other than to hector and cackle our ‘nastiness’ and, in general, to demonstrate why the Old Right was firmly in the philosophical ‘nature’ camp rather than ‘nurture’. Well, it turns out this wasn’t just a fiery response akin to a pioneer matriarch grabbing her shotgun to protect the homestead from varmints and bandits. No, this is how they interact with others always, including those who are on their side. Especially with those men on their side who have been thoroughly emasculated.
Feminists of a Reformed bent don’t have to justify their two-masters theology, because there are more than sufficient radical egalitarians like Bojidar Marinov to do it for them. This quote of his was posted on the wall of a notorious Reformed feminist, one Jerri Lynn Ward:
But it is not true that the family must be executively ruled in everything by the father and that he is the priest or the “representative” of everyone in the family before God. The wife – by the very nature of her position as a wife – has her own independent area of executive duties in the family that shouldn’t be invaded by her husband. She is to rule the home, while the husband’s job is to take dominion outside the home. By shifting the dominion of man from outside the home to inside the home, Patriarchy actually makes men take duties which are essentially female duties in the family. (That’s why I often say that feminism is women who desperately want to be men, and patriarchy fights it by producing men who desperately want to be women.) The center of the problem here is the belief that the wife’s authority in the family is delegated to her by her husband. This is BS. A wife has her own authority, whether her husband delegates it to her or not. A woman who has a husband but has no inherent authority in his home is called “concubine,” not wife.
Such an anti-biblical co-regency doctrine resounds to the feminist mind like blood in the water resounds to the shark. They are enabled in their delusion by the modern Church’s lump of sissified men too incompetent to do repairs or maintenance around their own home and too dweebish to object when the significant other decides it’s time to start teaching the homeschooled children about the precepts of Feng Shui. And guess what, guys? Due to the nature of social media, all men get to experience her wrath, camouflaged as ‘spunk’ to fool all those who believed The Mary Tyler Moore Show was a documentary.
As these womyn make a show out of holding fast to the Scriptures and are not pro-abortion (yet), confrontations between them and vocal anti-feminists have been rare to date. Yet only a fool could fail to detect the resentment percolating within the male alienist community as a whole. One can only hold one’s tongue for so long before the gag reflex starts to kick in.
Ego vs. Ego vs. Ego vs. …
Okay, I take back what I said regarding strife #1 – this is far and away the most common rift one will come across in the alienist camp, because it is continual. The fact is: most of alienism’s leading lights are concerned only with their own pathetic prestige. Can you imagine any of these poltroons actually lifting a finger to assist a Christian brother or sister in great need? I sure can’t. Their time is far too valuable to be wasted on such piffle. McDurmon is busy promoting the autumn release of his magisterial 50-volume series on Christian aesthetics in Africa and Asia, and looking down his nose at those who don’t have a loaded father-in-law on hand to fund such worthy endeavours. Pittman is busy traipsing off to Hawaii to convince imaginary investors to finance his vape habit so he can continue to be the Don Imus of Reformed cyberspace. Bahnsen the Lesser is busy promoting his upcoming 5-minute segment with Charles Payne on Fox Business this Thursday at 3 PM Eastern (12 noon Pacific). Marinov is busy sending lists of people he’s blocked to the Comintern for filing.
This is not a disciplined army, folks. It’s a collection of glory-seekers who have almost as much contempt for each other as they do for us. Sure, they might pose for pictures together with plastic smiles and half-hearted one-armed bro hugs at various ReformCon and American Vision forums, but only the uninitiated will be fooled by such desperate displays of faux solidarity. A house divided against itself cannot and will not stand, and as alienism’s foundation is built upon the shifting sands of egalitarianism, their entire obelisk is canting at a dangerous angle. They’re just too dense to realize it yet.
What, then, is our job? To get out of the way when they inevitably go after each other’s throats. And to keep them in a high state of tension, thus ensuring that their innate weakness and defects of character remain on view for all to see, resulting in the increased possibility of future contentions among them coming to fruition.
To God be the victory, blessed be He forever and ever. Amen.