We need a new religion, 4

Spandrell

We need a new religion. We sorely need one. And we will likely get one. But we might not like how it turns out.

In 200 AD, the Roman Empire was the largest, richest and most powerful empire on Earth. Roman civilization extended from Britain to Mesopotamia. Vast trade networks allowed for large and advanced industries that provided a very high standard of living, far above anything in the past. Rome was so great it seemed it would last forever.

Then a couple of substandard emperors, a military setback and a mutiny suddenly saw the Empire fracture into 3 parts, hundreds of thousands of barbarians entering the borders, plundering and murdering as they pleased. It took 50 whole years until Aurelian rebuilt the army, expelled the barbarians, and reunified the realm. But it was never the same. Too many people had died. Cities now had to build high walls to defend themselves, trade routes had been destroyed, the whole administrative apparatus had to be rebuilt from scratch.

All that was taken care of, especially by Docletian, who was very much interested in how to run a government. But still, as much as Roman emperors reformed the army and the administration, the virtue of the empire, the real power of Rome, the roman people, that was over. Any Roman of learning knew that. And they all wanted to do something to get it back. To fix Rome, to bring it back to its golden era. Romans used to be virtuous, strong, hard-working, just men. Not anymore. The Romans of the late empire were a fickle bunch, interested in frivolous sex, in sodomy, in spectator sports. We have almost no literary works from the late Empire; the Romans appeared to be uninterested in learning. Nor they cared to breed and form families. The whole society was a wreck.

The few virtuous Romans who noticed that must have wanted to fix this desperately, to use the power of the state to bring the Romans back to their virtuous, frugal and wise past, when men fought for their country, cared to learn about the mysteries of human existence, and took care of their wives and children. But none of those efforts worked.

What happened? A weird cult from the obscure province of Judaea, where people worshipped some countryside carpenter son of an old man with a teenager, who apparently got pregnant without having sex. Then the man started to preach about loving your enemies, rescued whores from stoning, made wine from water, told the poor that after death they'd lord over the rich; and other absurd stuff. The guy was justly executed by the Roman governor as an agitator but his followers believe he then came back to life and ascended to heaven with his mother.

The cult grew by preaching to women, to the poor, to slaves, to all manner of disaffected people. They formed local communities where they read this weird compendium of miracles of this Jewish lord of them. The Roman authorities killed some of them ever now and then but the guys appeared to like it! They called the dead "martyrs", and some of them appeared to actively seek martyrdom, as they believe it would pay off with privileges after dead. Bunch of provincial weirdos. Even weirder than the Jews they splintered from. That the Empire has declined to such an extent has much to do with this and other weird sects who are fooling the commoners, and even some women of good families! Scandalous.

No offense intended, early Christianity was in many ways a superior lifestyle compared to mainstream Roman life, which had plenty of weird stuff in it. But to any good old Roman patrician, the growth of Christianity, Manicheism and other assorted sects must have looked incredibly weird and threatening. As much as the Empire needed reform, nobody desired this kind of reform. To replace the classics of Greece and Rome with the made up history of some desert goat herders, to give rights to women and slaves, to encourage death and meekness instead of the classical warrior ethos going back for millennia. This is madness.Rome has to wake up. We can't let this happen.

But it happened. Rome never woke up. Classical civilization kept on with its decline, and eventually Constantine, a pragmatic man who just wanted a stable empire that obeyed his commands, made Christianity into the state religion. It replaced Roman civilization, little by little. Half the Empire died on the process, by the way. The invaders became Christians too, but never Romans.

The Romans of its golden age often said that the secret of Roman success was its religio, by which they mean their piousness, how their discipline was so tight they followed the old religious practices of paganism to the letter, no matter how useless they might have seemed. Worried Romans of the late empire must have thought all the time that Rome needed its religion back. They never got it back. They got a new religion. A pretty horrible one, for anyone who appreciated old Classical civilization. But a religion they got, and it wasn't that bad. Most of the Western empire still speaks Latin to this day. The Eastern half even kept calling himself the Roman Empire for a thousand years.

You might have noticed the parallels with our situation. We want to go back to the old days when Europeans were virtuous, frugal and strong. That's not going to work. It never works. I say we need a new religion. I say we'll get a new religion, because nature abhors a vacuum, and a vacuum is what we have right now. But the new religion we end up getting may not be nothing we like. It might very well something horrifying, something which denies all the values we hold dear. But as horrifying as it may be, it may end up winning.

Christianity had to be horrifying for a Roman patrician. But the Christians had children. They had stable families. They didn't do infanticide, did less drugs, less drinking, less sodomy, less idle watching chariot races or gladiator matches. The messianic wannabe Jews were a bunch of meek underclass pussies who hadn't read their Homer. But they won. And by winning, they destroyed Roman civilization. But they also tamed the Germans, and so a new hybrid civilization was born in Europe. It was poor, dark, brutish and nasty compared to the golden days of the Pax Romanica.

But at least the Roman peoples physically survived, and eventually developed a new civilization which was the most advance the world has ever seen. If Diocletian, Julian and the good old Romans had succeeded in crushing Christianity, pagan Romans would have probably continued in their hedonist ways, choosing drink and fun over reproducing; eventually the Huns would have come and destroyed the whole Empire, reducing half the land to pasture and physically replacing the Roman people. Even if by some miracle, the Roman empire had succeeded in integrating the Germans and the Huns into Romanitas, and they all started killing their infants while they devoted themselves to sodomy and gladiatorial matches; in a couple of decades some other northern tribe would have raced to the border and kill them all. It happened in China all the time.

You have probably guessed where I'm going. I won't repeat myself. Europe now is in decline and all Europeans of good faith are trying to find a solution. We are being invaded by Islam, and nobody likes it. But the problem we have is not Islam. Is not Islamism. As bad as it is; which is horrible indeed. But ideas come and go. What doesn't come and go is the people. The gene pool. The problem we have is not Islam, it's foreigners. Arabs, South Asians, Africans, etc.. Most happen to be Muslim, many are not. The problem is not their ideas, as bad as they are. The problem is HBD. They're dumb. They're impulsive. They have different genes, going back tens of thousands of years.

Even if we could fix their culture, their family structure, the clannishness; which we can't. It still wouldn't matter. You could convert them all to Lefebvrism tomorrow and they would still destroy European civilization, and physically replace European people, who are busy watching football, binge drinking and wasting their youth studying socialist history.

But you can't say that. One can't object to the immigration of foreigners into Europe and North America on genetic grounds. I can't object to Arabs being dumb; because there's plenty of Europeans who are just as dumb, and they don't appreciate that we discuss population policy in terms of intelligence or other personality traits. Any rational, utilitarian discussion of population policy is a complete dead end because there is no workable Schelling point for proposing eugenics in a democratic society. It benefits no one. For one, we don't know that much about the genetics of behavior. Second, meritocracy is an excellent Schelling point. It's completely fallacious, but it works. The elite can justify their privilege because they have earned it, they have "merit", not just genetic luck. And the dumb can consolate themselves that there's nothing physically wrong with them; it's just tough luck, which could change any day. All human societies, every single one, believe that human behavior and performance depends on proper education. Of course they do.

And so we are left without sellable arguments against the invasion of Europe by fertile foreigners with a set of innate traits which make modern civilization impossible. We are left without arguments against Europe developing the demographic profile of Sudan, which implies the living standards of Sudan. So if we can't use this argument, what can we do? We can adopt a new religion. It doesn't matter which. As long as it ensures the physical reproduction of European peoples. As of now, Islam is a fix, if a bad fix. I hope we find a different one.

I have a reputation as a gloomy pessimist, but there's a different way of looking at this. Think of this post as a way of prodding you into action. We better come up with something damn fast, because there are only two alternatives. White Islam, or the physical disappearance of the European peoples.

Jefferson

I think you may be undervaluing the structural differences between religions. There are no iron laws, but it's tricky to enforce a civilization building rule against a written law contradicting it. Islam really doesn't even make an effort to restrict bandit lifestyles; polygamy and the diminished primacy of agriculture give cover to disorganized violence. I'm no expert, but Islamic history is a bit more prehistoric in tenor than Christian history (or even what I know of eastern history). Seeing as how much of the Ottoman blood was Greek, but how much more pillaging, raping, and ethnic cleansing the Ottomans partook of makes me somewhat anxious regarding an Islamic future. I know I'm biased, but a restoration to something like Karaite Judaism might be a better fit for the West. At least it keeps half the Christian Bible without being vulnerable to a "meekness" status spiral.

Spandrell
Replying to:
Jefferson

I'm not saying it would be nice. I'm admitting it's likely to be disastrous. But so was Christianity for Rome. What we would like, what we think is preferrable has no relation to what is likely to happen given present trends. Incidentally the Ottomans did no cleansing. It was the beyliks between the Seljuq and the Ottomans who cleansed Anatolia of Christianity. The Ottomans run an organized empire and were more interested in tax collection than in messing with the local populations. I wrote about this before: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/where-did-all-the-christians-go/

Rollory

Specifically how is Islam a fix? I don't find it particularly credible that large numbers of whites would start proclaiming that there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet; nor do I find it credible that if they did, it would counteract the problem of foreigners physically present; nor do I find it credible that if both these were resolved, a white Islam would be able to maintain a civilization. To start with, Islam holds that there is no such thing as cause and effect; that all things are the will of omnipotent and omniscient Allah and happen only because he wills it. You can't derive rationality and the experimental method from that. If I was going to make any predictions, I'd point more in the direction of a Warhammer 40K style worldview, with the God-Emperor of Mankind being prophesied to show up one day once we build ourselves up to be worthy of him, and Chaos being an absolute and never-negotiable threat to every human soul. It's a worldview that isn't incompatible with Christianity, and does appeal to self-described leftists (probably because they can tell themselves it's just appreciation of good fiction). But I'm a nerd.

Jefferson
Replying to:
Spandrell

Great reply. I'm being mauled by a toddler, so I may have missed something, but I think this confirms the issue. As usual, I don't disagree with you, but am trying to add something potentially useful to the discussion. Christianity (and the Judaism it sprang from) has a strong mimetic tie to agriculture, which requires barbarian allies to adopt a settled lifestyle. Practically, this is the difference between the Scotch-Irish and the Chechens (the former had an incentive to become settled, the latter are running around the ME cutting off heads). Islam never asked anything of its barbarians, but to direct their barbarism away from the Caliph. The shit storm in the Muslim world right now is a flaw in their religion. Christianity ate Rome, but had a solid run as its successor. Islam's flaws are mimetic time bombs; if the west is going to exist as a civilization it better avoid Islam, or pass through it quickly.

Laguna Beach Fogey

Islam isn't new to Europeans. On the contrary, we've had a taste and found it wanting time and again. Islam is not growing in Europe through some miraculous organic fashion, but through the deliberate measures of collaborationist governments. It's bogus and contrived. Islam is not even a proper religion! More of a political or military doctrine, and as a vehicle for Arab supremacy. As the European Resistance grows and we experience the first skirmishes of the inevitable European civil war or race war, we will see various European alternatives develop and take hold. These alternatives will be decidedly non-liberal. Some will originate in Eastern Europe and Russia.

Karl

Any European who wants to help in our struggle for survival is looking for a Schelling point which might work. Any old religion requires people to breed. Otherwise the religion wouldn't have survived long enough to become an old religion. So in principle any old religion might work as a Schelling point. Traditional Christianity might be a useful Schelling point. The problem is modern Europeans don't believe in God anymore. That makes Christianity a hard sell. At first glance, it would also make Islam a hard sell. Modern Europeans don't believe in any god. Religious faith won't cause many conversions. Still Islam is a Schelling point. It rejects progressivism and the present state of our culture entirely. I also get the impression that it is less about belief than other religions. Pretending and following its numerous religious laws should suffice. These religious laws are enforced (by as much force as neccessary) and you get the community you signed up for. This community will include women having children. To put it bluntly: The traditional Christian would want his woman to be Christian. The Muslim might nor care what she believes and be content with her submission to the laws of Islam. As far as I understand, conversion to Islam does not require belief, it requires submission to a set of immutable laws. That might be appealing even to an atheist.

We need a new religion, 4 | Reaction Times

[] Source: Bloody Shovel []

Jack

Islam yes, but not e.g Mormonism? A religion that literally kills your literal brain cells (when pregnant women fast on Ramadan) and metaphorically kills your metaphorical brain cells (self explanatory) is the alternative to weird but functional cults? How so? Islam isn't the new Christianity. Islam is the new Communism: "the old world shall be destroyed" sings the Internationale; while ISIS is literally destroying all the antiquities, all of history, in the ME - and Wahhabism will do just that in Europe. There can be no revival under Islam, only post-Islam, if that; Islam doesn't preserve traditions and peoples, but erases them, replaces them with itself. You want genetic continuation? Where is the genetic continuation of all those Whites who joined Islam? Like the Arabs before them, Islamic Whites marry dark-skinned non-Whites, or at best marry their cousins. Genetic continuation! Seriously, Spandrell?

Frog Do
Chris B

Well, your claim here is that religion is over and above power. It isn't. Look at what happened to Christianity. It was power which promoted heresy, and it was power which made aspects of christianity inapplicable via law.

R7 Rocket

Elon Musk is The One True and Rightly Guided Caliph.

infowarrior1

''and ascended to heaven with his mother.'' Where is the evidence the early Christian believed that? Other than unfounded made up story it is not found in Scripture.

Howard J. Harrison

Does your article today build upon or relate to your article of Jan. 29, 2012, "On Mystics"? Then, you implied that your ontology was at least partly Kantian. That was years ago. (Do HTML links work in these comments? Let's try: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/on-mystics/.) It's too bad that Kant, the grand old man, cannot read and comment on your article today. We'd want to get him and Plato in here, and let them have it out.

Lex

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin created it, half a century ago. Read his books. Unfortunately the Vatican wasn't interested. As to encouraging Whites to make children, that's a whole other matter. I think the problem here is essentially economic and technological not religious. You used to make kids to work your land and feed you in old age or to strengthen your private army if you were a lord. Now what is the reason?

Spandrell
Replying to:
Rollory

They breed. I don't know about the Warhammer neds. But Muslims breed.

Spandrell
Replying to:
Jack

I'm not saying I like it. But they're here, they breed, and the government likes them. They have the conditions to spread. Mormonism doesn't. As of present Europeans are not having children. If Islam gets them breeding it's the best alternative. Of course if they all marry Arabs that is a problem, but I don't see why they would if enough numbers convert.

Spandrell
Replying to:
Lex

I've wrote plenty about that, an of course I agree we have a problem with incentives. But Muslims seem to have fewer problems with that. They're all firmly above replacement. Even Iran is at 1.8 after decades of state promotion of abortion and small families. The prophet doesn't need to be alive to worship him. St. Paul never met Jesus.

Spandrell
Replying to:
Chris B

Christianity grew for centuries even though the Roman state didn't like them and threw them to the lion pit to feed the animals at regular intervals.

Spandrell
Replying to:
R7 Rocket

Maybe he raises an army to march on Washington if he's denied further subsidies to prop up Tesla.

Rollory
Replying to:
Spandrell

So do Africans. They worship trees and rocks and spirits that steal their penises. I wouldn't recommend that as a path for anybody though.