I’m not saying it’s right or it’s wrong
• Paul Campos writes: “It should be considered journalistic malpractice to use the term ‘Christian nationalism’ and not to preface it with the adjective ‘white’.
This is certainly true here in America, where Christian nationalism in one form or another is older than the nation itself. And each of these forms of American Christian nationalism — from Bradford to Barton — has involved explicit white nationalism. It has always been so, ever since good Christian Puritans in Massachusetts devoutly passed Metacomet’s severed head on their way to church (for 20 years).
Scratch away any American form of Christian nationalism and you’ll find white nationalism. And you won’t have to scratch very hard.
Campos wrote this at the end of a profile of longtime neo-Confederate John Bircher Michael Peroutka, who just won the Republican nomination as the GOP nominee for Maryland state attorney general.
• In 1911, President Teddy Roosevelt sent a long letter to Reverend Franklin Smith, decrying Smith’s advocacy for family planning. Roosevelt wasted a lot of ink on this letter, considering that his entire argument could easily have been summed up in 14 words:
“To advocate keeping families artificially small, with its inevitable processions of prenatal infanticide, abortion, with its complacency, neglect of duty and weakening of character, is just as immoral as advocating theft or prostitution. , and is even more harmful in its madness, from the point of view of the ultimate welfare of the race and the nation. … You say your ministry is among the wealthy; that is, among the well-to-do and upper-class workers. I assume you consider these people to be desirable elements in the state. Don’t you see that if they have an insufficient number of children, then the increase must come from the less desirable classes?
Roosevelt was also concerned about how progressive religious journalism was covering up its fear of fewer white children being born, complaining, “To me, the most horrible part of this movement is finding theoretically religious newspapers like the Independent containing articles of women and clergymen, apologizing and advocating a theory of conduct which, if adopted, would mean the rapid collapse of this republic and of Western civilization. The action of the Independent in this affair was a scandalous offense against good morals, and a cause of shame to men of true religious feeling.
It’s by Rick Pidcock World Baptist News article, “There is a straight line between eugenics, ‘biblical family values’, white supremacy and the anti-abortion movement.”
And that’s not even the ugliest part of the story that Pidcock is tracing. It’s probably the excerpts he quotes from Margaret Farley’s recent discussion on “The Eugenic Roots of Evangelical Family Values”. Here’s a longer piece of that piece, with Farley’s original links included:
A positive eugenicist who particularly shaped religious conservatives was Californian Paul Popenoe, a central figure in my recent book, The Unfit Heiress: The Tragic Life and Scandalous Sterilization of Ann Cooper Hewitt. Popenoe had been one of the most prolific advocates of segregation and forced sterilization of people whom he considered “waste of humanity”, even inspiring the leaders of the Third Reich before it was time to rebranding itself as a champion of patriarchal and procreative marriage. . In 1930, Popenoe, an atheist, opened the American Institute of Family Relations (AIFR) in Los Angeles to improve marital harmony and remove what he thought were barriers to white reproduction, such as rape, masturbation, pornography, female frigidity and feminism. desires. Over the next few decades, Popenoe counseled white couples on the importance of strict gender norms and same-sex marriage, training psychologists, clergy (many Baptists and Mormons) and leaders of youth groups – his new allies in the racial improvement project – to do the same. According to Hilde Løvdal Stephens, author of Family Matters: James Dobson and Focus on the Family Crusade for the Christian Homehe instructed advisers to use “heredity” and “interpersonal compatibility” as race codes, particularly when his views on race began to fall out of fashion.
Popenoe encouraged women to make themselves sexy for their husbands, let domestic violence slide, and be mindful of their man’s ego and sexual needs. Knowing that some women were sexually reluctant, he hired Dr. Arnold Kegel to develop a treatment. (“Kegels” were born.) Popenoe has explored methods to suppress homosexual desire, such as electroconvulsive therapy, though it’s unclear if his institute has ever used this technology. The man nicknamed “Mr. Marriage” also paid considerable attention to the temperament of clients. One of his fellow first-generation eugenicists, Roswell Johnson, encouraged these efforts. Johnson, who had previously designed intelligence tests to identify and weed out the “feeble-minded”, developed a comprehensive personality test to assess compatibility, an adaptation of which is commonly used by Christian marriage experts today.
You thought “purity culture” was just about keeping your virginity for marriage? It was born and remains deeply tied to white supremacist “securing existence”.
Pidcock revisits the baby-bust panic that ensued once TPTB realized just how small Gen X was compared to their predecessors. The record-breaking baby boom among millennials hasn’t calmed those fears any more than it has stopped people from claiming that Social Security is going to go “bankrupt.” Hence the current wave of advocacy for reproducing our path to unchallenged white supremacy (something Pidcock hears in pro-natalist cheerleaders now coming from Kevin DeYoung, John MacArthur and others).
Roe vs. Wade left. Buck vs. Bell is making a comeback. After all, it is, as Pidcock shows us, “deeply rooted in the history and traditions of the United States.”
• On the topic of white Christian eugenics, I came across the following while reading about the clash between Ida B. Wells and the Women’s Christian Temperance Union. It is Frances Willard, president of the WCTU, in an interview with the New York newspaper The Voice in 1890: “The colored race is multiplying like the locusts of Egypt. The grog shop is his center of power. The security of women, of children, of the home, is threatened in a thousand places at this time, so that men dare not go beyond the sight of their own roof tree.
It sure sounds like that good white Christian lady who wanted to eliminate more than alcohol.
Incidentally, the link above leads to an exhibit at the Frances Willard House Museum examining her racist statements and her initial reluctance to speak out against the lynching. It’s a good antidote to the panic of the white right of the day about Monticello: “In trying to build a truly national organization only two decades after the Civil War, Willard compromised with the racism of white women. How and why this happened can help us understand the larger history of racism in American women’s movements – and American history in general.
• CBN, Bless Their Hearts, titled this piece “Witches, Satanists, and Wizards: Meet the Pastors Who Boldly Shared the Gospel for a Decade in Salem, Mass.”
Translated from kayfabe, this should read “White Evangelical Artists Answer Casting Call for Tourism Industry Fueling Local Economy”. It seems to have been a win-win for church planters, who relied on the town’s new tradition’s promotional acumen to cash in on its infamous history. They pledged as they went along, among other things, to move in next door to the “official witch” of Salem.
Sometimes I miss the theater.
• The title of this article comes from “Independence Day” by Martina McBride. It may seem like I’m a few weeks late in posting this song, but I think a song about realizing that the only way to protect your daughter’s life is to burn it all down is just about right on time . Here’s McBride singing with Pat Benatar: