Faith, Moral Responsibility and Identity Politics

On my YouTube channel and in general people often ask me “How can you be so committed to Christianity and faith in general when you hold such bigoted views.” Putting aside the obvious pejorative for the moment, it is perhaps ironic that my so-called bigoted views including race realism, a rejection of multiculturalism, hostility to immigration etc. come from my faith, and in fact I strongly rejected many aspects of this prior to my conversion.

The motto of my life ever since I was about eight years old has always been “truth above all,” that is that truth always comes first, before emotions, before political expediency and before peer pressure. And one day when I was listening to Dennis Prager he said something that really struck me, and it almost was like a spiritual revelation. He stated that “being a good person means you have to fight your feelings” or in other words, being a good person means you have to divorce how you personally feel about something from the moral weighing of an action, and that this is necessary to become a whole person and to be an adult.

In other words my formulation as such; “becoming an adult means accepting the principle of moral responsibility. Moral responsibility means attempting to do the right thing regardless of your feelings and personal biases.” It was as he said that that I realized that it was something I had known all along, and that knowing that all long it meant I had never been a liberal, not truly. Because that’s ultimately what modern leftism is – it’s the subjugation of everything to low-level emotionalism and the abandonment of any sort of moral responsibility.

Let’s go into this a bit. Perhaps the ultimate example of this is what the civil rights movement and desegregation did to the black family, more or less flipping illegitimacy rates from about 20% to 25% to about 80% to 85%, and having a similar proportion of children growing up without father figures. By any objective measure desegregation was a complete disaster for the black community and left them a burned out husk utterly lacking in purpose or self-respect. Yet it is held up as one of the great successes in human history for the simple reason that it makes leftists feel good about themselves.

This is ultimately why one must separate emotionalism from the concept of moral responsibility, inserting emotionalism to into it very often leads to something that is not compassion at all but is an extreme form of narcissism in which the good of others is entirely subjugated to a desire to appear righteous and self promote. The commonly used term to describe this is “status signalling,” which is essentially all that modern leftism is, rather than have anything to do with compassion or real concern for other people, it is in essence malignant narcissism which recklessly seeks to utterly destroy and rebuild society simply so that the leftist status signal and feel self fulfilled.

It always reminds me of a quote from Matthew:

And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.

At any rate, I used to be like that back when I was a mainstream conservative because, in essence, mainstream conservatives are identical to the left, but in a sense even more so, as the left is to some degree conscious that what they are advocating is bullshit, the center-right conservative fully believes all of his rhetoric.

One may wonder where I’m going with all of this? In essence what I’m saying is this realization that I had to base my moral views on how society should function not on what made me feel good or what was socially acceptable, but upon what was in actuality good for people raised doubts about a lot of things that I had taken for granted.

I have always been a scholar of history, indeed my bachelor’s degree’s in political science with a specialization in comparative politics and international relations, so I’m well acquainted with the histories of many different peoples and cultures, ironically enough far more so than virtually any leftist I’ve ever met (but that is neither here nor there). My point is upon reading a great deal of history a reoccurring theme that I always noticed is multiculturalism, and even more so, multiracialism always ends in disaster.

It seemingly inevitably results in ethnic cleansing, civil war, some form of diversity being forced on the people and general societal decay and collapse. The examples of this are numerous throughout history the most notable probably being the Roman Empire which found itself incapable of dealing with a large influx of people from a completely different culture than itself, and was incapable of reconciling this fundamental change in its identity.

This can also be seen in the near constant chaos that India has gone through, particularly since the arrival of Islam when Tamerlane showed up and decided that he would exterminate Hinduism once and for all, wars raged across the continent for hundreds of years following Islam’s appearance, and the only times there were peace were when the Mughals diluted their own doctrine and tried to impose some syncretic religion on the people as well as multiculturalism, which was widely rejected and led to their decline and eventual civil war.

Probably the most brutal example of the failures of multiethnic and multicultural societies was the Ottoman Empire, under which when the Ottomans realized that they could no longer contain the desire for independence of those people said subjugated, they decided to vote with bullets instead of ballots and exterminate the minorities contained within Turkey. Then again this had been a long term issue within Turkey as even for the beginning of the Empire they had resorted to kidnapping the children of ethnic minorities, forcing Turkish culture and Turkish religion on them, and then sending them back to wipe out their parents.

I could go into numerous other examples such as the collapse of the Soviet Union, but you get the general idea. My point is ultimately no one likes multiculturalism and no one likes multiethnic societies, in fact they despise them and it virtually always leads to said multinational country breaking up into its composite parts, generally speaking, with great loss of life and attempts to alter the future boundaries throughout the cleansing.

Thus I was faced with a moral choice, I could except this obvious historical fact and try to figure out ways of dealing with it, or I could continue to reject it and stay loyal to the values I was raised on and to what felt good. Because it feels so good to be tolerant and to promote diversity, indeed the whole thing exists for the sole purpose of signalling and stroking one’s own ego.

This was further complicated as I began to read stuff on genetics and race realism which to me seemed utterly unarguable, especially given the historical progress of Africa versus the rest of the world. It seems pretty obvious that people have it in a genetic nature that persists regardless of their environment, thus if you were to take the Japanese, strip them of culture, and put them somewhere else I’m quite confident they would develop something that is readily recognizable to an East-Asian as it is in their nature.

This culminated when I went to Los Angeles and I saw the utterly wretched and pathetic way that Blacks lived. I realize that decades of attempting to integrate them, of attempting to give them welfare and advance them had been an utter failure and had left them prisoners in someone else’s dream as Obama would put it.

Similarly I looked at the way natives were treated in my country and how the center-right attempts to force their integration, and I came to the conclusion that to some extent the utterly wretched way they live stems from the fact that they’re forced to be a part of a culture and live in a society dominated by a different race, something that was not them and bore no marks of them. No wonder they are so alienated and so incapable of the most basic form of personal responsibility.

I know how they feel as where I have grown up is gradually being ethnically cleansed of white people, and as they are removed the government feels it necessary to pass more and more onerous diversity ordinances, and make it more and more difficult for my people to find work or raise families. In essence, to live in Toronto and to be white is to be a stranger, it is to live in a globalist dream and to a large extent I understand how Blacks and natives feel, to be ruled by someone who is not your people and to be part of a culture that you are not biologically conditioned to be a part of.

Thus I realized the only compassionate thing is to end multiculturalism and multiracialism, for us all to go our separate ways and try to leave each other alone, because ultimately, homogenous societies make people happy, they promote community togetherness and higher levels of social trust. They make it easier for people to have a purpose in life and for people to support one another. The century long experiment that the British and Spanish irresponsibly carried out to me at least has failed and has resulted in societies utterly lacking in purpose, and those societies that do have a purpose like America have minorities contained within them that can never be integrated nor should they be.

Thus I am against race mixing, against multiracial societies and against multiculturalism, not because of necessarily at least hatred of other people’s but because I know full well what the consequences will be for all involved parties, and so ironically enough, I came to my bigoted views by converting to Catholicism in stark contrast to what happens to most people who undergo a religious experience. Perhaps this sounds strange, but I believe that sometimes what people need and what makes people feel good are not the same thing. I hope that made sense.


Hey I am Argent Templar some randy in my early to mid 20's from Ontario, Canada. I am a recent convert to Catholicism (2014) of the conserva-trad variety. My politics can be described as Far Right. I cover a wide range of topics including video games, movies, politics, history, philosophy and religion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s