Which Way Catholic Man?

Matthew Schmitz has a new article in First Things bellyaching about how China is tyrannical for violating the human rights of Muslims in Xinjiang.

First Things:

“In 2018, Archbishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, said in an interview: “Right now, those who are best implementing the social doctrine of the Church are the Chinese.”

He contrasted China with the more liberal America. “Liberal thought has dismissed the concept of the common good,” he said. “It does not even want to take it into account, it states that it is an empty idea, without any benefits. On the contrary, the Chinese, no, they propose work and the common good.”

Sanchez Sorondo may want to reconsider these statements. Last week, the New York Times revealed new details about the Chinese state’s mass internment of Uighur Muslims in the western province of Xinjiang. Over the last three years, an estimated one million people have been detained in prison camps, where they are subjected to “reeducation” and urged to abjure Islam. …

As people turn away from liberalism, it is important that they do not turn to ideologies that share with liberalism a fundamental mistake. If they do, Catholics must state clearly that the common good is not a euphemism for tyranny, and oppression is not a synonym for order. Counter to what Sanchez Sorondo seems to believe, neither China nor America is a model society.”

Xinjiang and Hong Kong are the least of our concerns.

Matthew Schmitz sees China as tyrannical. I haven’t studied the Chinese model closely enough to have a firm opinion about it. I am far less interested in what China is doing with Muslims in Xinjiang or liberals in Hong Kong though than in the fact that Europe is currently being overwhelmed by them and our liberal elite has thrown open the gates to the barbarians. What kind of Catholic worries about Muslims in Xinjiang while Rome is being lost?

China is poised to be become the dominant superpower in the world.

Over the course of the next 30 years, the Western liberal elite will confront a wealthy, illiberal authoritarian superpower of over a billion Chinese which is all but guaranteed to surpass the declining West. At the same time, it will simultaneously have to fight off us. We don’t have to agree with every aspect of China’s domestic politics to recognize that this is going to be geopolitically advantageous. Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place.

I’m not going to give the Chinese any grief about Xinjiang or Hong Kong and “tyranny” or “authoritarianism” because when we take power in the West the first thing that we are going to do after dismantling the liberal order is to start sending all of these immigrants back home. We don’t give a shit about Hong Kong, Taiwan, Xinjiang or the South China Sea either.

While I have no doubt there are flaws in the Chinese model, I also have no doubt that China will still be Chinese and vastly wealthier and technologically more sophisticated in 2120. I can’t say the same about Europe or North America because of liberalism.

Interestingly enough, Matthew Schmitz has another article up this afternoon in the Catholic Herald in which he attacks Nick Fuentes and the Groypers as evil:

Catholic Herald:

“Despite what so many well-meaning people believe, an ever more radical insistence on freedom will not defeat white nationalists. For many years, conservatives – once the party of censorship and discretion, as men such as Irving Kristol well understood – have revelled in provocation (“triggering libs”), disrupting “safe spaces,” and advancing an absolute idea of free speech. This shift in emphasis has reflected broader changes in our legal culture. Against longstanding precedent, the First Amendment is now widely seen as a licence for all manner of obscenity. …

In order to defeat the white nationalists and anti-Semites, conservatives must become less liberal. Only a conservatism that praises restraint and discretion will have weapons to fight those who are “just asking questions” about the Holocaust. Only a conservatism that abjures “viewpoint neutrality” will be able to side with truth against lies.

Conservatives must be ready to say that the freedom to host drag queen story hour is not a blessing of liberty. At the same time, they must be able to say loud and clear that they oppose white nationalists and anti-Semites, especially ones that wrap themselves in Christian garb. Our civilisational inheritance is spiritual, not racial. We were taught by a Jew to love; we were not taught to hate Jews.

Classical liberals have built a conservative movement that valorises “dangerous ideas”, thereby allowing people whose ideas are dangerous indeed to gain a foothold. That is why in the latest conservative debate, both sides need to los

After mounting his high horse about Chinese tyranny, Matthew Schmitz attacks Charlie Kirk for not supporting censorship of Nick Fuentes and the Groypers who are evil White Nationalists. He believes that Fuentes and his fellow Catholic Zoomer populists are dangerous anti-Semites and that Kirk has allowed them to gain traction by supporting free speech.

Over these past few weeks, we have come to see the First Things crowd in a new light. David French is a familiar figure to the Dissident Right. We have relentlessly mocked David French for years who inspired the cuckservative meme in 2015. We are also very familiar with National Review and conservative liberalism. In contrast, we had never heard of Sohrab Ahmari until he came to prominence by attacking French over his classical liberalism earlier this year. Sohrab Ahmari wasn’t even a Catholic when we were making fun of French during the Trump campaign.

Sohrab Ahmari and Matthew Schmitz’s problem with liberalism isn’t the same objection that we have to liberalism. We dislike liberalism because it has become a solvent that is dissolving the ethnocultural core of our nations and has empowered a hostile Jewish elite over us in the West who are bent on our demographic destruction. In contrast, Ahmari and Schmitz object to liberalism because our hostile Jewish elite is being criticized too harshly and mainstream conservatives are too tolerant of free speech. In other words, Ahmari and Schmitz are Catholic elitists who are even more out of touch with the conservative base than David French and Charlie Kirk.

What should we make of this? It is a war within the Catholic Right between elitists who have cozied up to the Jews and the populists who resent being censored by them. The Catholic elitists don’t believe that America or Europe should remain European because that is White Nationalism and our civilization has nothing to do with race. They are more upset about the blasphemy of Nick Fuentes making a Cookie Monster joke about the Holocaust that is offensive to Jews on YouTube than the plot of the Camp of the Saints unfolding in Southern Europe.

Who was that great conservative icon Irving Kristol who is so admired by Matthew Schmitz who stood for censorship and discretion? Let’s take a look at his book Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea:

“One “neo,” however, has been permanent throughout my life, and it is probably at the root of all the others. I have been “neo-orthodox” in my religious views (though not in my religious observance). … (My parents spoke Yiddish to each other, but only English to the children.) I dutifully participated, learning to read the Hebrew and memorizing the Yiddish translations. Discipline was strict – if we misbehaved in any way, the rabbi would order us to stand up and then give us a stinging slap to the face. He taught us to hate the goyim and to spit whenever we passed a church.”

Sohrab Ahmari and Matthew Schmitz dislike Thomas Jefferson. They both have the greatest respect though for Irving Kristol and Norm Podhoretz. I’ve never met anyone outside of the ranks of professional American conservatism that shares this strange worldview.

Schmitz seems to believe that there is a contradiction between opposing conservative liberalism and valuing free speech. The American Founders and Thomas Jefferson in particular were classical republicans. They believed that American liberty and free government rested on a foundation of moral virtue. They were comfortable with racial inequality and inequality between the sexes. They restricted our naturalization laws and citizenship to “free white persons.” They justified the American Revolution not only on the basis of the theory of natural rights, but also on English traditions and the colonial charters. They carefully distinguished between natural rights, political rights and social rights rather than muddling them all together as “equal rights.” The Constitution also reserved the vast majority of undelegated powers to the states.

The America that was created by the Founding Fathers was one that was that created by Anglo-Protestants. The overwhelming majority of White Americans were Anglo-Protestants. Americans didn’t become “free” as a result of the American Revolution or because of classical liberalism. The colonists were already the freest, wealthiest people on earth at the time. A society that is overwhelmingly English and Scot-Irish and which has an Anglo-Protestant elite will be free almost by default regardless of whether it adheres to a rigid abstract ideology. If the Scots-Irish of a “post-liberal” Greater Appalachia were an independent nation, it would be a free country and it would be nothing at all like Bourbon France or Habsburg Spain. It would be nothing like Xi Jinping’s China either because of differences in blood, culture, history and religion.

The Founding Fathers created an America that was White, Christian and free. The Dissident Right still finds that to be the best formula. The Confederates didn’t try to change any of that. Sohrab Ahmari and Matthew Schmitz, however, propose to do with away with an America that is White and free, but which will somehow remain Catholic, even though Catholicism has been in a state of free fall while Catholic elites have been aligned with Jewish elites. What’s more, the funniest thing about Ahmari and Schmitz’s America, which will be neither White or free, and their vision of the Right is that they expect it will appeal to highly religious Christian conservatives who tend to be Southern Anglo Protestants when it doesn’t even appeal to young Catholic traditionalists or the majority of Catholics either who tend to be far more liberal.

If Nick Fuentes and the Groypers had their way, there would at least still be a Catholic Europe a century from now because like the Poles they want to preserve both the people and their religion while rejecting liberalism and Jewish control and influence. In contrast, Ahmari and Schmitz are content to allow the people to be replaced by aliens because fighting “anti-Semitism” and “White Nationalism” is the higher priority for them, and as along as the status quo continues their religion and culture will continue to vanish under Jewish cultural hegemony. The Poles are smart enough to combine their nationality and their religion with defending their culture.

In spite of my personal differences with Fuentes, I hope that it is Fuentes and the Groypers who carry the day over Sohrab Ahmari because I am more ideologically aligned with them. I’m not even a Catholic, but obviously I don’t want to see Spain or France or Italy fall in my lifetime because Catholic elites were too intimidated by Jews to break with them. I understand what they are trying to do, sympathize with them and I certainly don’t think they are evil or support Jewish organizations like the ADL trying to blacklist and destroy them either.

Note: I think Nick Fuentes is a bit immature and an asshole, but evil? Is he really evil for making fun of Jews? That’s absurd.

About Hunter Wallace 12366 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. I went to catholic school and can tell you that Catholics condemn racism and even populism. Their ideology is based on the “us and them” being based on religion, with the idea that atheists are the worst. They’re not caving to Jews, they’re being what they are.

    • catholics are globalists to the core. the pope has called for a world government, bank and army. he calls for open borders. romanists have always amalgamated any people they can, then syncretize their beliefs making ungodly amalgamations like Easter and Christmas. they are the borg, and they are NOT Christian.

      Protestantism FTW

      • WASP – indeed. Cathokikes are a NIGHTMARE. So are most Protestards, fyi. Christards in general are the core of Anti White.

        I got banned from that First Race Traitor Shabby Goy site when I mentioned the Nation Wreckers. The Catrhokike MORONS still make excuses for every vile thing the Hebes do.

        I cannot write about what I think the appropriate responses are to these postulant, grovelling slaves…….

    • I’m of an earlier generation, and even so, I also did not get my racial awareness by studying the Baltimore catechism, nor by being taught by a nigger (who stank) in my homeroom, and an evolutionist math/science teacher, in the other, during my last year of parochial school. But the nig-nog did introduce me to CS Lewis, I thank him for that. But not for making us sing 1960’s protest songs, before our parents. SOB.

      It took me reading people like GK Chesterton, Lewis, Tolkien, Belloc, et al.- catholic/anglican English authors of a prior generation, to lead me to my eventual racial awareness, and then, to see the RCC evil as the Multicultural False Faith of the Caesaro-papal paradigm, for what it was. It took another twenty-five years to realize that the ethnic particularism of Orthodoxy is the only valid model for Christendom, and thereby learning to love the very English-ness of Anglicanism, before it, too, self-destructed in the quest for ‘revelance’ in the 1980’s.

      The moment I read the false flag phrase ‘anti-Semitism’ in this article, I knew: “NOT A REAL CATHOLIC. SKIP IT. NOT GERMANE TO YOUR ETERNAL SALVATION.”

      This is the huge red pill TRAD Xtians have to swallow- it’s not the corporation that you belong to, it is the Body of Christ; and that is NOT co-terminous with the visible ORGANIZATION that masquerades as that Body. ROME IS A LIE. SO, TOO, is any other ‘Coroporation’ that masquerades as that Body.

      And the biggest clue that it is DEAD, DYING, or DECREPIT, and WITHOUT GRACE, is its’ attitude toward the Christ-killers.

      If your church/congregation/fellowship/bible study is not 110% against the JEWS AS A RACE/RELIGION, you are fellowshiping with BELIAL.

      Then again, NEITHER is it the Atomistic ‘lone congregant’ perversion of “Jeebus, my, and muh Bah-bull’ of Protestant-schism. Witness the cancer that is the SBC today.

      Fr. Seraphim Rose said, ‘In the end, ALL the Churches will serve Antichrist.”

      I thought of this for decades as meaning, ‘the great evil ruler of the ‘last days,’ because of my foray into Dispensational mania. But what it really means, is FELLOWSHIP WITH THE JEWS.


      Death to the Jew World Order. Wherever it may be found.

  2. He also just wrote an article calling for hate speech laws and criminalization of white nationalism and antisemitism. Matt Schvitz is a clown.

      • I think that there is scant hope that Christianity, in any of it’s forms, can be revived or saved in any way that helps white people. Haven’t you heard? Red, brown, yellow, black and white, they’re all precious in his sight, Jesus loves the little children of the world. Note that white children come in last.

        Most churches are focused on “saving” the little brown people. Always focused on “saving”
        the little brown and yellow people. Now I take it that you don’t agree with these things, but the average “Judeo-Christian” does, and that’s a fact.

        But hey, since it’s Thanksgiving, I wish you the best of luck, Fr. John

  3. First Things is a neocon outfit disguised as a Catholic magazine. Don’t know much about the Catholic Herald but if it’s publishing this guys Schmitz then it can’t be trusted. These articles you posted are so full of falsehoods it’s hard to single out one. This comment may be a little off topic but there is a good article on Unz Review called “Ben Shapiro and the Myth of the Judeo-Christian West” which goes into the manipulation of both Catholics and Protestants into believing falsely and against tradition that the those who claim to be Jews today are our spiritual cousins. This guy Schmitz whom I’ve never heard of but is obviously a neocon propagandist pushes that lie. it’s worth reading.

    • Herald was once a respectable Catholic publication. G.K. Chesterton praised it. Nowadays it is just another “Judeo-Christian” propaganda rag.

      • Carlisle Cockatoo, I presume? I hope? Welcome! You and I have been spending time in some interesting places lately. Again, if my presumption is correct…not many places for Nationalists to go lately. Bitchute is growing. I agree that the catholic church is lost despite EMJ.

  4. In order to defeat the white nationalists and anti-Semites, conservatives must become less liberal.

    So he is justifying reducing liberty by “[becoming] less liberal” in order to “defeat the white nationalists and anti-Semites.”

    So again we see that “liberalism” isn’t the problem, nor is “conservative liberalism.” “Conservative liberalism” I would suggest is a good phrase, too. The Liberal Party in, say, Australia, is the conservative party. It is the party that defends free speech against politically correct censorship. The Liberal party is in coalition with the Nationalist party, which is the party of rural Christians.

    In Australia, the Liberals and the Nationalists are opposed by the Labor party, which is itself a coalition between two factions: labor unions, who tend to be white and urban blue-collar workers, and the politically correct, anti-white academic Marxists. Jews in Australia are overwhelmingly on the side of the Labor party, pro-immigration, and anti-white.

    The Liberals and the Labor party Jews and academic Marxists both support “free trade” (which is a capitalist value, and is classically liberal) and are opposed by both the union-oriented blue collar labor unions – as well as by the rural religious Christians.

    The real fracture point of liberalism is not free speech, freedom of the press, or freedom of religion. (For instance, rural Christians are happy to ignore, say, urban libertines, and urban libertines are happy to ignore rural social conservatives.)

    Throughout the West, the divide is between “liberal economics” (capitalism) and “social liberalism” (social/moral libertinism.)

    E. Michael Jones calls this the coalition of the “Wankers and the Bankers” – the “wankers” who promote social libertinism and the “bankers” who promote usury and capitalism.

    The Kingfish and Andrew Jackson are the best American historical examples of a coalition against “Wankers and Bankers.” Jackson was “populist,” and anti-usury – and pro-white. The Kingfish was “socialist” – meaning, economically populist, anti-usury – while maintaining the “social conservatism” of his day, which meant a racial segregation that did not unduly humiliate blacks.

    I assert that the Curtis Yarvin neo-reactionary trend for the last decade has been a purposeful Jewish attempt to confuse the issue. Yarvin’s anti-liberal neo-reaction is simply an attempt to justify Jewish technocratic capitalist oligarchy by attacking White liberals that are not necessarily accepting of American support for Israeli apartheid.

    Liberals can be quite authoritarian and conservatives can be quite anarchist and “anti-hierarchy” as we see everywhere.

    • The Liberal Party of Australia ran and won on giving people 5 years jail for online trolling. Currently they are raiding the offices of mainstream journalists that expose government corruption. They can’t get elected without the farmers, who they throw under the bus whenever there is a drought. They are Australia’s version of Conservatism Inc. They are selling Australia to the Chinese, are pro mass non-White immigration, never saw a war for Israel they didn’t like, offer blow jobs for billionaires and property developers.

  5. There is nothing you can do to save the Catholic church, unless you are a cardinal already in Rome. The decision making organs of the church are too distant, the power distance too great between the laity and clergy, and their own theology precludes the laity from dissent or dissidence of any kind.

    The Trad Caths don’t have a valid argument against the authority of the pope. And any argument they do have, can be used against them even in the off chance there is ever a “traditionalist” pope again.

    Hierarchy and authority weren’t given to the church by the laity, and they dont need the consent of the governed for legitimacy. So long as they hold the monopoly on the eucharist, they hold all the cards. Were it any other way, the church wouldn’t have survived even as long as it has.

    All of this presupposes the church is worth saving. This isn’t by any means a given.

    It is all totally out of our hands, and wholly dependent on whether providence may condescend to our plight, and toss us a bone up in here.

    I’m not holding my breath.

    The protestants are no better, so don’t get cocky.

  6. I go back to my literary metaphor of the widow forced, by a pesky angel, to choose to have her husband’s spirit haunt the farm, or have a return of his body. Most, if forced to choose, choose the spirit; and yet, in practice, most everyone chooses the zombie option.

    Be it “constitutionalists” who think words on a paper can preserve their republic, Presbyterians, who think words in a “confession” can preserve their church, or Catholics, who think their church can be preserved by bureaucratic fiat – all manage to preserve the physical trappings of their organizations, while completely failing to preserve the spirit inherent in the original versions.

    To preserve spirit requires poets, zealous lovers, and aristocrats of the heart…not political calculators and pragmatic strategists.

  7. I seriously doubt Nick Fuentes and his goons are going to have any real influence in the church. The church is probably .0001% white far-right(who have no money) while the rest of the church is dying liberal boomers and masses of mud of every shade. The RCC has made up their mind of who they want to cater to, and it’s a smart business move on their behalf.

  8. Okay, I do not understand all of this. All I know is that I am a Traditional Catholic and I believe in defined dogmas which condemn liberalism and modern conservatism.

    Neither Nick Fuentes or any of these other Catholics act like Catholics. Do any of these paper Catholics condemn Francis? Or attack the very roots of modernism? And I also could care less about Moslems in China. Now moslems in Europe? That I care about.

    I do not consider any of these people as being Catholic. If they were Catholic they would not be taking part in an evil system but instead attack it for supporting abortion, homosexuality, unjust wars, unjust economic policies etc. None of them are Catholic. They act too childish as if this is a game.

      • spahnranch1969,

        Well I only had to go to school for half a day today. So the first thing I do when coming home after getting settled is to look at this website. I have become a semi addict.

        I am part German. My grandfather is 75% German and 25% Mexican making me 18 3/4 % German if I did my math correctly.

        Yes, if only I were Empress somewhere. By the way i love Maria Theresa. She was against that evil freemasonic Frederick the Great who fought unjust wars against Austria.

    • See if you still like Nick after watching this video:

      The redpillers of Nick Fuentes are the reason for all of his backpedaling

    • Nick might be a bit of a egoist nutcase but he is my favorite Catholic Larper and speaks the truth on Zionist jews, conservative inc senorita

      • Thom,

        Perhaps I am being too hard on Nick Fuentes. My mentality is just to go for the throat and war to the hilt on the enemy. He is better than any American Catholic politician I am aware of. I grant you that.

    • Cristina, pray and believe that Christ is God, the BVM is His Holy Mother, and that God loves and will save us to the uttermost, and attend your local Mass, if you trust the priest. That is all that the laity are ever expected to do. Unless it is to witness to the realities of the lies of Hell in this world, via such fora as this. “Pray for us, O Holy Mother of God, that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.”

      • Father John,

        Thank you for your kind and informative response. Is it my imagination or are your comments becoming more and more powerful as a general rule?

        Yes, as a layman I have no power unless i was a monarch with Church and State united like has always been defined dogma.

        But you are right. i should stay in my place and pray and realize it is not up to me to solve these problems. I just get animated and frustrated.

  9. I’m a Catholic and I can tell you that many of us are sick to death of our country, our ancestral homelands and our lives being controlled by those whom St Paul calls the enemies of the entire human race.

  10. A trial was held in Toronto, Canada in the early 80’s, Ernst Zundel was put on trial for some sort of speech crime about the holocaust, the leading “holocaust” historian, Raul Hilberg was unable to produce 1 piece of evidence a holocaust happened while under oath in a Candian court of law…NOT 1!! Yet the story is “there’s tons of evidence!!”…remember, the leading “holocaust” historian could not produce 1 piece of evidence…not 1!!!

  11. Why must speech be suppressed? The truth is a very dangerous thing to the Jews. And Christ in his second coming must have his mouth shut the very second he opens it. We can not allow the salvation of human kind to utter a word now can we?

  12. Us Occidentals deserve to be ruled over by the Orientals for a few centuries. The Chinese, for example, have more respect for Western art and science than we do and would be responsible custodians of our cultural treasures. Under Chinese suzerainty the Acropolis and the Vatican would be preserved, not left to fall into gradual disrepair as they would under the Mohammedans, or turned into graffiti covered garbage dumps and open sewers if left to the niggers.

  13. Which way Catholic Larpers? Do you just need to get rid of Dope ‘migrant feet kissing’ Francis and all your problems are finito or are all your past 25 popes in the 19-21st century massive faggots, pedo enablers and Satanists?…

    Asking for a friend and his name is Jesus who gonna destroy the churches of reprobates, elites, warmongers, satanists and phonies

  14. In the Screwtape Letters C. S. Lewis warned about “Christianity and…” and how the and part actually destroys Christian belief. Today we have Christianity and Civil Rights, Christianity and social justice, Christianity and refugee resettlement (always in a White country). The mainstream churches of all denominations are little more than handmaidens to the enemies of the White race and the civilization Whites built.

  15. I think the commenters who criticize Catholics as an entire group for being anti racist or philosemetic should consider that many Protestants fall into these same traps as well. It isn’t constructive to promote division among Christians. It’s not about Catholics vs Protestants or even right vs left. This is about the people vs the oligarchs and this division runs though both Catholic and Protestant communities.

Comments are closed.