Brian Stelter: Trump Threw Open The Doors To White Christian Nationalism

Little Brian is chiming in.

After abortion is banned in the Red States, I would like to see gay marriage go down next. I would love to see this snowball into a full blown assault on the Sexual Revolution.

Jewish pornographers also need to be driven out of business. There is no shortage of moral and cultural rot like PRIDE month which needs to be cleaned up. The sky is the limit here. Divorce laws need to be changed to shore up marriage so that men don’t have to fear getting ruined by courts. OnlyFans and Tinder need to be shut down. “Trans” needs to be comprehensively banned and stigmatized.

Gender treachery needs to be a criminal offense like in The Handmaid’s Tale. Groomers should get the death penalty. I’m spitballing ideas here, but our culture is so rotten and degenerate that fixing it and recovering from the damage has been inflicted on us is a generational project.


    • I’m a pro-White Christian.

      If you are incapable of dealing with that, it is your problem

      • But you wrote on a prior thread, that you weren’t going to jump on that bandwagon.
        This is turning into Gab.
        There should be ONE focus, and that’s stopping the destruction of the White race.
        You won’t do that with Christians. They want the whole world as their friends.

      • Christian Nationalism will most likely be subverted as well, but OTOH having implicit pro-white movements subverted have led to more explicit pro-whites for each disappointment iteration.

        The inflation will make more pro-whites as well, as will immigration and the green insanity, so the future looks good no matter what happens to Christian Nationalism.

        • I’m just going to watch and see how this goes. It sounds promising, but I don’t have high hopes based on past experience. This seems like it will be next thing after MAGA like it evolved out of the Tea Party

          • ” a full blown assault on the Sexual Revolution.”

            ‘ Sexual Revolution’ just a gimmick term to sell fools on careless promiscuity.

            promiscuity has always been harmful, mentally and physically.

          • Anything “Pro-White” will become subverted it always has and other Whites are the main contributors of why they fail. It’s time to move on beyond “race”, and focus on religion, family, and culture.

          • @Orthodox You say that, because you know focusing on religion is the road to oblivion. You can’t have family and culture in a multicultural world, because, as a white, your job is to work and provide a taxable income so the government has money to support the nonwhites.

          • “” a full blown assault on the Sexual Revolution.””

            You need total power to pull that one off. Sex is very popular, particularly the “right” to trade in earlier “mistakes” as females see it for an alpha they meet later on. If we have government by popularity contest as the media oligarchs want, then such policies will get you thrown out of power. The strategy for saving America has to be “one man, one vote…one time” as the neocons used to go after the Islamists who were serious people should they ever come to power unlike the party children eating the seed corn that earlier generations in America built.

          • Unless there is a shift in fundamental premises, then it can’t really go anywhere, I don’t think. You have said that what is going on with MAGApedes is “radical,” but I would dispute that. The word radical implies going to the root, challenging and changing these more fundamental premises.

            Most of what is happening with MAGApedes is just pure emotional reaction from people who have personalities that are resistant to change. They want to go back to better times, usually whatever year they happened to graduate from high school. For MAGA millennials, the 00s up to 2010, before Obama’s second term, back when video game journalists still had ethics. For gen X MAGA 1980s when they could feel proud to be American. Boomers- 1960s. Whatever.

            That’s not to say that these emotional reactions are bad or that their desires to return to better times are bad, just that they aren’t accompanied by a challenge to the basic premises that supported the outcomes they don’t like. Laying out and challenging these premises is something leaders should be able to clarify and affect within the population, but we aren’t really seeing that from the conservative leaders, even the “Christian nationalist” ones. Instead it’s still retvrn to Reaganism or retvrn to MLK.

            We see some challenges to certain symptoms, but nothing fundamental. Say, for example, that gay marriage is rolled back and left to the states. Where does that leave us? 2015. Except gayer because more states accept it. And vulnerable to just being reversed later after the left is reascendant because the fundamental premises conservative liberals share with them were never challenged and overturned.

    • The writer is being facetious. The hyperbole should be a strong indication of that. I have lived as a Christian nationalist before the term was coined and I can tell you for sure I know absolutely no one, that shares the mindset you have portrayed Christian patriots as having. You spread propaganda and demonize people that just want you people to leave us alone. You keep bothering us. You keep encroaching on our rights. You keep calling us racist for not having your looney ideologies. You keep trying to burn our country down with your “inclusivity” that when put into practice is the most bigoted system known to mankind.

      You want to keep your base believing the lies that they are victims of White Christian Nationalist because without that, your ideology falls flat. You are forever creating a victim group. Pretending to be their saviors. Give me a break, You people can’t even save yourself. Instead you are the useful idiots destroying the country for people who the enemy of us both. The are the enemy of all American, You are aiding and abetting your own demise and don’t even have the sense to see it.

      Your kind are the biggest bigots in this country. You think black people are too stupid to get an ID and when a monkey is involved in any discussion you cry racism. I don’t get it. What does a monkey have to do with the color of someone’s skin? And since I don’t know, I guess that makes you the racist.

      You tell people they can be whatever sex they want simply by willing it. And everyone must pretend along with them. There are how many genders? I don’t know what you are claiming but I assure you there are only 2 gender assignment surgeries.

      You encourage people to be narcissistic believing they can change language and demand to be labeled as they want. Here is a clue. Language is what helps us to communicate with each other, You don’t have the right to change the definitions of words that we have used for hundreds of years, and you don’t have the right to insist that people call you by any certain pronoun especially if it isn’t even a pronoun or a word or real.
      You hate us because we are rooted in reality, You are rooted in fantasy, Our beliefs are rooted in science, Your beliefs ignores the most basic science. You hate us because our common sense highlights how bizarre and ludicrous your policies and ideologies are .

  1. CN was around long before Dump took office, so was White Nationalism. The ideology is the same, the names just change and evolve.

  2. The ADL=Jew hate group that wants to GENOCIDE!!!!! the Historic Native Born White Christian American Working Class Historic Majority……

    The Jew Hate Group….The ADL…..also wants to exterminate the Slavic Russian Infant Population of Donbas with napalm…..what evil vile creatures they are over at the (((ADL)))……

    The ADL…..Who ordered this sewage?….Who ordered the sewage Leo Frank…?

      • Ummm, didn’t Hunter Wallace just say he’s a Christian Nationalist? I’m pretty sure I can find plenty of articles on this site where he criticizes the ADL.
        Come to think of it, I know a shit ton of self identifying Christians who criticize the ADL. Listen to James Edwards on the Political Cesspool. He criticizes the ADL. What kind of rock have you been living under?

          • @Pilot…

            I know many Christians who had a negative attitude about the ADL.

            Your comments show that you are not well-informed about Christians, and are suffering an intellectual hangover from when you were a Leftist.

            You pick and choose certain acts and quotes by some Christians and then write off all the rest.

          • @Ivan If what you say is true, then why don’t Christians stop aiding “immigration”? Why don’t Christians, if they are the big majority, stop the insane appointees and diversity programs? Why is everything getting worse, if they are so critical of the enemy? Hmm? Is it just talk?

  3. >I’m a pro-White Christian.

    Are you a churchgoer? — is your church a 501(c)(3) organization? — how many churches are?

    I ask because recently I listened to an old Datum Line program by Bruce McCarthey, which aired on RBN 2011 – 2015 (when McCarthey passed away) — he remarks how ineffective the Christian church has been at stemming moral decay in America — he cites the tax code as one reason: because so many churches are now tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations/corporations, they are not allowed to directly engage in political lobbying or attempt to influence legislation — he seems to suggest the formulation of 501(c)(3) rules and regulations, together with a push to get churches to acquire this legal status, and thereby subject themselves to the above limitations, was a deliberate subterfuge designed to neuter the influence of Christianity in American civic life.

      • Having gone from just-about age ten to age fifteen during the five years of Lyndon Johnson’s presidency, I didn’t have an adult’s sense of time and change during it, but I sometimes think the country changed more in those five years than in any other five years of its existence.

        Whenever I catch the scent of a convenience store’s candy aisle, I think of that, as I once said on the internet, maybe here, at Occidental Dissent. My senses are not acute, I’ll acknowledge, but it sometimes seems to me that the corner-cutting that American industry had to do once the tax burden of Johnson’s Great Society had been imposed is reflected in that scent, which seems more artificial—i.e., generated by artificial scents and flavors—than it was pre-LBJ, when it was the scent of actual foods (chocolate, nuts, or whatever). If that sounds silly, well, it’s quite possible I’m silly. If it sounds rooted in nostalgia, I don’t think it’s that. I’m not particularly nostalgic about the smell of candy bars. It’s just something I’ve noticed—or at least think I’ve noticed.

        Yes, there are the large negative changes that Johnson wrought and that are likely to be discussed at a blog like this one, but I sometimes think there are many little ones, which go unremarked and which, cumulatively, have made American life much less agreeable than it was pre-Johnson. In time, for instance, there appeared self-service gas pumps, because it became too expensive, I’d guess, to hire someone to pump gas. Staffing of the great businesses and basic government offices that the U.S. had organized in the pre-Johnson century became expensive, too, as became clear not only because it became harder, say, to find a clerk or saleslady in a department store but because it became too expensive to pay somebody to answer the phones. The pseudo-solution was the “Press 1 for [what-have-you]” systems, which I doubt any sane person regards as anything other than frustrating. There are probably other little things that aren’t coming to my mind; but as you say: a dirtbag.

        • LBJ, scum of the eath.

          He also took silver out of our currency, setting the stage for future inflations.
          The jackass way he conducted the Vietnam war was a disaster, bombing halts, exclusion areas, combat restrictions etc.
          An old whore monger, who got his secret jollies sending young men to die while he f..kd young whores galore.
          He let nggrs riot and burn major cities to intimidate WHITES into supporting ‘civil rights’ legislation. Those riots could have been stopped within hours.

    • “he cites the tax code as one reason: because so many churches are now tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations/corporations, they are not allowed to directly engage in political lobbying or attempt to influence legislation” – This is true, and one of the major drawbacks when churches seek tax-exempt status.

      Moreover, a tax-exempt status for churches conflicts with the spiritual nature of the kingdom. It invites the world’s ‘system,’ values and organizational structure into a realm it has no legitimate place to be. If the church is not able to address clear socio-political issues due to its agreement with the State, it has placed itself in a position where the effectiveness of proclaiming the Gospel is restricted or hindered to some degree.

      Granted, tax-exempt churches may not want this to be the case and they may even disobey at times what their tax exemption agreement requires, but this is a dishonest and disingenuous way of handling the matter.

    • Ah—another piece of the puzzle. From that whole 501(c)-whatever-it-is, I personally have always got an unpleasant whiff of liberalism; now I know why.

      As I have said here, at Occidental Dissent, the most important thing is money. This is how liberalism works: It grips your wallet. If your response to that is to talk about your honor or your culture or your Christian-what-have-you, you are being ineffective. Because the Constitution—drafted by Southerners and thus necessarily half-baked—does not protect the right not to spend, the liberals can create a public-school system by majority vote and call it democracy. If you want to go your own way and create, say, your own school system, as Catholics in Philadelphia did, you’re free to do that, the liberals will tell you. Oh, yes, you’re free to do that—with whatever money you have left after you’ve been taxed to support the public schools you don’t want to use. Oh, would you like your schools to be tax-exempt? Would that help a bit? Sure, we’ll give you that: We’re feeling generous.

      On one or two occasions when some religious school has done something anti-liberal, I’ve seen, online, a liberal or two say something like, “How would they like their tax-exempt status to be revoked?” My—the blithe piggishness of that, the complete unawareness of the unfairness of it: putting everyone’s wallet up for a vote to create the public schools, then treating those who don’t want to use those school as if they’re the ones looking for a free ride.

      My personal reaction to any such threat is exactly this: I’d be happy to see the religious schools give up their tax-exempt status, if the public schools and the rest of our socialism were simultaneously to be eliminated. Oh—but that wouldn’t be democracy, would it?

      I hadn’t realized the tax-exempt status is conferred with an all-but-undisguised political leash, as you’ve now made clear to me. That makes it even more piggishly liberal than I’d realized.

      • @John Bonaccorsi…

        “Because the Constitution—drafted by Southerners and thus necessarily half-baked’

        The Constitutio, Dear John,n was NOT half baket before the North repeatedly put it into the crematorium between the years 1861 and 2008.

        No idea, document, or endeavour, can survive such persistent malice.

        All the best to you and your mama!

        • For the moment, at least, we’ll have to agree to disagree re the Constitution, Ivan, but good to hear from you again.

          This past December, at the age of ninety-eight and eight months, my mother left this world. After a downturn that lasted about a month and a half, she died peacefully in her own bed, in the home whither my father and she had come from their honeymoon sixty-nine years earlier. You know, I hope, that she was always warmed by the greetings I would relay to her from you, “one of my friends on the internet,” as I would tell her. As long as I have memories, I will remember the loving regard your wife and you have had for her. My good wishes to everyone at your end.

          • @John…

            Very sorry to hear this. Oddly enough, as I was writing my greetings to her earlier today I heard a voice in my mind say that your mama had crosst over.

            I’m very sorry for your loss, something which can never be, as Oprah seems to think ‘put behind’ you.

            Truly a great symbol of her life, and fidelity to those around her, that she would die as she lived and where, one assumes, she ushered you into this world.

            That is also a symbol for how this country has gone downhill, for most people in this land not only will not die in the marital bed, they will die largely unattended by those whom they loved.

            My wife and I are very happy to hear how our greetings brought cheer to her. Probably we were on a very short list of Southern and Confederate friends.

            All the best to you in this very sad time.

          • @Mr. Griffin…

            Sorry, Sir, to hear about your mamaw.

            I hope she was content with the life she had led, at the end,

            God willing, you pray for her happiness beyond and visit her grave now and then.

            Things like that mean a lot – both to the quick and the dead.

          • Thank you, Ivan, for the condolence and the good wish and for your appreciation of her. Yes, she died in the home whither she brought her children from the hospital where they were born.

            “Probably we were on a very short list of Southern and Confederate friends.” Well, yes—but only by accident of geography. Innocent that she was, she had no real sense of political things. Any nice person was, to her, exactly that: a nice person, nothing more or less. That was her grasp of things—a grasp that pleased me.

          • Thank you, Terry. I hope you can guess how much this post of yours means to me.

          • @John Bonaccorsi…

            ““Probably we were on a very short list of Southern and Confederate friends.” Well, yes—but only by accident of geography. Innocent that she was, she had no real sense of political things. Any nice person was, to her, exactly that: a nice person, nothing more or less. That was her grasp of things—a grasp that pleased me.”

            While clearly my wife and I take into account other aspects of a person more than your mama, in the end, we, like she and you, regard people in their individual light.

            Because of that we, like your mama, are blesst to have many friends all over the place, of ever persuasion.

            Like your mama, kindness, niceness,conversationality, culturedness, (an interest in things beyond the small scope of one’s own quotidian minutia) are what we consider the trump cards in regarding anyone.

            Now that we know what has transpired, we will remember your mama in our prayers.

          • ninety-eight and eight months

            You were very blessed, to have your mother for so many years.
            That we all could be so fortunate.

        • Thank you, Hunter. I’ll relay that to my family members. Sorry to hear about your grandmother. We learn early on, of course, that those days are coming; but somehow, they always come too soon, as a cousin of mine once said.

        • @Terry Smith…

          Thank you for wishing John Bonaccorsi consolations.

          I always appreciate the kind dimeanour you bring to this blog, something which is often sorely lacking.

          All the best to you and yours!

        • Ivan Turgenev, I send this too you Ivan and the rest of the praying people, Eastern kentucky is under water, scores dead and missing, survivors losing everything, people crying, they lost their dogs and cats, horses drown, it’s a hurtful thing to see……….

          • @Terry…

            Alright, Dear Terry – we’ll pray that The Good Lord brings the anguisht in Kentucky, consolation and comfort!

      • I hadn’t realized the tax-exempt status is conferred with an all-but-undisguised political leash, as you’ve now made clear to me.

        Only for 501(c)(3) — there is another type of tax-exempt non-profit: 501(c)(4).

        The situation is interesting: Why do so many churches have 501(c)(3) status rather than 501(c)(4)? — both are non-profits — one obvious answer is that donations to a 501(c)(3) are tax-deductible for the donor, whereas donations to a 501(c)(4) are not — this is an incentive for people to donate to the church.

        Note: 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) are both tax-exempt non-profits, so they do not have to pay tax on the money they receive (their income) — the difference is that donations to a 501(c)(3) are deductible, so donors get a tax break, with the trade-off that a 501(c)(3) cannot advocate — whereas a 501(c)(4) can advocate, but its income (donations) are not deductible to the donor.

        What Is A 501(c)(4)?

        In 2018, Florida passed Amendment 4, which restored voting to felons — when I first heard about it, I looked at the official website, and saw at the bottom of the home page ‘A project of Tides Advocacy’ — Tides Advocacy is a 501(c)(4) — it is also an offshoot of the Tides Foundation, a so-called ‘dark money pool’, a large and influential 501(c)(3) that allows wealthy individuals and foundations to indirectly fund things they would rather not fund openly and directly (for PR reasons).

        I would imagine most of the funding for Tides Advocacy comes from the Tides Foundation (?) — so there is no tax advantage to the Tides Foundation — but donations to the Tides Foundation (income to Tides) are already tax-deductible, and money given to Tides Advocacy is an expense.

        So here’s what I’m asking myself: Why can’t churches establish a 501(c)(3) so donations are tax-deductible, and another, separate 501(c)(4) which is free to do advocacy? — the money for the 501(c)(4), i.e. its income, can come from the 501(c)(3) — both are tax-exempt non-profit entities, meaning their income is not taxed.


        • Very interesting, eah. As I said in my original reply to you, 501(c) has always had for me the reek of liberalism—of liberal righteousness, I should say. I hadn’t examined details such as those you’ve presented via your explanation and the pages you’ve linked.

          What has always struck me about it, I think, is its foundation, or its being rooted, in antipropertyism, if I may coin that word. At bottom, everything leftist is rooted in two things—which are probably two aspects of some one other thing, for which I won’t at the moment try to coin a term. Those two things are anti-property-ism, which I’ve just now named, and anti-law-ism, as I’ll call it. A leftist will not always say he is opposed to the existence of property—as will, say, a Marxist—and he will not always say he is opposed to the existence of law—as will, say, an anarchist—but at bottom, he is opposed to both. This is why, for instance—well, I’ll give you an example that is decades old now but that is probably still relevant: Years ago, while I was riding with a relative on an interstate or some such highway here in Pennsylvania, I saw a sign that was marking a construction zone on the stretch we were traversing. Rather than say, straightforwardly, in adult terms, something like “Construction Zone—Reduce Speed—$300 Fine,” the sign was fashioned as if it were something a child had created in kindergarten. Its multicolored lettering was kindergarten style, so that it looked as if it might have been attached, by magnet, to a refrigerator door. The wording was something like “Drive carefully—My daddy works here.” It was, as you see, craven. Rather than frankly express a threat, as law should, it appealed to the great liberal virtue of concern for others (the one virtue that, in the liberal mind, is valid, though it’s never encountered in the liberal heart). The subtext, that is, was “I, the government of Pennsylvania, haven’t the self-respect simply to threaten you; I’m begging you to be nice.” It was, in other words, a manifestation of antilawism, a leftist mentality the government itself had internalized. It was law that was attempting to present itself as something else, as not law. Whether such signs are still being used, I don’t know, but I think there are other examples. Liberals, for example, like to talk about “good cops” and “bad cops,” as if they, liberals, are not simply opposed to cops entirely. It’s all a semantic meandering around what they really want to say: law shouldn’t exist, THREAT shouldn’t exist.

          Similarly, this whole 501(c) thing, with its distinctions between profit and non-profit, between charity and social welfare, and between whatever other pairings, seems to me to say, in subtext, “Property is bad, though we haven’t the political strength to come right out and say that. These distinctions represent an effort on our part to distinguish ‘good property’ and ‘bad property.’ By bad property, we mean, well, private property as it’s conventionally understood. By good property, we mean socialism, disguised though it might be as various organizations and dynamics that the government brings into existence via these fictional distinctions.” I’m afraid I’m not equipped at the moment to express that any more clearly than I’ve just now expressed it.

          So—putting aside for the moment my just-now-implied position that 501(c) should be torn in whole from our law, I’ll turn to the possibility you raised:

          “Why can’t churches establish a 501(c)(3) so donations are tax-deductible, and another, separate 501(c)(4) which is free to do advocacy? — the money for the 501(c)(4), i.e. its income, can come from the 501(c)(3) ….”

          It seems that what you’re suggesting there is a sort of maneuver, a “working within” 501(c), an attempt to slip (c)(3)’s political leash. Does that not seem to you as if it would come afoul of the law? Are you familiar with any other—i.e., non-church—groups that have attempted such a, well, again, maneuver? (Its transparency means it couldn’t be called a subterfuge.) Do you not think it would face a legal challenge that would undo it almost as soon as it would be fashioned?

        • PS As I’m now realizing, eah, you’re saying—or at least suspect—that the relationship between Tides Advocacy and the Tides Foundation represents the kind of maneuver you’ve thought churches might carry out:

          “I would imagine most of the funding for Tides Advocacy comes from the Tides Foundation (?) — so there is no tax advantage to the Tides Foundation — but donations to the Tides Foundation (income to Tides) are already tax-deductible, and money given to Tides Advocacy is an expense.”

          You really do think they’re getting away with that?

          • >You really do think they’re getting away with that?

            Why not? — I’m sure a 501(c)(3) like Tides Foundation awards lots of grant money every year to other organizations that are politically active (I gave one example); in fact, that’s its main purpose: to support leftwing political activism — they just cannot organize or otherwise engage in such activism themselves.

            I’m not a lawyer, but I see absolutely no reason why Tides Foundation should not be able to financially support Tides Advocacy, which in this context is just another separate leftwing activist organization.


            At the link above is the 2019 IRS form 990 of Tides Advocacy — per pg 3, Part IV, they are required to submit Schedule B, donation info — but if you scroll down thru the 990 filing, it does not include Schedule B — so maybe they are not required to make Schedule B public as part of their required 990 filing — note all non-profits are required to make their 990 filings publicly accessible, but often today there is nothing about that on their websites; you have to find their 990 filings on the IRS website.

            On pg 9, Part VIII, Statement of Revenue, they report getting no government grants (for many non-profits, e.g. refugee resettlement contractors, nearly all their revenue comes from the government) — so where did all that money come from? — my guess is that most if not all of it comes from the 501(c)(3) Tides Foundation.

          • >… so maybe they are not required to make Schedule B public …

            Is a tax-exempt organization required to disclose the names or addresses of its contributors?

            A tax-exempt organization is generally not required to disclose publicly the names or addresses of its contributors set forth on its annual return, including Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF). The regulations specifically exclude the name and address of any contributor to the organization from the definition of disclosable documents.

            Note: the above is related to disclosure, meaning making the info publicly available.

            IRS Revises Schedule B Requirements for Some Nonprofits

            Non-501(c)(3) organizations, like 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations or 501(c)(6) trade associations, will no longer have to report the donors’ names and addresses on Schedule B. Schedule B will still have to be completed by these organizations, but only contribution amounts will be listed. These organizations must still collect and maintain the donor information.

            So now as of 2018, some non-profits are no longer required to include specific donor info on the Schedule B they file with the IRS, just line items of donation amounts — the organization must itself still keep a list of its donors.

          • Hmm. Because the maneuver you’re discussing seems such a sham, eah, I’ve just now run a Google search for “can a 501c3 donate to a 501c4.” The first result is the following:

            (“Can a 501(c)(3) Donate to a 501(c)(4)?”)

            “A 501(c)(3) can donate to a 501(c)(4), as long as the donation is restricted to a charitable purpose that aligns with the organization’s mission and does not violate the 501(c)(3) nonprofit’s eligibility.”

            “It is not unusual for national and international nonprofits to set up 501(c)(3) arms of their 501(c)(4) organizations. The 501(c)(3) can accept donations and provide donors with a tax deduction, while the 501(c)(4) can engage in unlimited lobbying and political activity. The 501(c)(3) can donate money to the 501(c)(4) to fund specific projects that fall within the permissible scope of its activities.”

            The second result is the following:

            (“The Practical Implications of Affiliated 501(c)(3)s and 501(c)(4)s”)

            “There are issues an affiliated organization needs to watch for. Above all, the 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) must be separate legal entities and the 501(c)(3) must be able to demonstrate that it is not subsidizing, directly or indirectly, the partisan electoral work of the affiliated 501(c)(4).”

            So—it seems you can’t baldly route political money to a (c)(4) through a (c)(3).

          • @ John Bonaccorsi, Philadelphia AUGUST 2, 2022 AT 1:17 PM


            Above is a link to the 2019 990 of 501(c)(3) Tides Foundation — it includes a LONG list of grantees — scrolling thru it, there is a significant number of 501(c)(4) organizations among them — on pg 1088 you’ll see they gave > $18m to Tides Advocacy, which as I already noted is a 501(c)(4) — it was by far the largest grant I saw — anyway, clearly the 501(c)(3) Tides Foundation funds the 501(c)(4) Tides Advocacy, as I suspected.

            While I suppose it depends on what specific activity is deemed prohibited by the IRS, I think it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to strictly enforce any rules — so again I do not really see a general problem with a 501(c)(3) funding a 501(c)(4).

            And regarding the specific Tides Advocacy project I mentioned, restoring felon voting rights in FL, I think that could reasonably be regarded as non-partisan — meaning they could claim there is no overt attempt to support any specific candidate or party, just to restore the voting rights of felons — the same could probably be said about a lot of other activity too, e.g. criminal justice reform.

          • You might be right, eah. Because I don’t follow politics closely and thus never quite have a clear idea of what all these organizations are doing, it’s possible that I missed a distinction between outright partisan activity—such as a contributing to an election campaign—and political activity that isn’t strictly partisan (such as the felon voting rights thing, as you say).

            When I read, in the first item I quoted in my previous comment, that the (c)(3) could make a donation for “a charitable purpose that aligns with the organization’s mission,” I was thinking, oh, “charitable purpose,” like, say, a soup kitchen. You might be right that a group that was pushing for that felon-voting-rights thing might have been considered a “charity” in 501(c) law. There’s the additional problem, as you say, of identifying and thus of enforcing what’s what.

            If, indeed, the thrust of what you say is right, we’re left with the question why the churches aren’t doing what you’ve suggested they do.

  4. Putting the population on “a war footing” for a hot war to distract from the wholesale robbery of a major economic crash normally involves a restoration of public morals and the veneer of civil religion. The parasites’ host must be made to feel good about themselves and angry at an external enemy, while being bled completely dry.

    • This would explain a few things. Like why all of a sudden the Supreme Court appears to be upholding the constitution. Didn’t matter for the past 60 years and now…..

    • total fact of the matter and why they always divide you from your Yankee kin… the Yankee did not wage war on Dixie… the global monetary power did!!

      • @Ælf…

        “Total fact of the matter and why they always divide you from your Yankee kin… the Yankee did not wage war on Dixie… the global monetary power did!!’

        Vis-a-vis the Revolutionary War and the War of 19812, you are right – they were wars to thwart and stem Rothschild and his ‘Bank of England’.

        The 1860s and 1870s had nothing to do with that, however.

        That was was between Anglo-Celtic Gentiles, North and South, who have very different civilizational views.

        In short, the Northeast was, and is, always on the hunt for some panacea out there in the future, while The South, secure in the worldview it brought over here, now so long ago, is, and remains, rather averse to that.

        By the way, I appreciate your use of the Olde Ænglisc ‘Æ’

  5. Some think that Putin’s Russia maybe achieved the correct balance on the gay issues. It is not illegal there to be gay for consenting ADULTS IN PRIVATE … but gay propaganda, pride parades etc are prohibited. This allows for the fact it seems difficult / impossible for many gays not to be what they are … but preserves culture and peace for the normie majority.

    Maybe a fundamental principle that the LGBT movement violates, is the right of the majority not to be significantly disturbed by what they see.

    On hot days, it’s awful to see a Muslim husband comfy in t-shirt and shorts, the wife by his side sweating like a horse under head-to-toe black drapery. Muslim women and girls will secretly tell you they wish Western societies would have the courage to ban this sharia veil stuff. Freedom of religious thinking ok … but we can restrict what is done in public.

    In the early 19th century, some US states banned Roman Catholic priests from wearing their ‘cassock’ gowns on the street, because it offended them to see Catholic garb … sometimes they used the statutes against men being seen in women’s clothing LOL. Hence ‘Maryland’ as the original papist Catholic haven.

  6. In church this morning it was noted that Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan to provoke China did not succeed and gave thanks for this good outcome. Pelosi has landed safely in the firm U.S. “security partner” Singapore, having apparently had second thoughts about, and deciding not to, land in the Philippines that is beginning to lean toward China. The Empire has seriously “lost face” by turning back from landing in Taiwan. Also the neo-colonized Iraqis are getting restless now, invading the puppet “Iraqi” parliament (like January 6th) and driving bulldozers through some of the fortifications surrounding the U.S. “greenzone” in Baghdad. The new little proxy war that the U.S. is starting in Kosovo, against Serbia, even if it does succeed, will not cover the losses elsewhere.

    • The Empire must allow some Christian nationalism to help get its population on a war footing, to prepare for big war to distract them from the biggest-ever economic crisis (theft). Blinken just flew to Kosovo, where the Neocons are preparing another proxy war using Albanians against disobedient Serbia, and indirectly (as a second front) against Russia. See:

    • Among other things, it degrades women and rots the brains of men. We would unquestionably have a healthier culture without it

      • ” the problem with porn is”

        It wastes time and diverts energy.
        For many, it becomes a chronic addiction.

        • See, for example, the porn addled incels at Daily Stormer.

          They are completely unable to relate to or engage with women. It is sad watching it. I believe it was Jaden McNeil who called out Nick Fuentes on this

          • If you believe everything a person says about someone, then we should believe whatever someone says about you.
            How in the heck would you know, about anyone who goes to Daily Stormer, and what they do at home??

          • “See, for example, the porn addled incels at Daily Stormer.

            They are completely unable to relate to or engage with women.”

            Why is it “they are unable to relate to women” rather than “women are unable to relate to them?” Why is the burden always on the men? You’re always posting pics of these blue hairs so it’s ironic that you turn around and say “well, I wonder why these young men feel alienated from their womenfolk. Must be porn, dur dur dur.”

            And anyway, upwards of 80% of young men watch porn, so it’s hardly an incel only thing.

          • This seems focused on younger men in the movement. You have no concerns with the older guys. Ramzpaul and some of the rest of them are more than weird to me. The older guys seem more than grifty to me.
            What IS the difference between a younger guy going online, and some older guy reading Hustler or Playboy?
            I don’t even care about this crap, because it’s just ANOTHER distraction from the real problem.

      • I’ve been to some people’s homes, they have $10,000s to $100,000s that they have spent on porn. Such a waste.

      • “it degrades women”

        They don’t like it, they don’t need to watch it. White knighting is a dead end on both an individual and a political level. You won’t get female support this way.

          • But why do people watch porn? I’m all for banning porn, but what are the Evangelical policy proposals to stop the social conditions that lead to people seeking out this vice? Otherwise they are just putting a bandaid on the gaping wound.

          • The accessibility of every conceivable genre of hardcore pornography is just one manifestation of the Sexual Revolution and the liberal atheist modernist worldview that underpins it. Abortion is another. Gay marriage is another. “Trans” is another. Feminism is another.

            There is nothing really in evangelical Protestantism that permits this. It offends their morals and sensibilities. The problem is that these people have been held back by conservative liberalism. Evangelicals like David French will lament the obvious symptoms of cultural decline, but are ready to die on the hill of never lifting a finger to do anything about it because it is “big government” or something.

            If you want to get rid of these policies, you have to get rid of the people in the courts who are issuing these rulings like Anthony Kennedy who singlehandedly destroyed marriage. It is not like evangelical Protestants haven’t tried. They haven’t had much success until now, but they did get rid of Roe v. Wade and returned the issue to the states.

            We’re going to do that with other issues like gay marriage. Trump got rid of Backpage. OnlyFans needs to be shut down next.

          • Sounds like you’re very much on board with the whole Christian Nationalist deal.
            You want to regulate others’ lives, but you have no solution for the loss of our Constitutional freedoms. Porn seems to be more important in your mind, than the millions coming over the border.
            You want a Theocracy. Be careful what you wish for. Look at the Middle Eastern nations that are theocracies. The Salem Witch trials were done under that. People are stoned to death and more, because of what the bible says. Witches, demons, possessed people…it’s all in there.
            As far as porn goes, perhaps men don’t want to actively go and do things, especially when married, so porn online is an outlet for them. But you want to take that away.
            You’ll be happy when they impose the Noahide laws on everyone.

          • The people who are the angriest about illegal immigration who supported the Wall and who wanted Trump to deport all the illegal aliens are White evangelical Protestants. They are the most opposed to the Great Replacement.

          • @Pilot…

            “Porn online is an outlet for them. But you want to take that away.”

            I agree with Mr. Griffin – PORN IS NEITHER AN INNOCENT ACT NOT A HEALTHY ONE, but a spiritually cancerous act that is rotting out the souls of many many of our people, incluing boys and girls of elementary school age

            If someone cannot get through their day without watching some strange woman commit ungodly acts to men she does not know, then that someone is in serious trouble, indeed.

            Go lift some weights, plant a garden, or take up a musical instrument and build your soul, instead of poisoning it.

          • This is getting to where you’re making stuff up. Christians are NOT against immigration. Trump made a lot of noise about the caravans of people coming here, but they all got in, and they are still coming. What do you think “processing camps” do? They process them in, not deport them. Most Christians have no idea what the “Great Replacement ” means, even if they did, they’d say this isn’t our home anyways.

            You’re making a huge mistake. This time, next year, you’ll be chalking this up to another “Moral Majority” event. I don’t want you, or any other Cult Christians making decisions for me.

          • “The accessibility of every conceivable genre of hardcore pornography is just one manifestation of the Sexual Revolution and the liberal atheist modernist worldview that underpins it. Abortion is another. Gay marriage is another. “Trans” is another. Feminism is another.”

            Porn exists because men like to see naked women. You and the feminist aren’t that different, really, both try to psycho-pathologize normal male sexual desire.

            “There is nothing really in evangelical Protestantism that permits this. It offends their morals and sensibilities.”

            Theres nothing in the Bible that prohibits porn. The hostility of evangelical Protestants is down to the fact that most churches are numerically and financially dominated by women.

          • Whether men like to look at naked women or not is not the issue. Porn is degeneracy disseminated almost entirely by jews in order to destroy and tear down the family. A traditionalist, pro-White movement can never succeed as long as our people are addicted to the sick fantasy world promoted by the jewish sex industry. Porn is 100% jewish!

            Thanks to the jews, pre-pubescent children are being exposed to explicit sexual material at an increasing rate, which prevents them from developing into fully healthy adults. When a grown “man” is so warped by pornography that he cannot form stable relationships or even get through the day without viewing perverse sexual imagery, it is unreasonable to expect that he will have the moral courage and responsibility to stand up for his people. Porn needs to made illegal. Criminalizing the tools of subversion used by the Jews is the only way to return our civilization to moral and mental health.

          • I’m surprised this isn’t well known.

            Jews used to brag about how pornography was a weapon to degrade the culture, rot the minds of men and undermine Christian morality.

          • “When a grown “man” is so warped by pornography that he cannot form stable relationships”

            Do you know any men like this? I don’t. The men who aren’t in stable relationships are such because they get rejected by women. If this narrative is true, why is there so much complaining about “sexual harassment?”

          • “Jews used to brag about how pornography was a weapon to degrade the culture,”

            If it’s bad for the gentiles, it’s good for the jwz.

          • Do you know any men like this?

            Look how fucked up Western society has become. It wasn’t always. When this question above comes from someone who is so confused he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with porn, why bother to answer?

          • “Look how fucked up Western society has become. It wasn’t always. When this question above comes from someone who is so confused he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with porn, why bother to answer.”

            Just because you’ve identified the existence of a problem doesnt mean you’ve identified the source of the problem.

      • @Dart…

        You are absolutely right.

        Porn has been a plague on this society for at least 60 years, and, since the advent of the internet and smart-phones, it has only gotten worse.

        Yes, as bad as they are, brothels are much better than porn, because they do not promote a culture of masturbatorial fornicators…

        • I can’t get it straight, is porn bad because it turns men into incels or is porn bad because it turns men into fornicators?

          • @Anon…

            Porn is evil because it degrades everyone involved with it, in limitless ways.

            Porn cheapens people, puts stress on real life relationships, encourages toxick thoughtlines, and, as Saint Paul said, it is the door to other kinds of sin.,

            Oh, and dare I say it? : porn makes you noxious to God.

            If porn were something you could physically ingest, it would be the equivalent of mild arsenick flavour enhancer for your food – slow deterioration.

      • I’m surprised you said that. How are brothels better? If a man goes online and looks at something, is he really breaking his marital vows? But if he goes to a brothel, is he? Which of the two is more likely to lead to the man contracting some form of venereal disease or hepatitis? Which of the two is more likely to result in the break of the marriage?
        Women like to look at fashion magazines. Many like to watch cooking shows. It’s an outlet.
        So you guys would rather have whorehouses than online porn. That’s a big leap in the wrong direction to me.
        And again, porn, abortion, gays, LBwhatever, etc. are not killing us off. Not good, but not the main goal.
        Massive invasion by nonwhites, hostile anti-white laws, and discriminatory policies against whites with the goal of reducing our numbers….IS.

      • Porn needs to made illegal.

        Not possible in the digital age.
        But many things can be done to reduce it.
        Make porn producers liable for all health costs of the STDs spread by their productions. Hit them in the wallet.

  7. What kind of Christian nationalist allows his daughter to convert to Judeo-Satanism and marry a son of the devil (John 8:44)?

  8. Weimar conditions need Weimar solutions.

    Christianity in Deutschland was capable of removing the reservoirs and vectors of the jewish pestilence that was pushing both cultural degeneracy and Bolshevism. It took a secular (not hostile to Christianity) movement of Third Position National Socialists to remove the yid flies from cultural and financial primacy in Germany.

    Evangelical Protestants and other sects of Christianity in the Anglosphere fell in will the atheist USSR against the White Christian nations that were allied against their real adversary (Godless communism).

    We have seen from recent history that Christianity is a windsock for whatever regime is in power, and their hierarchies will acquiesce to their governments, instead of the well being of other White Christians like themselves.

  9. From a standpoint of logic, Christian Nationalism will not deliver victory because there are not enough Christians of that sort to offset the pushing away of fence sitters who just don’t like religion encroaching on civic life.

    However, I do not want to expend any energy against it because it is a necessary phase of the development of the movement that will ultimately deliver victory. Something about human nature seeks every possible alternative before embracing what must be done.

    Only the new can fight the new

    • What is being called “Christian nationalism” is not new. It’s 1980s moral majority Reaganism, relabelled by the liberal media as “Christian nationalism” in an attempt to link it to fascism and scare their progressive audience.

  10. Edit: Christianity in Deutschland was not capable of of removing the reservoirs and vectors of the jewish pestilence…

    • ‘Edit: Christianity in Deutschland was not capable of of removing the reservoirs and vectors of the jewish pestilence…’


      I do not know why you say that – the Lutheran and German Roman Catholic churches of 1930s and 1940s gave, as a whole, a great deal of support to Hitler and his movement.

      • Hello Ivan,

        My point was that both Lutherans and Catholics were unable to remove the degeneracy of the Weimar Republic Era or defend Germany from the Bolshevik revolutionary menace with their Christian Faith, and they numbered over 50 million. It took the secular NSDAP to remove the jewish pestilence/plague from Deutschland.

        At the ballot box, Protestants supported Hitler more than Catholics who were still voting for their own Zentrum Party, but in the unnecessary Brother War, indeed German Christians fought and died heroically for their Reich. As you probably already know, Wehrmacht belt buckles had the inscription, “Gott mit Uns.”

        • @November…

          Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

          Let’s be clear – when we speak of ‘the Decadency of The Weimar Republik’, we are speaking of 1920s Berlin – NOT Munich, not Stuttgart, not Hanover, nor a gazillion other smaller places in Germany.

          The overwhelming majority of Germans, at that time, did not accept homosexuality, transvestiteism (today transgenderism), are any other trademark decadencies of Jewry run awry.

          At the ballot box it is important for you to understand that the NSDAP never gained more than 36% of the national German vote. From there, Hitler found a path into power, but, it was not a straighforward one, because the average smalltown and rural German did not approve of the National Socialists, anymore than they approved of the Judeo-Bolshevik socialists.

          Of course, after Hitler had been in power for a few years, most Germans grew to comprehend what he was about and changed there mind – he growing to be as popular as Putin is today in Russia.

          Of course, by 1944, Germans came again to be of another mind about what Hitler was about.

          Yes, I know that Germans in the armed forces commonly thought they were fighting the good fight against Satan, which is why ‘Gott bei uns’ was on their belts, and, as well, why, by 1944, they were wondering why God seemed to be forsaking them.

          The same thing has been going on in The South, in recent years – Southerners scratching their heads and wondering why God has deserted ‘us’.

          To them I always say what annoys them : ‘ God doesn’t make biscuits, God does not mow the lawn, and God does not make or break nations.

          He may bless or curse us to do these things, but, He does not do them for us.’

          Yes, most Germans who fought in WWII were Christians, and I believe, were fighting for what was right, if you discount the horrific abuses of the Nazi Government in occupied lands.

          This is inconvenient for Americans today – they who wish to crown the WWII Generation as ‘The Greatest Generation, because, ostensibly, they were on the side of right against German evil.

          For me my daddy’s generation qualifies as the most duped, because they allowed themselves to be lured into fighting their German kin with whom they agreed with about practically everything – including wariness about Jewry.

          But, there again, my fellow Southerners love any legal excuse to shoot at things, and are not much discerning about why.

          On a final point, yes, Christianity, as a whole, was unable to remove the claws of International Jewry from Germany, because that was the responsibility of the politicians and military to do.

          The military had been defeated, and the politicians were unable to grasp what the situation was, except for Hitler, he who graspt entirely what was going on and why, and was prepared to act.

          This country needs leaders like that today.

          Until they arrive, this country will sink deeper and deeper into the muck, because it’s enemies who control it’s upper echelons know no limits.

          • “For me my daddy’s generation qualifies as the most duped, because they allowed themselves to be lured into fighting their German kin with whom they agreed with about practically everything …”

            As I’ll guess you know, Ivan, Hollywood moved as early as 1946 to quash any suggestion to that effect …

          • @John Bonaccorsi…

            Excellent choice of an illustration, Dear John, and how apropos it is, as a case in point for the constant mental grooming that was, and, indeed, still is, going on.

            Sadly, the video also has an unintended validity, for, as your Average Southerner of 2022 tries to put together his feelings over how much he now dislikes this country, and yet, how much he and his daddies, and granddaddies have invested into it, he is as ill apt as is the ‘staunch defender of Americanism’ in this clip, to confront the fact he has been taken for the greatest ride in all history.

            Moreover, the Average Southerner of 2022 is seems equally unable to pull himself back and admit, if not to anyone else but to himself, that he has made a bad investment, and, thus, ought be reinvesting himself into something that might be something closer to the mark.

            By the way, as immense as was, and, indeed, is, the effort to crown the Americans that fought the Germans in WWII as, ‘The Greatest Generation’, just as much effort has been put into getting Germans to believe that their fathers and grandfathers who fought ‘The Greatest American Generation’ were the worst…

          • I don’t doubt what you say about what has been directed toward the Germans, Ivan.

            You’ll have noticed the sign on the drugstore’s wall: “Prescriptions accurately compounded.” It’s almost Victorian—a different America.

  11. Katherine Stewart is Jewish. She had a nose job. She used to have a big beaky nose. What is the problem the Jews have with Christ or Christian morality or Christian power? If the power is used for good if the power is used to protect the weak and the innocent, what is the problem?

    The Jews want prey and Christianity is the opposing force in this world to their predatory wants. The predator does not want the shepard or his sheep dogs around, it is harder to feed, harder to survive.

    They, the Jews were given their own country, to live in peace with their own kind as they see fit. But but but……

    El Al has three daily non-stop flights from JFK to Tel Aviv. What is the excuse??

    Ditto, Aer Lingus has three non-stop flights from JFK to Dublin daily.

    Do you need a written invitation?

  12. “WHITE Christian Nationalism”

    Now where cooking with gas

    And now it is our job to steer the ship that way

  13. Southern/American Christian nationalism really missed the boat when they didn’t support the Serbs (White Christian Nationalists) ever to retake their historic, sacred spiritual center of Kosovo from Albanian Muslim Turks. Most scratched their heads and just couldn’t understand what was going and Why Conservative inc (Jewish Neo Conservatives) were screaming that “The Serbs are NAZIS” and then it moved on to Syria’s Assad and the Russians Putin are now the NAZIS, Assad and Putin and then Donald Trump are Hitler.

    It seems like was just a a couple years ago that I was doing a one many America First, anti Neo Con war/intervention in Iraq under George Bush Sr. I was doing this anti War activism in Nashville TN where I went to undergraduate. I was treated very fairly by the local media including the local Jewish media (Teddy Bart show). The general (White) audience was respectful to my arguments that we should stay neutral in these inter Arab conflicts and come home, secure our border, restore the rule of law in our collapsing cities. But the general Red State White audience couldn’t resist the Hank Williams Jr war propaganda and the calls that :

    “We need to finally win a war again like we did in World War II and not have another Vietnam”.


    This was back in 1991.

    Time flies when you’re not having fun.

  14. I don’t have much hope for this political movement, because our Marxist “betters” are working hand in glove with other Marxists around the world to achieve their utopia, BUT that doesn’t mean I won’t dedicate resources to it–nothing to lose!

  15. No, Brian Stelter:

    Trump did NOT throw open the doors to Christian Nationalism.

    You loony leftists did with your attacks on our children. You thought you had right-leaning normies cowed by your unconstitutional punishment by process of the January 6th protesters to overthrow the questionable victory of your corrupt Biden regime. And you were probably correct to think si.

    But you couldn’t stop there; the Red Diaper Doper Babies doubtless forgetting that, back in 1919, the Hungarian people (who did NOT have guns) ran out Communist dictator, Bela Kun even in the face of his gulags that were set up and genocide by his Lenin Boys AFTER his Deputy Commisar, Georg Lucaks established a similar CRT to destroy Hungarian nationalism and sexual debauchery of Hungarian school children to de-Christianize the country.

    You should have quit while you were ahead. Roe v. Wade was imposed by unelected officials but would still have remained the law of the land as even the most leftist countries overseas drew the line at fetal viability. But you then had to push for abortion on demand up to the last second of the last trimester. Only sick degenerate psychopaths like you would object to drawing the line at infanticide.

    But even keeping your degenerate values confined to your fellow travelers in your own states wasn’t enough for you; you want to force them on those of us who want no part of them or you and you want to indoctrinate our children to your spiritual sickness using our taxes over our objections at gunpoint if necessary.

    Well you have gone too far. You desperately need and deserve the nuclear backlash that is headed your way. Keep your damned hands and poisonous doctrines away from our little ones or be prepared to draw back bloody stumps.

    We are sick and tired of you so back off, go away, and get lost.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Wajahat Ali: The Handmaid’s Tale as a GOP How-To Manual – Occidental Dissent

Comments are closed.