Christian White Nationalism is a hot item -- and reeks of anti-semitism while there are major shifts in support from Dems and now some Republicans

How about this xmas song? I'm dreaming of a white Christian Nation 

 

December 24 - Christmas Eve - in the old days this would be a joyous day for me, not because of religion, but because school is over. In the years when I had my own classes - grades 4-6 - I spent a hectic few weeks organizing gifts and a class party. More than once, I remember getting into my car on the last day of schools and my throat started hurting which led to being sick for the vacation. It was due to the body let down after intense activity and a lesson for me on how to avoid getting colds when your body reacts to over-activity.

Jews and Xmas: Now the last day of school is just another day for me - but - We already booked a movie and Chinese restaurant for tomorrow. You have to book a movie in advance on Xmas day? We did and it's sold out. 

 

This post is likely to get me in some trouble. It is a mess as I change my views every few minutes in trying to see various points of view - a way to get in trouble in today's world where being morally unequivocal is required.

 

I've been working on this since I heard Vance spouting his nonsense and in the process my views are evolving. Or devolving. I was about to finish this up this morning but Brian Lehrer opened his show by talking about some of the issues I raise here regarding the repeated declaration that this is a Christian nation, which it is in a sense in that Brian pointed out only 6-7% are religiously identified non-Christians -- that includes Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. But -- 22% identify as no faith. Jews make up 2.4% of the total population - 7.5 million of us. Yet Jews occupy a lot of the conversation with attention focused due to what is happening in Israel. 

Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing aa anti-semitism - always has been and always will be. It is made to seem worse than ever. There has been an uptick but pogroms have not been. My school district leadership  - Italian and Irish in the 70s, while allied with the Satmar Hasidics, definitely had an anti-Semitic bent. Even between the Irish and Italians there was friction, with the Italians ultimately winning out. When someone became a principal or AP, they were considered "made" and taken out to a restaurant known as a mob joint. My friend was Jewish and a principal in that crowd and the Supt once told him he doesn't trust anyone who is not Italian. And how interesting that at one point Italians, Irish and Jew were attacked as not being pure enough to be in this country. White Christian nationalism goes back almost 200 years. Remember how Al Smith was attacked for being Catholic in the 1928 election and even Kennedy in 1960?

                                                                     
Has anyone looked at the crucifixion of Christ as as anti-antisemitism, Roman style?

 

I identify as Jewish without the religion  - so the line is fuzzy -- but in this "Christian" nation, 30% do not id as practicing Christian. And then among Christians, there are so many sects -  Catholic is the largest - I can imagine the battles for primacy because as we become more intoletant of political differences, how far behind are intolerance to other religious sects, even within Christianity? But there is a common denominator - Jesus Christ -- yet as I heard on Brian Lehrer, the "love everyone" message of Jesus often gets lost. The theory of progressive Christians is that Jesus would be a leftist - probably DSA today. 

 

If they had their pure white Christian nation how long before one sect attacks the others? Like Christians never went to war against each other? Henry the 8th I am I am. England was a religious war zone in the time of Shakespeare. 

Here is the vice-president: 

Speaking today at Turning Point USA’s annual “AmericaFest” conference, Vice President J.D. Vance said, to great applause: “The only thing that has truly served as an anchor of the United States of America is that we have been, and by the grace of God we always will be, a Christian nation.” 

Whenever I hear the "we are a Christian nation" trope, I see an ethnic state and

dangers to non-Christians, though ironically, the basis of Christianity was a Jew. I often think that one root of anti-antisemitism is resentment at praying to a Jew. How can one love Jesus and not love Jews? I don't get it. I see all this festive stuff Jews don't take part in and it's all about a guy who was killed because he advocated a sect of Judaism - and there were many sects at that time, one of the lovely things about religion -- they split more then Trotskyists -- and Trotsky was also a Jew that many on the left pray too - and he was sort of crucified - or ICE Picked - by Stalin, who had his own brand of antisemitism. 

 

Ethno states faced opposition for ages. I don't care what religion people have --  I am opposed to ethnic states - Saudi Arabia or Israel or the United States. The founding of this country was based on being tolerant of other religions since so many came here to run away from persecution - yes mostly Christian -- but Jews too. 

 

Armenians also suffered a genocide after WW1 and also want their own state. Their arguments seem to make sense but that is another slippery slope.  I would agree with some critics of the left for ignoring situations around the world to focus on Israel. A guy I know who is involved in the NYC based Educators for Palestine told me there was a discussion to broaden beyond the focus on Israel and include other states oppressing populations but that position was rejected --- the focus on Israel alone is one of the major arguments Zionists use to claim people on the left are antisemitic. I say they are more rigid ideologues. 

 

The extremes on the right are outright bordering on fascism -- which seem to becoming more and more mainstream- this is a white Christian nation - which means Jews (who they don't consider to be white), are a target --- the major antisemitism is coming from the right, which generally supports Israel while on the left we see a lot of anti-Israel which is not anti-semitism but Zionists try to brand that as anti-semitism. 

My thinking has evolved from being a mild Zionist to having had enough.

 

The Vance Christian stuff has lots of baggage when it comes to women.  

Going back to Germany in the 30s when there was enormous unemployment, Hitler "solved" the problem not only with massive rearmament but also ordering woman back to the home to raise babies for the Reich.   

And in this country, raising white babies to counter the possibility the majority of people will not be white one day is part of the ideology.  

 

Note the calls from Vance and others for women to not work and have babies to keep this nation white by banning immigration from non-white places. South African whites are hot. Why won't people from Scandinavia who have all sorts of healthcare and other protections come here to die in emergency rooms? I have a friend from Japan who has been here 25 years on a visa and won't become a citizen because she doesn't want to be subject to the harshness of a weak safety net that she has in Japan.

 

Irony in that Vance has non-white kids and his Indian wife has been trashed by the Groypers. 

 

The Nick Fuentes-led Groypers want a pure white Christian nation - which means the Jews have to go - and where can they go?  I was brought up thinking that a holocaust can come to us here and used to see Israel as my escape route. No longer. I don't want to go from one fascist to another, even if it's my sect that's being fascist. There is no free speech in Israel, even for Jew. And it's not just an ethnic Jewish state but increasingly a religious state as the power of ultra Orthodox grows.

 

Israel wants to be a pure Jewish nation. Fuentes wants the same for this nation - just substitute Christian for Jewish.

 

Fuentes on a recent broadcast said he admired Israel for being the same kind of place he wants America to be. And why not he asks? Why do Jews get to have an ethnic state and Christians don't? 

On an episode of his show in March, he summarized his politics as: “Jews are running society, women need to shut the fuck up, blacks need to be imprisoned for the most part, and we would live in paradise. It’s that simple.” He has also repeatedly described Hitler as “cool”. Support for an ethnic and religious hierarchy with white Christian men at the top; a belief that black people are inclined to criminality; opposition to legal as well as illegal immigration; vehement anti-feminism; respect for authoritarianism; disdain for democracy.

What next? A revival of the Ku Klux Klan to enforce Christianity? And don't forget, the racist KKK was also anti-Catholic because it was not the right sect of Christianity. 

 

Republican outing

So, Fuentes says he admires Israel for its ethnic centric policy -- he has said that in 50 years Israel will still be a Jewish state while America if it doesn't reverse direction will be totally bastardized. He wants us to be like Israel. But Christian. 

Zionists say Israel has has to be a Jewish state and most Jews seem to go along with that and if you object you are branded anti-semitic and if you are a Jewish objector, you are a self-hating Jew. There is a massive Zionist lobby pushing these lines and of course they will be focused on anything Mamdani does to attack him -- note the extreme scrutiny of his appointments -- like the woman married to a Jew with two Jewish kids who made some anti-semitic comments in 2011 when she was a teen. Rabid Zionists will do anything they can to make Mamdani fail and emphasize any negatives they can because of a Muslim who is critical of Israel succeeds it is a threat to them. The Anti Defamation League will do anything it can to undermine Mamdani.

 

Zionists think Jews are special and due so the Holocaust they must have their own state - which is where I have been at most of my life but draw the line that that state is entitled to do anything it wants. Now I have to question the very nature of a fascistic, apartheid state. I talk to all levels of Zionists. Some are rabid --- no kids are dying in Gaza and if they are they are being used as shields by Hamas which then justifies Israel to wipe out an entire building to kill one Hamas. One relative recently used the argument that Jews are moral while Muslims are not. I know too many Jews to make that judgement. I never say Hamas is good -- though some I argue with on the left defend them and compare them to the Irish IRA resisters to Britain -- I was always disturbed by them too. 

 

On the other hand, Jews have been a minority for 2000 years wherever they have been and that has not turned out so good for them. So when people say Israel should just be a peaceful multiethnic state and let the chips fall where they may, history does not look good if they were to be a minority -- people seem to think Palestinians in the majority would just live and let live. That is dreamland. Remember when Nasser expelled Jews from Egypt? 

He also expelled Greeks. Probably too many diners.

 

I could see a reversal over decades if Jews became a minority where the shoe is on the other foot. The left will say good riddance -- they are settler colonialists. 

So I am confused as I try to see all sides.

Recently, we saw Ken Burns American Revolution and I was a history major and took a one semester course in that period and that was a political, and not a social revolution - mostly - though supporters of England were often exiled and had their property seized. The Declaration states: "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another...." Can you name one such separation without violence?

Around the same time as the founding of Israel, the India/Pakistan partition took place and they are still having issues, as is Israel and Palestinians. Religion played a part there too - Muslim and Hindu friction. There was massive forced migration in both cases. In Israel the idea that if Palestinians would just disappear, their problems would be solved. Oct. 7 made this possible by making life so miserable people would have to leave -- at least those left alive.

 

A growing number of Jews and Democrats have turned against the Israeli government. Remember the reaction against Amy Arundell when she announced she was running for UFT president last February because of her views on Palestine? ABC still got 32% of the vote and I'd guess we lost 2% while she was a key to making ABC viable. I'd guess that between February and the election in May minds were changing as the atrocities piled up. And a month later Mamdani won the primary and views like Amy's were becoming mainstream in NYC, even among Jews. 

But it's hard to let go if you think Israel is your out when this place goes full fascist. And now a portion of MAGA has also turned against Israel, but I suspect there is more antisemitism than in the Dems.

 

Most Zionists I know support the idea of Israel -- if only we got rid of Netanyahu - which is a mistake as there are even more far right people in Israel -- there will be no going back to more tolerant days. They are moving toward removing or killing as many Palestinians as they can - killing children is part of the plan to prevent future opposition -- one Zionist told me she doesn't care how many kids they kill as they are all future terrorists. The idea is to make conditions so bad people will leave - but where will they go? Probably the Ellisons will throw a few billion to some desperate nations to take them. 

 

The Mamdani win in the biggest Jewish city, considering his position on Israel, has sent shock waves throughout the nation -- a crisis of sorts for zionists, a number of whom are critical of the Netanyahu government, but still defend the concept of a Jewish state. However, it looks like the Israeli population on the whole are fine with whatever is done to Palestinians - look at the West Bank outrages - and the fact that Israel will never treat Palestinians decently is resonating deeply and causing even some zionists to question the validity of a Jewish state continuing in an apartheid situation - or eliminating the Palestinian people as a solution. Maybe a final solution. 

 

They don't see the dangers to themselves as they did see when many Jews were forced to leave Muslim states and declare that if Muslims have states, Jews should too. But why not Christian states too? Which is a point Fuentes makes when he says he admires Israeli Jewish nationalism and says he wants the same thing for this country,

 

In this video, Krystal Ball and Segar Enjeti delve into the Fuentes issue and tie to the Israeli situation and how the calls for an Israeli ethnic state lead inevitably to a Christian state here.

 

https://youtu.be/HGvq_1PLhr4?si=MM1qDlkT81fUa9eI

 

The United States was founded on being a non-single religion state.

Let's not forget that many of the earliest settlers going back to 1620 were escaping religious persecution in Europe. The ultimate outcome of the Vance position of Christian nationalism is, of course, more antisemitism. Jews were place the fault on the left are certainly ignoring 500 years (at least) of history of right wing antisemitism and pogroms. Does anyone think that 

Heather Cox Richardson goes into some details on our history, but Christian white nationalists will call it fake news. 

In 1790, the year after he took office as the nation’s first president, George Washington assured a Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, that in the United States of America, “[a]ll possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship.” The government of the United States, he wrote, “gives to bigotry no sanction” and “to persecution no assistance.” He wished that Jewish Americans “continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants— while everyone shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.” The next year, the states ratified the First Amendment to the Constitution. In order to ensure men had the right of conscience, it reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” In 1802, President Thomas Jefferson called this amendment “a wall of separation between Church & State.” In a letter of January 1, 1802, he explained to a group of Baptists from Danbury, Connecticut, how that principle made him refuse to call for national religious days of fasting and thanksgiving in his role as head of the government. Like Madison, he maintained that “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship.” “[T]he legitimate powers of government reach actions only,” he wrote, “[and] not [religious] opinions.” “[T]hat act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’” he wrote, built “a wall of separation between Church & State.” In the early years of the nation, Americans zealously guarded that wall. They strictly limited the power of the federal government to reflect religion, refusing even to permit the government to stop delivery of the U.S. mails on Sunday out of concern that Jews and Christians did not share the same Sabbath and the government could not choose one over the other. The Constitution, a congressional report noted, gave Congress no authority “to inquire and determine what part of time, or whether any has been set apart by the Almighty for religious exercises.” But the Civil War marked a change. As early as the 1830s, southern white enslavers relied on religious justification for their hierarchical system that rested on white supremacy. God, they argued, had made Black Americans for enslavement and women for marriage, and society must recognize those facts. When reformers in the United States tried to change the preamble of the U.S. Constitution to read, “We, the people of the United States, humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the sources of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the Ruler among nations, and His revealed will as of supreme authority, in order to constitute a Christian government, and in order to form a more perfect union,” the House Committee on the Judiciary concluded that “the Constitution of the United States does not recognize a Supreme Being.” That defense of democracy—the will of the majority—continued to hold religious extremists at bay. Reformers continued to try to add a Christian amendment to the Constitution, Foster explains, and in March 1896 once again got so far as the House Committee on the Judiciary. One reformer stressed that turning the Constitution into a Christian document would provide a source of authority for the government that, he implied, it lacked when it simply relied on a voting majority. A religious amendment “asks the Bible to decide moral issues in political life; not all moral questions, but simply those that have become political questions.” Opponents recognized this attempt as a revolutionary attack that would dissolve the separation of church and state, and hand power to a religious minority. One reformer said that Congress had no right to enact laws that were not in “harmony with the justice of God” and that the voice of the people should prevail only when it was “right.” Congressmen then asked who would decide what was right, and what would happen if the majority was wrong. Would the Supreme Court turn into an interpreter of the Bible? The committee set the proposal aside. Now, once again, we are watching a minority trying to impose its will on the majority, with leaders like Vice President J.D. Vance trying to rewrite American history. Letters from an American December 21, 2025 Heather Cox Richardson