Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Vice President-elect J. D. Vance rightly said that “the Chinese have a foreign policy of building  roads and bridges and feeding poor people,” while U.S. has built “a foreign policy of hectoring, and moralizing, and lecturing countries.” He could add that this supposed moralizing is, for most countries, immoral; maybe, if you look carefully, it is even immoral for the majority of the domestic population, since Kamala Harris lost the election. After all, moralizing goes far beyond the defense of liberal democracy: it includes the defense of “human rights,” practically summed up in the “achievements” of the sexual revolution (LGBT and feminist rights). Thus, if the U.S. intended to give moralizing lectures to the Afghans, the Afghans would certainly say that the U.S. defended a lot of immoralities.

The habit of hectoring and moralizing is associated with Puritanism; and, in fact, the United States is a country founded by Puritans. How is it possible that such a country went from being Puritan and a believer of Manifest Destiny, to being a propagandist of sodomy throughout the world? Did God choose America to preach the Gospel of Lady Gaga?

This riddle results from two things: a theological doctrine and a matter of political power. The theological doctrine is Unitarianism, which emerged shortly after the Reformation. It consists of denying the Trinity and affirming the unity of the divinity. If only God is divine, the logical consequence is that Jesus is not divine. Jesus, for them, is a great moral reformer who, like Socrates, was punished by society for being ahead of his time. This is a belief very compatible with scientism, since there is nothing supernatural in Christ. On the other hand, it is questionable whether this theology deserves to be called Christian, since Muslims and Kardecists also recognize the superior character of Christ while denying his divinity.

The first Unitarians appeared in Poland in the 16th century and caused some confusion in Hungary and Transylvania, but were successfully repressed. The places where Unitarianism took hold were England and, even more so, United States. In 1774, the first Unitarian Church was established in Essex by Theophilus Lindsay. In England, there was not enough repression to put an end to the church, nor to stop its influence – much less to prevent it from crossing the Atlantic. To give you an idea, two English Unitarians were the feminist Mary Wollstonecraft and Harriet Taylor Mill, the wife and collaborator of John Stuart Mill. In the United States, however, there was no serious attempt to repress them: in the 19th century, the Unitarians took over Harvard and elected a president, John Quincy Adams.

What is the consequence of denying the divinity of Christ? In the case of the Unitarians, at least in the case of the Anglophone Unitarians, it was a militant anti-conservatism in the field of ​​morals. Jesus, like Socrates, was a moral reformer who was far ahead of his time, and, because he was ahead of his time, he was assassinated. Therefore, it is possible – and even desirable – that other Socrates and other Jesuses will emerge, that is, other moral reformers. How can this new Jesus be identified? By opposing current and past morality. Mill wrote extensively in On Liberty against the “tyranny of opinion”, that oppresses free thinkers who want to reform morality. Unitarian clergymen (e.g. William Ellery Channing) had already written before him that the tyranny of opinion was as oppressive as that of the Inquisition. The logical consequence of this is that, if a free thinker springs up defending pedophilia and arouses the revolt of common opinion, the one who is right is the pedophile, because he is the moral reformer, and society is repressive and inquisitorial.

Of course, things didn’t start out so badly. A cause cherished by Mary Shelley and Harriet Taylor Mill’s husband is the equality of women with men. As bad as feminism is, and as bad as the world is for most Western women (who can’t start a family or find fulfillment in their jobs), there’s no denying that, in the 19th century, marriage could leave women to a private despotism of bad husbands. In the 20th century, the Unitarians were advocating for the equality of black people and, later, for gay people. What did the feminist, black and gay causes have in common? The fact that they proposed social reforms that went against society (it’s worth remembering that the U.S. is a country with deep racist roots). In practice, the moral rule ends up being to go against society – and that’s why the U.S. ended up embracing transvestites and putting them to read stories in children’s libraries.

Why did this doctrine gain so much traction in the U.S.? For two reasons, the main one being political liberalism. The United States was even more liberal than England, since, unlike the latter, it never prohibited Catholicism by law. Thus, the United States had nothing remotely similar to the Inquisition, and Unitarianism enjoyed the same freedom as any other religion. There is no room, in the institutional history of the United States, for the category of heretic. Nothing is heresy, everything is religion.

Unitarianism spread like wildfire. If in 1774 they founded the first church in England, in 1805 (only 31 years later), they already had the rectorship of Harvard, and in 1825 they already had the sixth president of the United States. The United States became independent and constituted itself as a nation in 1776, that is, only two years after the founding of the Unitarian Church in England. Thus, we can say that the country existed for less than 30 years free of great Unitarian influence.

If the United States, being liberal, cannot adhere to any religious creed, and does not have any strong leader (such as an Emperor or a Supreme Leader), power ends up falling into the hands of technocrats trained by the most important universities. Unitarianism has this convenience of not seeing itself as a religion among others; thus, its principles are easily secularized – so much so that Mill’s On Liberty is a typical work of Unitarianism, but it is not seen as such. In addition to being considered secular, Unitarianism ended up giving rise to theological liberalism (which we have already discussed) and spreading through various churches and even synagogues. Protestants of any denomination ended up being divided between fundamentalists (who denied science) and liberals (who repeated the Unitarians). That is why we see so much transvestites and rainbows in the Episcopal and Anglican Churches, even though the thing arose in the Unitarian Church: both adhered to liberalism, instead of fundamentalism.

In view of this, ladies and gentlemen, what we can conclude is that the adoration of transvestites is an inevitable consequence of liberalism, and that the Inquisition burned too few people.