The current reality resulted from the fading of the balance between SAY and SEE, especially as the SAY was used as cover to push against the SEE.
Ever since the Civil Rights Era, politicians and prominent people have been SAYING good things about blacks. The SAY was pro-black.
But what did people SEE in their everyday lives as years passed? Rise in black criminality and pathology. And things got worse and worse. Also, the boomers, the biggest generation ever, were so busy yapping against the evils of the older generation that they were, for a time, oblivious of things falling apart.
Still, precisely because the SEE was so at odds with the SAY(that hadn't gone totally PC back then, i.e. blacks were praised but not yet 'sacralized'), many people(even Liberals) had some sense of actual reality. They heard and said the SAY but they could SEE what was really going on. They heard from their friends and families about black crime, or they experienced it first hand. Even if not victims of crime, they could SEE the rise in grime.
Finally, the boomers got in control of things. Since they had 'moral cred' as the 'progressive counterculture generation', they could do things that would have been condemned among the older generation. (It's like Richard Nixon could go to China and make deals with the USSR because of his anti-commie credentials.) Especially beginning with Billy Boy Clinton, the boomers decided to counter Big City crime(that was especially damaging to Democrats). They pushed back against what what they could SEE, which was mostly black thuggery and violence. (As Jews came to elite dominance as boomers, there was the Jewish angle as well. Jews could get away with more stuff as they had the 'holocaust' shield.)
But even as boomer elites began to clamp down on the SEE, they kept with the same SAY. Actually, they pushed the SAY even harder. Blacks went from objects of sympathy/reverence to those of worship/sanctity. There were two reasons for this. Boomers came of age during the Civil Rights Era that defined the times. But on a more cynical and opportunistic level, it was a means to cover up their war on the SEE, which was too much black crime. If Clinton and NY-ers were to get tough on black crime, they had to mask their tough 'racist' actions with endless paeans to black holiness. (Another problem was the rise of rap culture, or the idolization of black nihilism. If black thuggery was once seen as a bad thing, rap culture made it 'cool'. SWEET SWEETBACK was a cult thing in the 70s, but such became the mainstay of American culture in the 90s. If THE GODFATHER made Italian-Americans idealize mafia patriarchs, Rap culture led to black and white kids idolizing street punks.)
Still, because the War on the SEE was carried out for real, crime did plummet in places like NY. And even in other cities where black crime remained problematic, the downtown areas improved markedly and became safer than ever. Areas once depressed in value with black housing projects became gentrified and among the priciest places on Earth. The best parts of the cities, the downtown areas, sprung back to life. The war on the SEE worked. Yet, the SAY not only remained pro-black but even more so. The more the whites, Jews, homos, and immigrants pushed out blacks, the more they claimed to worship the Magic Negro and Badass Bro.
No one quite realized what kind of impact this would have on the younger generation of Americans, especially affluent urban whites. Millennials lived in a far safer and nicer world due to the war on black crime, but for that very reason, they experienced less of raw urban reality as counterbalance against the indoctrination of the SAY. Earlier generations also heard the SAY but witnessed and experienced the SEE. Just like people in the Soviet Union heard the holy SAY about the glories of communism but could SEE that the shelves were empty, it used to be that many Americans understood the SAY to be largely BS as they could SEE so much black pathology in big cities. But among the Millennial privileged in big cities, there was far less SEE to prick the bubble of the SAY that became ever more obnoxious with 'wokeness'. Or, even if some Millennials did experience black thuggery and crime, they were so enamored of the black rap gangsta idol that they cucked before black violence than get angry about it.
And so, we have the current paradox. Younger whites in cities are so much better off because the boomers used the War on the SEE to drastically reduce black crime by means of incarceration, stop-and-frisk, gentrification, and immigration. But because they were raised with the SAY of black holiness, they became reverential of the very thing that had to be clamped down to make cities better. And as black crime was reduced to a considerable degree, there was less getting mugged-by-reality among Millennials to balance out the bogosity of the SAY. So, Millennials became yay to the SAY.
Some have compared the current nuttery to the Cultural Revolution in China, and there is one striking similarity. After Mao Zedong brought upon total disaster with the Great Leap Forward(that led to mass famines and tens of millions of deaths), something had to be done about Maoism to make the Chinese economy recover so that people could eat again. People during the Great Leap could SEE what was happening. Even Mao came around to admitting the Great Leap failed. So, Maoism was rolled back in action, BUT the SAY remained the same. Mao was still the wise leader, the great helmsman, the sun that rises in the East. There was less Maoism in action but still lots of Maoism as official ideology. So, even though the economy recovered by rolling back Maoism, the younger generation was nevertheless indoctrinated with the mythology of Maoism. At the very least, even the true-believers of Maoism during the Great Leap could SEE the result of its wholesale application. The brutal SEE countered and balanced out the official SAY. But by 1966, the Chinese economy had recovered enough so that the famines were over and forgotten. So, the young ones, who weren't starving, got the SAY but there was no SEE to warn them against Maoism in radical action. The result? The madness of the Cultural Revolution. (Now, we see that capitalists are just as capable of pushing their own brand of cultural revolution, but then capitalist have been smashing things for quite some time already. Jewish globo-homo capitalist vandalize churches and streets with homo symbols. Zionist capitalists also fund ISIS and other terrorists who've ransacked so much cultural treasure in places like Syria.)
In both the US and China, the SEE was rolled back but the SAY remained the same. Or worse, the SAY intensified even as the SEE was reduced. Blackness was praised in words while blackness was suppressed in action. Maoism was praised in words while Maoism was rolled back in action. One might think the anti-black and anti-Maoist actions would reduce the power of the pro-black and pro-Mao SAY. But the effect was the opposite. With less black crime, there was less mugging-by-reality to wake up the 'woke'. With no more Maoist famines, there was less starving-by-reality to warn young people of the dangers of radicalism. And so, China had to learn a second time of the dangers of Maoism with the loony Cultural Revolution, and the US has to go through the lesson of black pathology once again.
The lesson from all this is the Danger of saying one thing while doing another thing. Now, one might think this is a clever way to cover up pragmatic deeds with idealistic sermons, but once the deeds succeed, the bogus sanctimony of the words is less likely to be checked by reality.
For example, if an African tribe says hyenas and lions are noble while hunting them down to make the village safer, it will result in greater safety for the tribe as there will be fewer lions and hyenas. But it also means that the young tribesmen will revere lions and hyenas EVEN MORE because there will be fewer lions and hyenas to attack them and wake them to the dangerous reality of big predators. As such, they will condemn the elders for having killed the sacred lions/hyenas and welcome the big animals to the village... with grim results of course. When the SEE is greatly reduced while the SAY is greatly vamped, the SAY will turn especially cancerous because the successful war on the SEE reduced the grim reality that once served as a check on the rosy sermons of the SAY.
The SAY has gotten so obnoxious that white progs aren't really moralistic. They are sanctimonious. They don't operate by moral reflection or reasoning in relation to reality. Rather, they are addicted to the sanctimony of worshiping their favorite idols. This is the obvious result of humanism being replaced by idolatry.
When the Word and the World are not in alignment, people who take the Word to heart act in ways that do harm to the World and then to themselves because Reality always takes revenge on those who push falsity. So, in the end, the World wins over the Word, but by then, so much harm had been done. So, it's better to use the Word in alignment and consonance with how the World really is. Good use of the Word guides people to act properly in the World. It's like good medical advice leads to responsible behavior that is good for health. But when the Word is bad in medicine, those heeding the advice will suffer in the World and make it a worse place as a World full of sick people is a kind of hell. Eventually, the physical suffering caused by bad Word will force people to change course in the World, but by then, they'd needlessly suffered because they'd blindly heeded the Word. Consider what the Word on Covid-19 did to the World Economy.
Eventually, the mindless promotion of Negrolatry will lead to a reaction because it is a biological fact that blacks evolve to be most violent, aggressive, and pathological. Indeed, worshiping blackness will lead to outcomes worse than worshiping Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Mao Zedong. After all, despite the horrors caused by communism and Nazism, none of them managed to, in the end, destroy German Civilization, Russian Civilization, and Chinese Civilization. But when white people take blackness to heart as the ultimate holiness, they are paving the way for the total destruction of the West. Why? Africans Africanize whereas Europeans Europeanize. As whites worship the false god of blackness and welcome more mass-migrations of black, the result will be the Africanization of the West. Then, it's Adios White Race. Then, even if whites finally realize the foolishness of the 'woke' Word, their World will be too far gone to be saved and restored.
In some ways, religiosity is stronger than ever. Indeed, paradoxically enough, the reason for the decline of traditional religions is because they no longer offer the moral high and high ground of religiosity. People are abandoning them not because they are rejecting religiosity but because they can find it or more of it in something else.
Now, religiosity is not the same thing as religion. Religiosity is the state of strong commitment, righteousness, and/or moral outrage. Religiosity can be gotten from anything, even non-religions. Marxists and Maoists were surely riding high on religiosity as they firmly believed that history, humanity, truth, and morality were on their side.
A religion has power only if it retains the element of religiosity. Consider so many religions that have fallen by the wayside. Zoroastrianism for example. Today, it is mostly a matter of scholarly, mystical, and/or theological interest. Almost no one gets worked up over it. Some people seek out Eastern Mysticism, but it will never gain power because it lacks religiosity. Buddhism, Taoism, and such religions are about peace of mind, the search for the Way, the harmony. This was one reason why the East was less dynamic than the West, the culture of which was driven by Greco-dialectics and Judeo-monolithics. According to the Greeks, if there is A and B, the two must duke it out. Thus, the philosophical and historical pendulum swings violently back and forth, left and right. It causes a lot of friction and even trouble, but it also sets off lots of sparks. If both A and B remain viable, the dialectics continues and keeps shooting off sparks, some of which are destructive, some of which are constructive. But if A or B were to overcome the other or arrive at synthesis, it goes up against a new force: C, D, E, etc. As for Judeo-Monolithics, it says the ONE idea is absolutely true and all the power must be exerted to spread that idea far and wide. This is the core of Western Messianism and puritanism. Greco-dialectics made for dynamism, and Judeo-Monolithics made for commitment, aggression, and expansion. The Crusading or Jihad Mentality.
In contrast, Taoism and Buddhism seek to rise above conflicts. Taoism seeks the Way, or the hidden harmony behind all chaos. It urges people not to involve themselves directly in world conflicts and instead to recede and contemplate with a cup of tea. Buddhism says everything is an illusion, and people should meditate to reach Nirvana and eternal extinction. With such spiritual outlooks, it's no wonder the East was less dynamic(though it allowed for longer stretches of peace and stability, albeit of the repressive kind by today's standards).
Modern religiosity thrives on psycho-cultural legacy of Greco-dialectics and Judeo-monolithics. Pat Buchanan loved politics all his life as a kind of sports. Political season is like sporting season. And so many people see the world in terms of 'we are right, and you are wrong'. Most people don't seek the middle-ground or the Way. They savor the dialectical bloodsports of politics. This owes to the pagan Greco-dialectical tradition. But Greeks and Romans, with their many gods, weren't really into the cult of self-righteousness. Through endless discourse, they believed somethings were more right than others, but they didn't believe there was anything or any people that was the holiest in the world for all eternity. They regarded everything, even the great gods, being in a state of flux. In contrast, Jews did see the world in absolutist and monomaniacal terms. They weren't just another tribe, but the Tribe, the Chosen, and their God was the only true God, and they were blessed by the true God. So, Jews were filled with sanctimony and (self)righteousness, and this mindset flowed to the West via Christianity. If Greeks politicized conflicts, Christians spiritualized and moralized them. In the Athens vs Sparta conflict, both sides knew that it was all about power, economics, and influence. Sure, each side called on their gods for favors, but it was a conflict of 'mighteous' than righteous. It was dialectical politics. In contrast, infused with the mindset of Judeo-monolithics, Christians saw their conflicts in strongly moral and spiritual terms. So, there was a greater sense of moral outrage in conflicts involving Christians(which is why the US tries to morally justify everything it does around the world, a factor that blinds so many Americans to the true nature of what is really going on). Each side among Christians was totally holier-than-thou, even though many of the wars were triggered by political or economic factors than spiritual or moral ones. The Thirty Years War was even more destructive and harrowing than the Peloponnesian War because of the sense of spiritual outrage. If Spartans and Athenians were merely seeking political advantage over the other, Catholics and Protestants, armed with Judeo-monolithic moral outrage, was trying to totally crush the other for all time. When Spartans finally won, they let Athens survive. But if either Catholics or Protestants had gained total victory, the losing side would have been totally crushed and rubbed out. But as it happened, the stalemate finally led to some kind of understanding, and the art of Greco-dialectics prevailed over Judeo-monolithics. Catholics and Protestants would have to co-exist in lively conflict and not try to crush the other totally in the spirit of moral/spiritual absolutism.
Why did Christian religion lose its religiosity in the 20th century?
We know the usual suspects. The rise of science undermined religion, especially among the elites. Around the time the US was founded, many of the most intelligent people in both Old World and New World still believed in God, sought meaning in God, attended religious schools, and spread the Gospel. Religion back then had spiritual and moral authority, from top to bottom. But with the rise of modernity, most intelligent people abandoned religion, and if they did remain religious, it was on the personal level than on moral, spiritual, and social one. With best and brightest eschewing the religious life, the leadership came increasingly from the less intelligent segments of the population. Also, as religious authority lost prestige, fewer men were willing to give up worldly happiness for God. Back when the Catholic Church was like the Harvard of the West, many intelligent men were willing to sacrifice sex and good times to serve God. As priests, they had much respect in society. But when society no longer regarded priests as anything special, what was the point of giving up sex, marriage, and good times? So, an increasing number of priests came from eccentrics, derelicts, perverts, and homos. Some homos sought repentance for their sinful ways by serving God. Other homos figured they would take over the Church and make it 'gay' to serve toot-toota-loop homo vanity.
Mainline churches replaced saving souls with saving the world with good work. But what is 'good work'? As worldly matters and issues were defined by secular forces, Mainline church's idea of 'goodness' came to be defined by academia and media. Then, it's no wonder than Mainline churches now think god is all about the 'gays'. After all, Ivy League, Hollywood, and NYT said so. Evangelicals were more traditionalist and moralistic, but they were dumb, and dummies lose out to smarties. Being dumb and childlike, Evanjellies could easily be manipulated by the Power. It's no wonder so many Evanjellies are into 'muh Israel' and 'Jews are holy' even though Jews despise them and turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah. Also, Evanjellies put emotions before dogma. It's all about the FEELS. Then, it is no wonder that homomania is making inroads even among childlike Evanjellies. Also, as most Evanjellies, like Mormons, suffer from inferiority complex of status and class, they tend to suck up to the rich and powerful. Look how Mormons are changing full-steam ahead toward homomania because the rich and powerful now worship it as their main cult. And many Evanjellies are suckers for televangelists whose shtick is 'god made me rich' and 'Jews are great cuz they are so rich'. As for the Catholic Church, it shot itself in the foot by the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. While some of the reforms were good and necessary, others presented the Church in the position of weakness, especially via Jews and modernity. The main mode was of concession and contrition, and this put the Church on the moral defensive than offensive. Instead of judging the world with the One True Faith, it sought forgiveness from the world. Thus, being a Catholic came with less religiosity and more perplexity.
While people may be drawn to religions for metaphysical or philosophical reasons, religion has power ONLY WHEN it has the element of religiosity. Religious or secular, people are more prone to organize, unite, and rally IF they the run the fever of religiosity. This is why the anti-homo voices tended to come from the religious. There are non-religious people who oppose the homo agenda, but they feel less worked up because they just believe it is wrong, not an affront to God. There are secular people who are anti-abortion, but again, they see it as ugly and wrong, whereas religious people see it as a grave sin. Because of their element of religiosity, the religious often united to push for or against certain issues.
This is what Jews hate about Christian religiosity. (They hate Islamic religiosity too, but at least in the West, they make alliances with Muslims against Christians.) Those armed with religiosity are more likely to leave the house, meet with others, gather together(esp in churches), and protest. Even when people dislike or oppose something, the chances are they are not gonna do anything about it unless they are armed with religiosity. They see it as a personal matter -- "I don't like it" -- than as a grand moral/spiritual one -- "It is an affront to God". But Jews fear Christianity far less now because it's either been bled of religiosity or infected with neo-religiosity of PC, e.g. all those churches that are now all about Diversity, Globo-Homo, Anti-Whitey, Holy Negro Worship, and Jew-Worship. Catholic Church is no longer a force of religiosity because it's in cucky-wuck apologetic mode. "We are sorry so many of our priests buggered boys". "We are sorry for having aided and abetted imperialism, genocide, etc." "We must fill up Europe with Africans and Muslims because Christians have so much to atone for." There is no moral pride or spiritual authority. It now even has what looks like closet-homo pope, aka the Poop, who says Europe must be Afro-Islamized as fast as possible. Because the Church is still officially opposed to 'gay marriage' and abortion, progs still eye Catholicism with disgusts and trepidation. But because it is so cucked and wussy, traditional Catholics feel nauseous about sticking with the Church. There is hardly any real religiosity found in Catholicism anymore.
But people love religiosity because it's like a drug. It gives them the high of moral sanctimony, the rush of holier-than-thou rage, and a sense of unity with 'history is on our side'. The thing is religiosity can be gotten from anything: Ideology and 'Idology'(or idolatry as ideology). Those Red Guard lunatics during the Cultural Revolution were surely filled with righteous religiosity. Incidentally, the Cultural Revolution showed that religiosity had little to do with truth and more to do with control of information and indoctrination. After all, Mao's policies had killed tens of millions in the Great Leap Forward. He should have been disgraced forever based on historical facts, but with control of propaganda and the military Mao and his gang were able to instill countless young people with fever of religiosity and set them loose to smash 'class enemies' in ruthless abandon and righteous rage.
It's like no amount of destruction done by Black Savage Reversion, Crazy Jewish Supremacism, and Nutty Homo Perversion has made any real dent in the holiness of those three groups. Given all the black crime and thuggery, one might think Americans would have wised up to the fact that blacks are the crazy savage race, but Jews control the media and they keep rerunning the Emitt Till and MLK narrative over and over. And come Superbowl season, white cucky-wucks are back to worshiping blacks as sports hero demigods. And given what Jewish Power has done to the US in terms of financial distress and foreign Wars for Israel(that created WWII situations in Middle East), you'd think people would have wised up to Jewish power by now. But every year, it's Holocaust this, Holocaust that, and "Jews are eternally holy holocaust people" and "If you notice Jewish power, you're an anti-Semite." So, even 'literally Hitler' Trump spends most of his time with his lips wrapped around Netanyahu's pud. And given the HIV mess caused by deranged homos, you'd think people would have woken up to the danger of homo influence and practice. But Jews(who run the media) 'sacralized' homos in movies, TV shows, and advertising. And Jews associated homos with the 'rainbow', and whore politicians just can't get enough of pontificating about how the New Normal of morality is all about celebrating homo fecal penetration and tranny-penis-cutting.
If Rob punched you but has the megaphone and says that you punched him while he makes himself out to be the poor poor victim, people will side with Rob and denounce you and maybe even punch you. Worse, even people who saw Rob punch you may not come to your aid because Rob's megaphone can attract many more people to his side. Or, even those who witnessed Rob punching you may believe you deserved to be punched because you're a bad person. This is what Jews are doing with 'punch a nazi' meme. They are saying that if Jews, Antifa, or blacks attack whites who happen to be 'nazi', then the righteousness belongs to the puncher because 'nazis' are evil and deserve it. This is how religiosity works. It's not so much about objective definition of right or wrong or legal or illegal. It's about holy vs unholy. It's about blessed vs the wicked. Just like Christians in their hyper-religiosity could be inspired to carry out violent acts against heathens, the PC crowd can be driven to rages of religiosity to attack any people and feel good and righteous about it.
As Jews control academia, media, entertainment, and whore-politicians, they control the levers of religiosity. Academia writes the sacred texts, the canons of officialdom. Media relay them as 'news' and sermons. Entertainment turns certain figures and narratives into idols. And whore-politicians use oratory to push the acceptable narrative.
People are leaving the church and flocking to PC, Homomania, and Afromania because most of the hottest religiosity is now to be found there. PC slogans and chants about 'Diversity' and 'Inclusion' are the new mantras and catechisms. And 'gay rights' became Gay Rites, a neo-religion. There was a time when NO ONE was worked up over homo issues. At most, some supported the legalization of homosexuality because they figured homos were born that way. Also, they figured homos are deserving of individual rights too. It was a legal matter, not a moral one. No one thought there was innately holy about being a homo. No one felt he was holier or more righteous because he was pro-homo. But Jewish media spun the HIV crisis to make homos out to be victims of something akin to a holocaust even though homos did it to themselves by acting like a bunch of butt-bang-boys in bathhouses. Movies like PHILADELPHIA and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN made homo lust the highest and most tragic kind of love. Homos were made into saintly icons. Such ploy would have been thought outrageous when the US was more religious and moral, but in Boomer-dominated America of the 1990s and 2000s, it went over with post-religious people and young people raised on degeneracy. Also, as Bush II was such an awful posterboy of the Christian Right, young people turned away from religion. Furthermore, what with religions being so cucked & apologetic while AND homomania got more judgmental & aggressive, young people realized that there was more religiosity points to be found on the holy-homo side than on the religious side. While homomaniacs are passionately and aggressively sure of their cause and position, the Religious Right seemed confused, cowardly, and castrated. As Jews came to dominate the GOP and bought off most top church leaders, NO ONE on the Right mounted any counter-attack against homomania. They kept their heads down like the worthless Rich Lowry lest they offend Jews as allies of holy homos. Also, young people, raised on celebrity culture, were addicted to the cult of the cool. So, what some pop star or famous actor said mattered more to them than what some crusty religious type said. Mormons for one are really a bunch of Mammonites who will sell their mothers down the river for thirty pieces of silver. Look at those worthless piles of shit Mitt Romney and Harry Reid.
Now, it may well be that the current religiosities of PC may blow away. After all, where is Maoist religiosity today? Where is Stalinist fervor? Secular forms of religiosity have short-shelf lives because history proves them wrong. History proved communism wrong. All the icons and altars to Marx and Lenin came to mean nothing to Eastern Europeans with the fall of the Iron Curtain. Hitler, who was once the much revered icon of glory among Germans, has been disgraced. In contrast, God cannot be deposed and may yet win again in the long run. That said, in any given MOMENT in history, those with more religiosity win over those with less. And the fact is religions have lost the fire of religiosity either because people lost faith or because the religions have become cucked and apologetic. There was a time when to become a Christian was to be filled with a sense of salvation, glory, and pride. Now, joining the church means you should kneel before a homo and apologize for the church's 2000 yrs of 'homophobia' against guys like Butt-gigs who thinks dicks-up-my-ass is great because 'god made him gay'. Using such logic, a fatso should take pride in his gluttony since god made him want to pig out like a hippo. And I suppose a drunken Irish can argue that his alcoholism is a wonder to behold because god made him want to hit the bottle.
Ideologies can be full of religiosity because they offer a formula for understanding history and fixing humanity. As such, they are more than mere ideas but a worldview of 'what REALLY happened' and 'what must happen'. It has an element of prophecy, and so, ideologues are armed with religiosity. In time, ideological religiosity may fade as people get tired of the same-old-same-old and/or because the promises don't come true. This was true enough with communism. Or, even if the ideology does succeed -- such as the Americanist individualist-capitalist ideology -- , it can lose its righteous luster if critiqued endlessly by radicals and subversives. Notice how the very founders and makers of the American nation have been so drastically 'discredited' by Jewish use of PC that now says MLK is the true 'founding father' while all those 'dead white males' were a bunch of hypocrites who owned slaves. (Never mind Jewish bankers funded much of 'white supremacist' imperialism around the world, and Jewish immigrants worked alongside whites to wipe out Indians and enslave & exploit blacks.) In our increasingly post-literate age or what Christopher Hedges calls the Empire of Illusion, the power of 'idology' or neo-iconography may now matter more than ideology. Why are so many people reverential toward rappers even though all they ever say is 'muh gun', 'muh dick', 'muh bling', 'muh ho', and etc? Because idolatry makes them look cool and badass, and that's enough for neo-worship in our deracinated and degenerate age. But then, because of the narrative and iconography of the Noble Negro as victim of 'white racism', the image of black cool is fused with image of black tragedy, and this makes them even more potent as idols for young people to worship and that means a lot of religiosity points in the 'idolic' worship of the Negro. And of course, nothing is holier to SWPL crowd than the holy holy of the 'rainbow' valley. Compared to that, what does the current Church have to offer except butt-hurt apologetics and "I'm sorry".
