Duration: 3h 27min 51sec

Topcis: Gnostic Informant comes on to talk about Alt-Media SLOP; schizos taking over X; JQers; Christian quesiton & more!

Duration: 3h 58min 59sec

Topics: First half I cover the silence on fake internet Christians like Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones & Candace Owens on the Sumy attack; all of these frauds have made themselves into useful idiots for Russia; they are accomplices in mass homicide of White Europeans; we look at some other attacks on civilians going back to the beginning of the war; second half some OME & answering chat questions about why I moved away from wignatism.

The people who push the “Jews only” or “Jews mainly” explanation of feminism (or any other left-wing phenomenon really) are either Christians who want to hide the role of Christians in it, or they are dupes who have fallen for cherry-picked memes like this one, produced by dimwits who think fishing a handful of Jewish names out of a pool of hundreds of feminists is proof of a conspiracy while ignoring all the others.

By saying “every single aspect” of X is Jewish, they are implying that there are no non-Jews doing the same thing and promoting the same ideas. This is categorically false in every case, no matter what issue you look at.

Let’s look at early feminism.

Early feminism in the West was not particularly Jewish, no matter which country we look at. The meme cherry picks Jewish feminists mostly from the second wave of the movement, and lists only one early Jewish suffragette of the first wave, Ernestine Rose, who “had renounced Judaism at an early age and was an active atheist.” But of course the memers leave out a whole ton of non-Jewish suffragettes who led the movement.

America

The earliest American feminist was Christian Abigail Adams, the wife of second US President John Adams:

One of the earliest women’s rights groups was the “Woman’s Christian Temperance Union”:

The two biggest names in the early suffragette movement in America were Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, both Christian women.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton (née Cady; November 12, 1815 – October 26, 1902) was an American writer and activist who was a leader of the women’s rights movement in the U.S. during the mid- to late-19th century. She was the main force behind the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention, the first convention to be called for the sole purpose of discussing women’s rights, and was the primary author of its Declaration of Sentiments. Her demand for women’s right to vote generated a controversy at the convention but quickly became a central tenet of the women’s movement.[1] She was also active in other social reform activities, especially abolitionism. In 1851, she met Susan B. Anthony and formed a decades-long partnership that was crucial to the development of the women’s rights movement. During the American Civil War, they established the Women’s Loyal National League to campaign for the abolition of slavery, and they led it in the largest petition drive in U.S. history up to that time. They started a newspaper called The Revolution in 1868 to work for women’s rights. After the war, Stanton and Anthony were the main organizers of the American Equal Rights Association, which campaigned for equal rights for both African Americans and women, especially the right of suffrage. When the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was introduced that would provide suffrage for black men only, they opposed it, insisting that suffrage should be extended to all African Americans and all women at the same time.

That 1848 feminist conference was held in a Christian church:

First wave feminism is thought to have officially started in 1848, during the first women’s rights convention at Seneca Falls, New York. 300 women and men met in the basement of a Wesleyan Methodist church and signed Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s Declaration of Sentiments, publicly declaring their belief in the legal equality of women to men.

So these two Christian women established all the important organizations of early American feminism, convened the first feminist congress and wrote foundational documents like “Declaration of Sentiments”. On Anthony’s influence:

After the war, they initiated the American Equal Rights Association, which campaigned for equal rights for both women and African Americans. They began publishing a women’s rights newspaper in 1868 called The Revolution. A year later, they founded the National Woman Suffrage Association as part of a split in the women’s movement. The split was formally healed in 1890 when their organization merged with the rival American Woman Suffrage Association to form the National American Woman Suffrage Association, with Anthony as its key force.

They founded feminist newspapers and groups and also supported black rights.

Another big name: Matilda Joslyn Gage.

Gage was considered to be more radical than either Susan B. Anthony or Elizabeth Cady Stanton (with whom she wrote History of Woman Suffrage,[24] and Declaration of the Rights of Women). …She served as president of the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) from 1875 to 1876 and served as either Chair of the Executive Committee or Vice President for over twenty years. …In 1870, Gage published a pamphlet called Woman as an Inventor.[9] The pamphlet was described as ‘Woman Suffrage Tracts – No. 1’ and was published by the New York State Woman Suffrage Association, which Gage helped to found.[10] In 1883, Gage published a similar essay called Woman as an Inventor in the North American Review.[11] In both pamphlets, Gage argued that women were already competent inventors and supported her argument by citing examples of women inventors.

Another big one who inspired both Stanton and Anthony was Lucy Stone, also Christian:

Stone wrote, extensively, about a wide range of women’s rights, publishing and distributing speeches by herself and others, and convention proceedings. In the long-running and influential[4] Woman’s Journal, a weekly periodical that she founded and promoted, Stone aired both her own and differing views about women’s rights. Called “the orator”,[5] the “morning star,”[6] and the “heart and soul”[7] of the women’s rights movement, Stone influenced Susan B. Anthony to take up the cause of women’s suffrage.[8] Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote that “Lucy Stone was the first person by whom the heart of the American public was deeply stirred on the woman question.”[9] Together, Anthony, Stanton, and Stone have been called the 19th-century “triumvirate” of women’s suffrage and feminism.

Stone founded the American Woman Suffrage Association:

Francis Wright:

In the late 1820s, Wright was among the first women in America to speak publicly about politics and social reform before gatherings of both men and women.[1] She advocated universal education, the emancipation of slaves, birth control, equal rights, sexual freedom, legal rights for married women, and liberal divorce laws. Wright was also vocal in her opposition to organized religion and capital punishment. The clergy and the press harshly criticized Wright’s radical views. Her public lectures in the United States led to the establishment of Fanny Wright societies.

The Grimké sisters:

Antoinette Brown Blackwell:

Harriet Taylor Upton:

A big supporter and funder of women’s suffrage was wealthy socialite Alva Belmont:

She was inspired to take up the cause after hearing a lecture by Ida Husted Harper.

Another wealthy backer of suffrage was Phoebe Hearst, a Christian who converted to the Baha’i faith:

Other Christian (or otherwise non-Jewish) leaders of American feminism: Carrie Chapman Catt, Ida Husted Harper, Lucretia Mott, Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, Frederick Douglass, Martha Wright, Betsy Mix Cowles, Jane Hunt, Mary Ann M’Clintock, Hannah M. Darlington, Lydia Maria Child, Frances Dana Barker Gage, James Mott, Ann Preston, Abby Kelley Foster, Paulina Wright Davis, Anna Howard Shaw and many more.

Here are the 100 signatories of Elizabeth Stanton’s Declaration of Sentiments:

Virtually all Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Germanic and French names and a plethora of Quakers. You can look at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848, the Ohio Women’s Convention at Salem in 1850, the Pennsylvania Woman’s Convention at West Chester in 1852 and other similar conventions of the day, and you’ll see mostly Christian women at the helm.

Virginia Minor and her husband Francis Minor were among the first to attempt to legally overturn the ban on women’s voting rights:

Christians Alice Paul and Lucy Burns led the campaign for the 19th Amendment (women’s vote) and then started the National Women’s Party:

Alice Stokes Paul (January 11, 1885 – July 9, 1977) was an American Quaker, suffragette, suffragist, feminist, and women’s rights activist, and one of the foremost leaders and strategists of the campaign for the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits sex discrimination in the right to vote. Paul initiated, and along with Lucy Burns and others, strategized events such as the Woman Suffrage Procession and the Silent Sentinels, which were part of the successful campaign that resulted in the amendment’s passage in August 1920.[1]

After 1920, Paul spent a half-century as leader of the National Woman’s Party, which fought for the Equal Rights Amendment, written by Paul and Crystal Eastman, to secure constitutional equality for women. She won a major permanent success with the inclusion of women as a group protected against discrimination by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Other important women in the National Women’s Party were Mabel Vernon and Anne Henrietta Martin.

This website lists 20 important American suffragette activists, virtually none appear to be Jewish:

The abolitionist anti-slavery movement was also led by American Quakers.

It isn’t until the second wave of American feminism that Jewish women start to take a more prominent role. Jewish websites, as they often do, like to boast of the role of Jews in various things as if to present themselves as a particularly enlightened “moral” group showing others the way.

This is part of their Tikkun Olam/social justice ideology embedded in the religion. But even in these cases, they tend to embellish their own importance by ignoring all the prominent non-Jews doing the same thing, which is ironically what the Neo-Nazis also do from the opposite angle. Both want to portray Jews as either especially good or especially evil.

Some of the prominent Jewish feminists of the second wave were Betty Friedan, Andrea Dworkin, Gloria Steinem, Naomi Wolf and others. Of course, they were not alone and had plenty of help from non-Jewish feminists.

Wiki has 42 entries for “Jewish-American Feminists” meanwhile it has 163 entries for “African-American feminists” and 10 for “Asian-American feminists”. That’s not including all the White non-Jewish feminists, which there is not a specific page for.

A magazine listed 37 influential women with feminist tendencies which includes these people:

1. The Suffragettes (mostly Christian)
2. Simone de Beauvoir (French Gentile)
3. Eleanor Roosevelt (American Gentile)
4. Marlene Dietrich (German-American Gentile)
5. Betty Friedan (Jewish-American)
6. Gloria Steinem (Jewish-American)
7. Angela Davis (African-American)
8. Bell Hooks (African-American)
9. Barbara Walters (Jewish-American)
10. Coretta Scott King (African-American)
11. Maya Angelou (African-American)
12. Audre Lorde (African-American)
13. Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Jewish-American)
14. Yoko Ono (Japanese)
15. Alice Walker (African-American)
16. Hillary Clinton (American Gentile)
17. Oprah Winfrey (African-American)
18. Diane Von Furstenberg (Jewish)
19. Madonna (American Gentile)
20. Sheryl Sandberg (Jewish-American)
21. Malala Yousafzai (Muslim)
22. Angelina Jolie (American Gentile)
23. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (Nigerian)
24. Beyoncé (African-American)
25. Roxane Gay (Haitian-American)
26. Janet Mock (African-American/mixed race)
27. Emma Watson (British Gentile)
28. Patrisse Cullors (African-American)
29. Tarana Burke (African-American)
30. Michelle Obama (African-American)
31. Amal Clooney (British-Lebanese)
32. Meghan Markle (African-American/mixed race)
33. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Latina-American)
34. Naomi Klein (Jewish-American)
35. Kathleen Neal Cleaver (African-American)
36. Winona LaDuke (Native American)
37. Laverne Cox (African-American)

That’s 7 of 37 or 19% of these women are Jewish. 17 of 37 or 45% are black. Clearly, blacks are also over-represented in the second wave American feminist movement. Jewish and black over-representation in liberal causes is likely due to various factors related to historical “oppression” consciousness related to slavery and the holocaust, etc.

If we look at the 2017 women’s march in the US, these were the organizers:

Melissa Miotke (Polish/German name, unknown religion), Teresa Shook (unknown religion), Evvie Harmon (religion unknown), Vanessa Wruble (Jewish), Bob Bland (religion unknown, but was accused of anti-Semitism so not a likely J), Linda Sarsour (Muslim), Tamika Mallory (black), Carmen Perez (Latina), Gloria Steinem (Jewish), Harry Belafonte (black, distant J ancestry raised Catholic), LaDonna Harris (Native American), Angela Davis (black), Dolores Huerta (Hispanic). Mallory, Sarsour and Perez were all accused of anti-Semitism, which led to the Jewish Wruble quitting. Clearly there is an array of people involved in feminism from all kinds of backgrounds.

These Jewish women are into feminism probably partly as a result of the “social justice” ethic of Judaism (same reason the Christian social justice teachings led many Christians into women’s rights and anti-slavery activism) and also just because they’re women and want privileges as many women do. This article on Jewish feminists lists the social justice motive and a rejection of Jewish patriarchal values:

Another article on the topic says a similar thing, that Jewish women first began their revolt within their own community (meaning they’re not applying a different standard for Jews):

So Jewish feminists were rebelling against their own patriarchal traditions within Judaism and broadened that fight to a generic feminism. Their sex is the most important factor here. They’re not Jewish men, but women, just as most of the early suffragettes were Christian women and not men. The blacks involved in feminism are black women, not many men.

The wignat conspiracy take here is that Jewish feminists are promoting this to “mess with the Gentiles” and wreck society for malevolent anti-Gentile reasons, ignoring that they’re promoting the same stuff for Jews. They don’t make the same argument for the Christian suffragettes or the other non-Jewish feminists. Why not? Is feminism a conspiracy of women since virtually all feminists are women? One could make that claim, easily. This conspiracy framing is weak because these Jewish feminists are not protecting Jews from the feminist indoctrination, but rather include them in it and promote it for Israel too. It’s not like they’re protecting Jews from feminism while pushing it exclusively onto non-Jews.

Betty Friedan for example started an analogous feminist movement in Israel:

Feminism is rampant in Israel where laws are biased against men. This documentary explores the feminist outrages in Israel against men, noting “Israeli women are the freest in the East, emancipated and independent.”

Israel has had the same first and second waves of feminism and feminists there do the same things they do in the West.

Here are some Jewish feminist groups in Israel:

Jewish feminists in Israel oppose the religious right and demand more feminist laws:

Gloria Steinem also pushes feminism in Israel and, like most feminists, is a left-liberal who opposes Netanyahu and the “far-right” in Israel:

Feminist Naomi Wolf is herself pro-Palestinian and a critic of the Israeli Right.

Here Wolf criticizes the Israeli lobby in the US:

Another prominent Canadian-Jewish feminist and leftist, Naomi Klein, is a staunch anti-Zionist:

Andrea Dworkin also pushes feminism in Israel and criticizes the country, denouncing the status of “male Jews” over female Jews:

Lots of feminists, being left-liberals politically, support Palestine and not Israel.

So once again we see these Jewish feminists pushing their ideology consistently across national and ethnic lines, which weakens the conspiracy angle that it’s designed to specifically “hurt Gentiles” and spare Jews its effects.

Numerous feminists like Dworkin are also anti-pornography:

Dworkin wrote a book against porn:

Another Jewish feminist Gail Dines was described as the “world’s leading anti-pornography campaigner” and founder of Stop Porn Culture:

So if the agenda of Jewish feminists was simply to “wreck society,” as some allege, then why come out against pornography which helps wreck society? They are indeed perpetrating harm to society with feminism, but they’re doing it under the delusion that feminism helps women. Like the non-Jewish feminists proliferating the same ideas, they’re true believers in the ideology and regard it good for women.

On top of this, there are some prominent Jewish conservative anti-feminists (often second wave-critical) like Laura Loomer, Melanie Phillips (author of “The Sex Change Society: Feminised Britain and the Neutered Male”), Ashley St. Clair (of TPUSA), Judith Reisman (another anti-porn crusader), LibsOfTikTok (Chaya Raichik), Ben Shapiro, Dennis Prager, Christina Hoff Sommers and others.

So if you can find Jews on the other side of this issue, as well as Jewish feminists pushing the same stuff for both Jews in the West and in Israel, then it can’t be considered a generic “conspiracy” to attack Gentiles. They are consistent liberals. And if there are tons of Gentiles doing the same thing —as is the case here—then it’s not a conspiracy of a single ethnic group against another. It’s a women’s movement so women of all races and backgrounds are in it.

Lastly, let’s look at the #MeToo movement. It was started by a black woman, Tarana Burke:

The official MeToo organization started by Burke is staffed almost exclusively by black women:

Their contributors are mostly black and their board is mostly black with one White woman:

It was picked up and promoted by all kinds of celebs of different backgrounds:

The New York Times ran a piece on all the prominent men who were taken down by MeToo sexual assault allegations, the most famous being Jewish Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. The list includes numerous Jews like aforementioned Weinstein, media mogul Leslie Moonves, senator Al Franken, journalist Mark Halperin, senator Ira Silverstein, TV journalist Matt Lauer (half J), conductor James Levine, editor Lorin Stein, director Bryan Singer, media exec Eric Weinberger, casino mogul Steve Wynn and numerous others. Evidently, Jews are not invincible and their power is not absolute.

If Jews were single-handedly running the “feminist movement” as a tribal operation, then none of these powerful Jewish men would have been targeted and forced out of their jobs by #MeToo accusers.

The UK

The earliest feminists in the UK were Mary Wollstonecraft and Harriet Taylor Mill (wife of classical liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill).

Wollstonecraft, who was raised Christian but stopped attending church, was a key feminist intellectual who was inspired by the French Revolution/Enlightenment.

She is best known for the treatise, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, in which “she argues that women are not naturally inferior to men but appear to be only because they lack education. She suggests that both men and women should be treated as rational beings and imagines a social order founded on reason.”

Wollstonecraft’s writings and “advocacy of women’s equality and critiques of conventional feminity have been significant in the development of feminism.”

Harriet and John Mill co-authored the treatise, “The Enfranchisement of Women”, one of the first to appear advocating for total gender equality before the law.

John Stuart Mill introduced a petition to parliament in 1866 to give women the right to vote:

He was one of the earliest “proponents of gender equality, having been recruited by American feminist John Neal during his stay in London circa 1825–1827.” He authored a book, The Subjection of Women, which was seen as “an affront to European conventional norms regarding the status of men and women” for its egalitarian thrust.

Thus, he was a very influential early feminist in the UK. Mill was agnostic but his father had once been an ordained priest.

The mother of the British suffragette movement was raised Christian (although irreligious), Emily Pankhurst and her daughters.

The UK government takes note of her central role in British women’s suffrage:

The Pankhurst family is closely associated with the militant campaign for the vote. In 1903 Emmeline Pankhurst and others, frustrated by the lack of progress, decided more direct action was required and founded the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) with the motto ‘Deeds not words’.

Emmeline Pankhurst (1858-1928) became involved in women’s suffrage in 1880. She was a founding member of the WSPU in 1903 and led it until it disbanded in 1918. Under her leadership the WSPU was a highly organised group and like other members she was imprisoned and went on hunger strike protests.

Membership of the WSPU was limited to women only. Emmeline Pankhurst’s daughters, Christabel, Sylvia and Adela, were committed members.

Wiki gives us this bio:

Emily Pankhurst was a British political activist who organised the British suffragette movement and helped women to win in 1918 the right to vote in Great Britain and Ireland. In 1999, Time named her as one of the 100 Most Important People of the 20th Century, stating that “she shaped an idea of objects for our time”. She founded and became involved with the Women’s Franchise League, which advocated suffrage for both married and unmarried women.

Millicent Fawcett was a leading suffragette who “campaigned for women’s suffrage by legal change and in 1897–1919 led Britain’s largest women’s rights association, the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (NUWSS).”

She took inspiration from early English feminist Emily Davies, who was raised by a Christian priest:

Sophia Duleep Singh, of Indian descent, was a major suffragette in England who “was one of several Indian women who pioneered the cause of women’s rights in Britain”:

She was also an early advocate for racial egalitarianism in Britain:

Emily Davison “was a staunch feminist and passionate Christian.”

Davison was a tireless campaigner for women’s right to vote:

Kitty Marion (German-born Schafer) was a leading suffragette and abortion advocate:

Her religion is not reported anywhere.

Known as the “first female press photographer,” Cristina Broom is credited with taking photos of suffragette protests and thereby publicizing their cause:

Other influential British suffragettes with a Christian or otherwise non-Jewish background include: Ada Flatman, Flora Drummond, Annie Kenney, Emmeline Pethick-Lawrence, Mary Blathwayt, Clara Codd, Charlotte Marsh, Muriel Matters, etc. Among others.

Here’s a larger list of British suffragettes:

If we skip ahead to today, the most toxic feminist in the British government is Jess Phillips:

Despite her “feminism,” she voted against a public inquiry into the Pakistani grooming gangs:

The most prominent British celebrity feminist is Emma Watson:

The most prominent feminist group in the UK is The Fawcett Society. Here is their board:

So we see some British names and some Arabs. Their staff has a couple foreign names and some Anglos.

Wiki’s list of “British women’s rights activists” has 155 entries. Here they are, mostly Anglo names with some Arabs and Jews thrown in:

The “British feminists” page has 129 entries, mostly Anglo names:

The “British socialist feminists” page has 91 entries, mostly Anglo names, a couple Jews mixed in:

The “British suffragists” page has 151 entries, mostly Anglo names:

The “British feminist writers” page has 130 entries, mostly Anglos with a few Arabs and probably Jews:

The “Scottish feminists” page has 30 entries, mostly Scottish names:

The one Jewish surname there Bernstein came from a “family retained their Jewish surname they identified as Christian.”

The “Welsh feminists” page has 21 entries, mostly Welsh surnames a few foreign:

Canada

Here are the “Famous Five” Canadian suffragettes:

Henrietta Edwards was a strong Baptist Christian. She founded various women’s groups:

Nellie McClung was a Christian.

Louise McKinney was Christian.

Emily Murphy was a Christian.

Irene Parlby has no religious reference but has an Anglo name.

These five led all the legal challenges to get women full rights:

On August 27, 1927, they petitioned the federal government to refer the issue of the eligibility of women to be senator to the Supreme Court of Canada. This petition was the foundation of the Persons Case, a leading constitutional decision. Although most Canadian women had the vote in federal elections and all provinces but Quebec by 1927, the case was part of a larger drive for political equality. This was the first step towards equality for women in Canada and was the start to the first wave of feminism.

Most of the early women’s groups were started by Christians and one group was started by a Jew in Toronto.

Australia

Women’s suffrage in Australia was led mainly by Anglo-Christian women.

Here are the original members of the “Womanhood Suffrage League of New South Wales”:

All of them have clear Anglo surnames and Jewish background doesn’t come up for any of them on Wiki.

Ireland

Here are the main figures of the suffragette movement in Ireland:

France

France’s leading feminist philosopher and writer was Simone de Beauvoir, raised Catholic.

Her influence on French feminism was huge:

She was best known for her “trailblazing work in feminist philosophy”,[8] The Second Sex (1949), a detailed analysis of women’s oppression and a foundational tract of contemporary feminism.

The French Union for Women’s Suffrage was led by one Jewish woman and three non-Jewish women.

The group Suffrage des femmes was founded by Hubertine Auclert, who was Catholic.

Here’s a larger list of French suffragettes:

Possibly two of these people are Jewish: Caroline Kauffmann and Louise Weiss. The rest most likely just French.

Iceland

Said to be the most liberal country in Europe, Iceland’s feminism was always led by Icelandic women.

“the first women’s magazine Framsókn is founded by Ingibjörg Skaptadóttir and Sigríður Þorsteinsdóttir in 1895, and a women’s suffrage organisation, the Icelandic Women’s Rights Association, was founded by Bríet Bjarnhéðinsdóttir in 1907”

“A bill for women’s suffrage was agreed on by the Althing in 1911, ratified by the Althing in 1913, and enacted on 19 June 1915 by the Danish king but only granted the vote to women over 40… In 1920 these restrictions were lifted after Iceland became an independent state under the Danish crown in 1918”

The Icelandic Women’s Rights Association was founded by Bríet Bjarnhéðinsdóttir.

In 1975 Icelandic feminists launched the “women’s strike” where they refused to work for a day. 90% of Icelandic women participated.

The 1975 strike led to the election of the first elected female president in the Western world, Vigdís Finnbogadottir, in 1980 who ruled Iceland for 16 consecutive years.

“Shortly after she took office, the number of women in the Althing saw a significant increase.”

That Icelandic women’s strike inspired other feminists across Europe to do the same:

Iceland’s 1975 strike inspired similar protests in other countries including Poland, where women boycotted jobs and classes in 2016 to protest a proposed abortion ban. In Spain, women staged a 24-hour strike in 2018 on March 8, International Women’s Day, under the theme “If we stop, the world stops.” Spain’s acting equality minister, Irene Montero, said Tuesday that the 2018 strike was inspired by Iceland’s 1975 walkout and expressed full support for the latest protest.

Iceland elected the first female openly gay prime minister, Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir, who served from 2009 to 2013. She said: “The Nordic countries are leading the way on women’s equality, recognizing women as equal citizens rather than commodities for sale.”

Iceland’s second female prime minister passed a “gender pay gap” law.

Same thing in other Nordic countries.

Spain

This website lists five leading Spanish suffragettes and feminists.

Clara Campoamor:

is considered one of the mothers of the feminist and suffragist movement in Spain, being one of the three deputies of the constituent courts of the Second Republic. Defender of the equality of women’s rights, she was one of the impellers of the approval of the universal suffrage in Spain, obtaining the feminine vote in the first republican elections, as well as the first divorce law.

She founded and led various women’s groups:

María Goyri:

Despite being a feminist, she supported Franco in the civil war:

Francesca Bonnemaison i Farriols:

Soledad Cazorla, a lawyer who pushed for prosecutions of men based on “gender violence” leading to the current nightmare state:

Ada Colau, Catalan lesbian politician who leads feminist “strikes” and other nonsense:

Wiki’s “Spanish feminists” page has 138 entries, all clearly Spanish surnamed women (not worth going through all the names just to find a tiny sprinkling of Jews):

All of the leading feminists in Spain today are Spanish, here’s a few:

Irene Montero, leader of the leftist Podemos party, pushed the “yes is yes” feminist law in parliament which makes it easier for women to accuse men of rape and sexual assault. She has in fact led all of the cancerous feminist initiatives in recent years making Spain “among Europe’s most feminist countries.”

Montero’s former husband Pablo Iglesias, founder of Podemos:

Yolanda Diaz, leader of leftist Sumar party:

Rita Maestre, Podemos politician and radical feminist:

Pedro Sanchez (president) is a full-on radical feminist who boasted of putting more women than men in his cabinet:

This degenerate even boasts a “feminist foreign policy”:

Íñigo Errejón, former Podemos politician and male feminist:

Despite being a gaylord feminist who says “believe women” no matter what, he is currently being accused of sexual assault by various women and was forced to step down:

Ana Redondo, the current minister of “equality,” a radfem who says men can’t be victims of domestic violence:

Juan Carlos Monedero, co-founder of Podemos party, and radfem progressive:

Luis Zapatero, former PSOE president, another big feminist who implemented the “gender violence law” and same-sex marriage:

Ione Belarra, Podemos feminist:

With all of these aggressive feminist women running the show, Spain has sunk into a feminazi hellhole:

Sanchez’s cabinet is entirely Spanish people, no Jews:

Despite Spain being led entirely by Spaniards, it’s the most leftist-feminist country in Europe. The Jew-trappers will cope by saying all of these people are “paid off” by Jews (despite campaigns being mostly publicly financed), which is laughable considering that all of these Spanish leftists are PRO-PALESTINE and oppose Israel. Sanchez just did an arms embargo on Israel over the Gaza war.

This is a list of 27 Spanish billionaires. There’s only two Jews on the list: one is dead and the other was “brought up Catholic by her mother and was for some years associated with the Legionnaires of Christ.”

Conclusion

The purpose of this article is not to blame feminism exclusively on “Christians,” but to show that it’s not exclusively the fault of Jews or any one group of people. If anything, women are the evident protagonists behind feminism, but not all women are to blame either and some men are to blame too.

Like in every case here, a variety of people from different backgrounds support feminism. Christians led the way for women’s suffrage in most Western countries and Jews took up prominent posts in the second wave, but mostly in the United States because it has a large Jewish population. In countries with few Jews, like Iceland, Ireland, Spain, Scandinavia, etc., feminism is led by non-Jewish European women.

At the end of the day, feminism is a women’s movement so women lead it. Their particular ethnic or religious backgrounds and possible motivations are less important than their sex, which is the main reason they’re feminists.

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a small contribution.

Please share and subscribe as well!

Duration: 3h 10min 57sec

Topics: I run down the substantial evidence that Christian charities and churches are neck-deep in illegal migrant trafficking; of religious groups they receive the most subsidies from the US government to resettlement migrants & are the majority of refugee charities working with the UN too; J-trappers can’t cope with this reality so they invent kooky conspiracy theories to blame it all on Js; second half OMETV.

One example:

If you highlight all these liberal Jews doing X thing and then omit all the liberal non-Jews doing the same thing, then you’re being dishonest and distorting reality to make it seem like all and only that one group is doing that thing.

Why do the memers choose to deceive like this? If mass immigration is bad and groups who promote it are bad, then why leave out the Christians (and secular non-religious people) who are promoting it? Why give them a pass and only focus in on Jews who do it?

After observing these people’s behavior on platforms like X, my conclusion is that most of the people who only talk about Jews and immigration are themselves Christians. As Christians, they are hard-pressed to find fault in the actions of members of their own group. It’s much easier to blame it all on an “other” and project moral purity for themselves as victims of this “other”. Same phenomenon with White nationalists who deny the role that Whites have played in the decline of the West. “Not my group, we are victims of other groups!”

So let’s look at it.

World Relief, a Christian humanitarian group, penned an article highlighting historical Christian support for refugees and immigrants. To justify their stance on a religious basis, they cite a bible verse often cited by Jews who support immigration too:

“Welcome the stranger” seems to be the clarion call for both Christians and Jews who have championed refugees and “the vulnerable” in general. World Relief says it’s a “biblical calling” to support immigrants and oppose restrictions on their entry:

In recent U.S. history, Christians have referenced Deuteronomy 24:14 as a moral reason to look out for the good of immigrants: “Do not take advantage of a hired worker who is poor and needy, whether that worker is a fellow Israelite or a foreigner residing in one of your towns.”

This Scripture has inspired countless people of faith to seek justice and care for immigrants navigating a foreign culture in the United States.

At times of prevalent anti-immigrant narratives, Christians have returned to the Bible’s command to care for immigrants and refugees. At times when the Church forgot its mandate, bold leaders reminded the Church of this biblical calling.

The article cites the case of William Speer, a Presbyterian pastor and missionary, who became a vocal advocate for Chinese immigrant laborers in California in the 1840s and 1850s when Americans were demanding restrictions on immigration.

Speer became:

a vocal advocate for the fair treatment of Chinese immigrants. He used his relationships, knowledge of their language, and workforce data to argue against anti-Chinese legislation and even planted a Chinese Christian church in San Francisco in 1853. During his lifetime, he was vocal in opposition to racial prejudice and left a legacy of successors who contributed to fighting the racist anti-Chinese sentiment and joined with Chinese Christians to lead and channel Presbyterian support for the community.

Next it cites the activities of the Christian organization YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association) who aided the millions of new immigrants to the US in the early 20th century:

other Christians formed organizations and associations that helped immigrants integrate into the community. The YMCA in Cincinnati hosted the first known English as a Second Language (ESL) class in 1856 to help German immigrants gain language skill. Additionally, the YMCA served Asian communities in San Francisco. Then, in 1903, the YMCA created a specific department to work with industrial workers and immigrants, a legacy continued through to the YMCA’s present day adult education classes, refugee services, and New American Welcome Centers.

It references the work of Christian organizations, churches and charities who lobbied the US government to accept displaced persons and refugees during and after World War II:

During this displacement, Catholic and Protestant congregations organized to respond. Christians joined with U.S. policymakers to convince American citizens to sponsor refugees. And while the U.S. Government created new resettlement legislation, Christian agencies and churches planned and implemented resettlement efforts, while also advocating before the government. In 1948, the United States passed the country’s first refugee and resettlement law. As a result, the government and Christian agencies partnered to help displaced Europeans seeking permanent residence in the United States after World War II. And to welcome the newcomers into community life.

In a thirty year period between 1950 and 1980, the US government did not provide assistance to refugees, so the Christian churches and faith groups “stepped up to fill in the gaps and help refugees get their footing.” World Relief notes the example of Christian missionary Evelyn Mangham who personally cold-called hundreds of churches to convince them to take in Vietnamese refugees fleeing the war:

a woman named Evelyn Mangham emerged to call the Church to welcome Vietnamese refugees. With 20 years of experience as a missionary, Evelyn Mangham cold-called churches. She quoted the Bible. And she told stories. Because of her commitment to the Church and Scripture, she worked tirelessly to convince churches to sponsor refugees from Vietnam. In the span of a year, she had convinced churches to sponsor 10,000 refugees from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.

Mangham went on to found the World Relief charity alongside her husband.

The 1980s rolled around and “Christians, alongside Jewish and other faith leaders, advocated on behalf of [Latino] migrants [fleeing conflicts]”. This led to the Sanctuary Movement:

The Sanctuary Movement began in 1980 with a goal: to provide shelters to Central American refugees fleeing civil wars. For instance, churches provided English lessons, basic humanitarian help, and legal aid through immigration attorneys. Additionally, leaders preached sermons, organized protests, and advocated to the government on behalf of the asylum seekers. And hundreds of religious communities provided sanctuary, usually inside houses of worship. At its height, the movement grew to include more than 500 congregations.

The Sanctuary Movement lobbied Reagan to pass “the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. This landmark piece of legislation extended temporary worker visa programs and helped 3 million people gain legal status.”

Two prominent leaders of the Sanctuary Movement were retired Presbyterian minister John Fife (who founded the No More Deaths NGO) and American Quaker James A. Corbett.

World Relief ends their article noting that of the leading nine refugee resettlement agencies working with the US government, five are Christian:

Today, there are nine agencies that work with the U.S. Government to resettle refugees. World Relief is one of them, along with five other faith-based organizations. One is Jewish, one is Catholic, and three others are Protestant.

The UNHCR’s webpage lists ten refugee resettlement agencies that they work with and six are Christian:

It’s a similar phenomenon in the UK where 90% of the refugee charities are Christian:

There are also a few Jewish and Islamic groups doing the same there.

Another article on the topic reveals the extensive support American Christians have given to immigrants and refugees at various times. It explains that Christian public opinion in the US is turning against immigration as of late, but it was not always that way:

Before the 1990s, evangelical Christians were busier resettling the newly arrived refugees than banning them from entering the United States. Before they became immigration restrictionists, evangelicals actively endorsed and participated in a large-scale legalization effort for undocumented immigrants (and, indeed, some evangelicals still assist undocumented immigrants in that way). In cooperation with the Justice Department’s Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), evangelical churches across the country helped legalize thousands of undocumented immigrants during the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act’s legalization program.

Signed into law by Ronald Reagan, the reform allowed the opportunity for nearly three million undocumented immigrants to become permanent residents. Among other civil sector organizations, this program enlisted the support of evangelical churches, which provided facilities and volunteers to help interested individuals determine their eligibility and process their applications for citizenship. Nearly all of the major evangelical denominations and organizations were involved – either independently or by participating in the Evangelical Task Force on Legalization run by World Relief, an evangelical relief and resettlement organization.

This support was substantial and essential to the entry of tens of thousands of migrants into the US:

For evangelical pastors, the legalization program was an opportunity to minister to and serve those marginalized by society, as well as a way to solve problems relating to immigration issues in their own pews. While INS officers provided the training and the forms, evangelicals offered the public space, equipment, and volunteers to process legalization forms and determine applicants’ eligibility. Throughout the duration of the program between May 1987 and May 1988, the Task Force established twenty-eight processing centers as well as eighty-five counseling centers in the churches of its member denominations. At the end of the program, 14,518 applications had been submitted to INS through the task force, and 70,000 individuals had received counseling on their eligibility.

Once again, they cited biblical passages to justify it:

In their efforts to help legalize undocumented immigrants under the Immigration Reform and Control Act, evangelicals drew on many Scriptural commands to show hospitality and “welcome the stranger.” They had previously cited these commands when they helped resettle refugees from Cuba in the 1960s and from Southeast Asia during the 1970s and early 1980s. In their efforts to attract refugee sponsors and volunteers for their ministry to undocumented immigrants, evangelical leaders explained that the Bible was filled with stories of migration and replete with commands to the people of Israel to protect the sojourners in their midst. They stressed that extending a welcoming hand to refugees was not only in line with, but was imperative in light of biblical teaching on the care of foreigners. Helping refugees was a direct response to Christ’s call to help “the least of these my brethren” and to both Old and New Testament commands to practice hospitality toward the sojourner.

Another article mentions Evangelical Christian assistance to Cuban and Asian migrants:

Evangelical leaders have called on Christians to “welcome the stranger” since the early 1960s, when evangelical churches started getting involved in the resettlement of Cuban refugees through the U.S. government’s Cuban Refugee Center…. This was not just applied to coreligionists: The same denominations and organizations that had resettled the Catholic Cubans in the 1960s (though these were not viewed as fellow Christians, either) continued to resettle refugees from Southeast Asia in the 1970s and 1980s, many of whom where Buddhists. Southern Baptist volunteers held Americanization and ESL classes at the refugee camps in Arkansas (Fort Chaffee), California (Camp Pendleton) and Florida (Eglin Air Force Base), where the refugees arrived. They built relationships with the refugees and guided them through the day-to-day activities in the camp. In fact, some of the volunteers were former missionaries to Vietnam, who – unable to continue their missionary work on site – discovered that their mission field had relocated with them. They were an important resource for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which gladly accepted their services as language and sometimes cultural interpreters.

While this pro-immigrant sentient is starting to change among the general Christian public in the West, the Christian church leadership is still mostly on board with globalism. The Catholic Pope Francis is the most vocal proponent for open borders.

Pope Francis has been one of the most outspoken globalists in the Vatican, calling relentlessly for more liberal and tolerant immigration policies. He has called the rejection of refugees a “grave sin”:

Working to turn migrants away from the prospect of peace and security in a new country is “a grave sin,” Pope Francis said. “It needs to be said clearly: There are those who systematically work by all means to drive away migrants, and this, when done knowingly and deliberately, is a grave sin,” he said during his general audience Aug. 28.

As Trump comes into office, Pope Francis just appointed a liberal Bishop to be the next archbishop of Washington:

Cardinal McElroy, 70, is a longtime supporter of the pope’s pastoral agenda, and is known for regularly speaking out on the inclusion of migrants, women and L.G.B.T.Q. people in the Catholic church and in the United States.

At a news conference at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington on Monday morning, Cardinal McElroy directly addressed Mr. Trump’s immigration proposals, stating that plans for a “wider, indiscriminate, massive deportation across the country” would be “incompatible with Catholic doctrine.”

Catholic charities are heavily involved in lobbying for and directly assisting the entry of migrants into many Western countries. The International Catholic Migration Commission itself says Catholic groups are responsible for resettling 30% of the refugees who enter the US:

The nine national refugee resettlement agencies of the United States, including the Migration and Refugees Services of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, have urged the U.S. Administration to increase the number of refugee admissions to the country. They call upon the president to authorize the arrival of 62,500 refugees by the end of September 2021.

In a 9 April letter to President Joseph Biden, the nine U.S. national domestic refugee resettlement agencies urge him to honor his commitment of increasing refugee resettlement opportunities. Among the agencies is the International Catholic Migration Commission (ICMC)’s national member, Migration and Refugee Services of the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Conference, which assists in the resettlement of approximately 30% of refugees to the country. Its resettlement network includes over 100 diocesan offices across the country.

An article on the subject tells us this:

USCCB affiliate Catholic Charities boasts assistance to an annual 650,000 migrants on the record, each of whom received legal counsel, jobs, transportation, food & shelter, and contacts for further assistance inside the country. The Catholic Legal Immigrant Network (CLINIC) claims offering legal assistance to an additional 500,000 annually. Assuming no overlap, as much as over 1 million immigrants are receiving legal aid & transportation from the Catholic Church every year.

An array of services and lawfare is offered by the Church and its countless subgroups. Catholic Charities focuses on so-called “respite centers”, also known as migrant camps. The large tent cities you see on the news are not random but in fact built and maintained by NGOs such as CC. They operate on *both* sides of the border. Once across, they feed, wash, clothe, and bed migrants. After a rest, they meet individually and give legal counsel and a plane or bus ticket to the next center with instructions on who to meet and when. Have you wondered, “who paid for their transportation? Who pays for the hotels, the brand new clothes?” Chances are high that it was your church.

CLINIC alternatively focuses on legal assistance to migrants, public advocacy, lawfare training, and lobbying. It is the US’s largest network of immigrant activist programs, founded by the USCCB in 1989. Its website promises free services including direct legal representation, family reunification, and VISA acquisition. On top of this, it is also one of the most prominent immigrant lobbying groups in the country. CLINIC was personally responsible in stifling a number of Trump’s immigration reform policies, including ending permanent residency for refugees and requiring refugees to prove “credible fear” in an interview with a federal official. Additionally, they offer counsel and training to legal groups on the state and local level. If there is a legal matter involving an immigration policy, CLINIC has its hands on it. As of writing, CLINIC is working on getting Temporary Protected Status and permanent residency for thousands of Palestinians and Congolese wishing to enter the US.

When this group is brought up, the 4chan MEMETARDS always post a selectively photoshopped image of some of CLINIC’s staff who have German/Jewish-sounding names.

There’s no proof all five of these five staff members are Jewish, they could be German, but let’s break it down further. This is a cherry pick of five names off a list of 58 staff!

Clearly, the vast majority of these people are not Jewish (assuming those five are). Moreover, this is not the Board but the staff. This is the current staff:

Here are the members of the board:

It’s all Catholic clergy.

The same types of messages can be heard from other church leaders. The Church of England vigorously backs migrants and refugees and sponsors their entry in the UK.

Christian churches and charities are doing this in most Western countries, including Iceland.

Churches in Spain are doing the same:

Same in Canada:

Germany’s Protestant Church helps fund Sea-Watch 4 who rescue migrants in the Med and bring them to Europe.

Christian charities are getting the lion’s share of over a billion dollars in US government grants to resettle refugees.

Catholic charities are getting over three billion in federal grants.

You can compare that with the between 250 to 350 million that HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid) gets depending on the year.

In 2017, 100 Evangelical leaders signed a letter blasting Donald Trump’s Muslim immigration ban:

Scores of evangelical leaders, including at least one from each state, have taken out a full-page newspaper advertisement to denounce President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on refugees, urging him to reconsider his executive order and welcome people fleeing persecution and violence.

Signees include Pastor Timothy Keller of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York, Christian author Ann Voskamp, Bill and Lynne Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church, preacher and author Max Lucado, Pastor Eugene Cho of Quest Church and Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals.

These are some of the Bible passages Christian groups have used to justify their pro-immigration stance:

The evidence for this goes on and on.

Some Americans trace mass immigration from the third world back to the 1965 Hart-Cellar immigration act and put all of the blame for that squarely on the Jewish groups and Jewish congressman Emmanuel Cellar for its passage. But Christians were also involved and central to its success.

Philip Hart, the bill co-sponsor, was Catholic. Ted Kennedy, a big supporter of the bill, is Catholic and cited the familiar “welcome the stranger” bible passages to justify his support. Ted Kennedy continued to support progressive causes long after the 1965 immigration bill:

The Irish Catholic Kennedy family, especially John F. Kennedy, were instrumental in forwarding the general civil rights movement in the 1960s as well as immigration reform to abolish the national origins quota system. The Democrat capture of the house and senate in 1960 laid the groundwork for the passage of civil rights bills. Cofnas reports:

Kennedy’s election in 1960 “ensured that immigration reform, though not a priority for the new administration, would find a place on the new president’s agenda” (ibid.: 55). In 1965, Johnson was president, and Democrats controlled both the Senate (68–32) and the House (295–140). Graham comments: “These circumstances, especially the egalitarian thrust from the civil rights movement, virtually ensured that the 89th Congress would be pressed by the White House and the congressional leadership to abolish the national origins quota system in 1965” (ibid.: 56).

What the JQers often leave out of the discussion is that, while Jews played a strong role in pushing for immigration reform, so did Italian Catholics who formed a lobbying group to pressure the congress to pass the 1965 Hart-Cellar bill. The Irish Catholic Kennedy family of politicians led the charge for civil rights, including immigration liberalization:

Immigration reform was also a personal project of John F. Kennedy, Chin notes, whose pamphlet written as a senator was published after his assassination as the book A Nation of Immigrants, and argued for the elimination of the National Origins Quota System in place since 1921. Ted Kennedy, along with Attorney General and Sen. Robert Kennedy (D-N.Y.), were both proponents of the bill, in part to honor their brother and also because it was consistent with their general interest in civil rights and international cold war politics, Chin adds.

Renewal of the system was particularly offensive to groups that represented Italians and Jews, who had been particularly affected by the restrictions. The American Committee on Italian Migration conducted an intensive lobbying campaign. Publication of A Nation of Immigrants was a project of the Anti-Defamation league of B’nai B’rith, which had been impressed by Sen. John F. Kennedy’s record of supporting liberal immigration laws, including measures to accept refugees from war-ravaged Europe. The book was actually written by a member of Kennedy’s staff, Myer Feldman. Describing Kennedy’s participation as minimal, Feldman said the senator had “reviewed it, and did some editing.”10

While Kennedy was one of his era’s most outspoken reform advocates, he used a 1957 speech to the American Jewish Congress to make clear that he did not favor unlimited immigration. He stated his conviction that “we should have a system of limited and selective migration to the United States.” Kennedy’s principal objection with the status quo was about “the nature, not the existence” of restrictions. Asserting that a selective policy was necessary, he said that policy should “give preference to an immigrant because he is a nuclear physicist rather than because he is an Anglo-Saxon.”11

Kennedy was aware of the political as well as the ideological value of expansive immigration policies, especially in northern states where immigrants and their families were concentrated. In a 1955 letter to fellow Sen. Lyndon Johnson, he wrote, “The Democratic Party must do something to fulfill its 1952 pledges concerning revision of the McCarran Act if it is to have any appeal in the large cities of the North in 1956.”12

That Italian-Catholic lobbying group rarely gets a mention when talking about the Hart-Cellar bill, but it was important:

The American Committee on Italian Migration (ACIM) was organized in February 1952 as a member agency of the National Catholic Resettlement Council, which later formed part of the National Catholic Welfare Conference (NCWC). From its inception, ACIM’s chief objective was the liberalization of the United States immigration policy that, as delineated in the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, rested upon a restrictive “national origins” quota. ACIM undertook a wide range of activities, from raising funds to sponsoring new Italian immigrants into the United States and promoting new immigration legislation by Congress. This collection contains additional materials donated to CMS by ACIM in 2003, mostly documenting ACIM’s work in the 1970s-1990s. The collection contains office files and case records pertaining to lobbying US Congress regarding immigration law, and to the assistance of Italian immigrants in Italy and the United States.

Pretty much all of the groups who were being excluded by the national origins quotas were inclined to support the reforms:

John Higham described the 1924 Johnson-Reed Act as a “blatantly discriminatory” effort “to freeze the existing balance of ethnic strains in the total American population” by sharply restricting the arrival of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. “Since the brunt of the restrictionist attack was aimed more than ever at the supposedly racial qualities of the new immigration, it stung the Jews, the Italians, the Slavs, and the Greeks deeply,” Higham wrote.

The Hart-Cellar Act and most other major civil rights acts were passed by Lyndon Baines Johnson’s administration after JFK was assassinated. Johnson’s “Great Society” bills created the modern civil rights/welfare state.

On the immigration issue, Johnson had this to say:

But as Johnson delivered his first such address less than two months after becoming president he became an energetic advocate of the reform. “We must … lift by legislation the bars of discrimination against those who seek entry into our country, particularly those who have much needed skills and those joining their families,” President Johnson said. In a reference to the legislation’s use of preferences to replace national quotas, he added: “A nation that was built by the immigrants of all lands can ask those who now seek admission: ‘What can you do for our country?’ But we should not be asking: ‘In what country were you born?’”

Johnson was a fervent Christian who cited his religion to justify his stand against discrimination. He “believed in the brotherhood of all mankind, in racial and religious tolerance, and in the integrity and dignity of the individual.”

He was an active Christian and descended from a long line of Baptist preachers:

Moreover, this is what LBJ’s cabinet looked like when he passed the Civil Rights Act:

I’m only counting two Jews out of 29 people.

Without the Kennedy family, LBJ, Hart and other Christians (including all the hundreds of other Democratic congressmen and senators), that bill and other civil rights bills don’t get passed.

If we move onto modern politics, we can find plenty of politicians who identify as Christians promoting the same open borders globalism that Jewish liberals like George Soros have been spearheading.

Joe Biden, an Irish Catholic, said it’s a “good thing” Whites will become a minority in the US.

He often cites his faith to buttress his social justice politics.

Peter Sutherland, an Irish Catholic, served as UN Special Representative for International Migration from 2006 to 2017. He also headed the International Catholic Migration Commission for a time. He was a leading advocate for open borders in Europe, once calling explicitly for “undermining the national homogeneity of Europe.”

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, raised religiously Catholic, championed the most liberal immigration policies in the country’s history. He explicitly said Canada has “no core identity” and put a Somali refugee in charge of immigration in his first term.

Germany’s former Chancellor Angela Merkel is a Protestant. She championed the most liberal immigration policies in Germany’s history, allowing millions of Syrian refugees into the country in 2015 and many others.

Merkel’s father was a Lutheran pastor and theologian and she was raised in a religious environment. She was “deeply influenced by her father”. Merkel’s biographer noted that she “was more intensely affected by her family home and the Christian faith than she was by her study of physics”. She was quoted saying that she is a believer in God, she attends an Evangelical church, religion is her “constant companion” and “the Bible is the book that has most influenced her life”. She also said Germany’s value system was based on Christianity.

Tony Blair, the UK Prime Minister who opened the floodgates of mass immigration in the 1990s under his leadership, was raised Anglican and converted to Catholicism. He spearheaded the most liberal immigration policy in the UK’s history.

Far-left Democrat politician Elizabeth Warren, a Christian, justified her social justice stances by citing her faith.

There’s an interesting contrast here between the Christian liberal Warren vs the Jewish conservative Stephen Miller, who Warren tried to drive out of the White House.

Frans Timmermans, a Dutch politician and former Vice-President of the European Commission, is one of the most radical advocates for diversity and open borders. He said: “Diversity is humanity’s destiny… there will not be, even in the remotest places of this planet, a nation that won’t see diversity in its future”.

He hasn’t specifically cited his faith for his political views but he is a Roman Catholic.

One of the loudest advocates for open borders and charity to Africa is singer Bono, an Irishman who was raised in a religious Christian household. Wiki mentions that his lyrics “frequently include social and political themes, and religious imagery inspired by his Christian beliefs.”

Jamie Drummond, a board member of Bono’s charity, said this: “As Africa’s population doubles they will be coming to Europe… and that is a good thing because we will be senile…we need their youthful energy.”

It later came out that Bono’s charity gives only 1.2% of its donations to poor Africans and pockets the rest.

This is what the board looks like (three Jews out of 12):

Kamala Harris, the most liberal politician in America today (who oversaw Biden’s disastrous open border) and de-facto leader of the Democrat Party, was raised as a Baptist and attended church.

She does not often cite her faith to back up her political liberalism but she does nonetheless still profess Christianity.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. In the entertainment world, you can find plenty of Christians or people who were raised Christian who champion liberalism and globalism. One was “anti-establishment” comedian George Carlin, an Irish Catholic.

Carlin appears in multiple instances to make explicitly anti-White statements. In a Seattle Times interview, he hailed the “decline of the white race on this planet.”

Many of the major late-night hosts and other hosts of political shows are leftists and a number of them are Christian or were raised Christian. Stephen Colbert, John Oliver, Chris Cuomo, Rachael Maddow, Jimmy Kimmel, and Chris Hayes were all raised Christian.

Colbert infamously said, “White people will soon be a minority in America and that’s great!”

Other celebrities like Robert DeNiro and Leonardo Dicaprio are notorious political liberals who hate Trump.

The intention of this article is not to cast aspersions on all Christians or blame them for what the Christian leadership has done. I argue the same point against blaming all Jews for the liberal stances of their elite. Fortunately, the majority of Christians are turning against mass immigration and reject the globalism of their elites.

I could make another article showing all the non-Jewish and non-Christian atheists who support the same open borders globalism that the Jewish and Christian elite do. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that there is no single group that’s responsible for the implementation of globalist/liberal policies. The memetards who suffer from tunnel vision want us to blame exclusively Jews for immigration, but the preponderance of the evidence shows there are many more people involved from different ethnic and religious backgrounds.

Let’s blame all of the culprits not just some.

If you enjoyed this article please consider a small donation or becoming a member.