Over the weekend I sent out a simple post that started a firestorm. The context of when I sent this post is important, so let’s start there. Amidst a raging week long debate about immigration all over the internet, people who were arguing in favor of hiring Americans over foreign H-1B workers were being called “racists,” myself included.
Words like “racism” have been so grossly misused and abused over the past few decades that they have lost all real meaning. They have become nothing more than weapons of political correctness, used to silence and demonize anyone who dares to dissent from the prevailing leftist orthodoxy. The term “racism” has also been specifically weaponized against White people. In its contemporary usage, “racism” is essentially synonymous with in-group preference.
Every other race and ethnic group on the planet engages in in-group preference, favoring their own kind in various aspects of life such as employment, neighborhoods, social circles, mate selection, and yes—even the church they attend. One of my favorite clips to illustrate this is the infamous Muhammad Ali “Blue birds fly with blue birds” interview.
And there is nothing wrong with this, I have no problem with other races having an in-group preference. This was the norm for every racial group for all of human history until about five minutes ago when Whites decided to embrace suicidal levels of altruism and atomized individualism. This self-destructive behavior, if not addressed, will have long-lasting effects on the future of the White race and thus Western civilization itself. We simply cannot afford being afraid to state this obvious fact out loud anymore.
My main problem is with the double standard.
When a Jewish, Black, Hispanic, or Asian organization lobbies for policies that benefit their communities, that is not considered “racist” by any stretch of the imagination by our society, but when Whites exhibit the same in-group preference, they are labeled as “racists” or “White supremacists.” This distortion of the term “racism” is deeply deceptive. It implies that Whites having in-group preference is inherently malicious and irrational, driven solely by a hatred of other races.
This is a gross mischaracterization. In-group preference does not necessitate a venomous animosity towards other races simply because of their ancestry. It is a natural human tendency that has served to maintain the integrity and cohesion of various communities throughout time.
Even in the supposedly “enlightened” cities of the West, we see clear examples of in-group preference and ethnic enclaves. Neighborhoods like Chinatown, Little Italy, and others are designated areas where people of a particular ethnic or cultural background tend to congregate and live together.
There is nothing inherently wrong or “racist” about this. In fact, it is a completely natural and understandable human tendency. People often feel more comfortable and at home among those who share their language, culture, and traditions. Ironically, this is especially true for immigrant communities who may feel alienated and out of place in a predominantly foreign environment.
The existence of ethnic enclaves and nations is a simple fact of life that we should accept and embrace, not demonize and pathologize. It is a reminder that, despite all our attempts to create a “colorblind” society, human beings are inherently tribal creatures who will always be drawn to those who are most like themselves.
The true significance of in-group preference lies in its role as a mechanism for survival and prosperity. When Whites fail to prioritize their own group interests, they leave themselves vulnerable to displacement, replacement, and eventual destruction at the hands of other groups that have no qualms about pursuing their own self-interests.
It is essential for Whites to recognize and understand the importance of in-group preference, not to foster hate or animosity towards other races, but to ensure the continued survival and flourishing of our people and nations. We can, should, and have every right to embrace and advocate for our own interests.
Christians today often conflate the spiritual kingdom, where believers are united in Christ, with the earthly kingdom, which is the realm of human society and government that we share with non-believers. This confusion can lead to misunderstandings and problems. In the spiritual realm, we are all part of the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12-27). We are united by our faith in Jesus Christ and our shared identity in Him.
We are called to love and care for one another, regardless of our differences (John 13:34-35; Romans 12:10). We are also called to live according to the principles and values of the kingdom of God (Matthew 6:33; Romans 14:17).However, in the earthly realm, we live in a world that is still marked by sin and rebellion against God (Romans 3:23; Ephesians 2:1-3).
This means that there are real differences between Christians and non-believers, as well as between different nations, cultures, and people groups. These differences are not accidental, but are part of God’s plan and design for the world. Pretending that these differences can somehow be erased in the earthly realm is the folly of the egalitarian worldview. Standing idly by while God’s enemies seek to destroy these differences in favor of a uniform, utopian sameness is not acceptable.
As one example of the very real differences–even between Christians– in the civil spehre, the voting patterns of evangelical Christians in the United States exhibit a significant racial divide. While White evangelicals have consistently shown strong allegiance to the Republican Party, with approximately 85% identifying as or leaning toward Republicans, the voting behavior of Black evangelical Christians is markedly different. Historically Black Protestant denominations, which often share similar theological characteristics, overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates. In recent elections, upwards of 80-90% of Black Protestant voters have cast their ballots for Democratic candidates.
This can also be observed by the fact that majority Black, Asian, Hispanic, and White churches exist. It’s telling that despite our spiritual unity in Christ, the vast majority of us choose to worship with people who share our kinship and culture. There’s nothing wrong with this. It doesn’t mean we are any less united spiritually as brothers and sisters in Christ, but to deny that these differences and preferences exist is to deny reality itself.
We should celebrate the unique contributions that each person and people group brings to the table, recognizing that God has designed us with distinct strengths, weaknesses, and perspectives. Rather than seeking to erase our differences or pretend that none exist, we should strive to understand and appreciate them, leveraging our differences to glorify God and serve one another.
In Romans 9:3, Paul reveals the depth of his profound love and devotion to his ethnic kin, the Israelites. This verse stands as one of the most heartfelt and self-sacrificial expressions of love in the New Testament. Paul declares, “For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race.” Here, Paul conveys the extent of his anguish over the spiritual condition of his people, showing that his love for them is so intense that he would willingly endure eternal separation from Christ if it could lead to their salvation.
This sentiment echoes the heart of Christ Himself, who demonstrated sacrificial love by laying down His life for humanity, including his own people who rejected him. While Paul knows that such a wish cannot be fulfilled—since salvation is a personal matter between an individual and God—his statement reflects the deep burden he carries for the Israelites as his people. He recognizes their unique role in redemptive history, as they were entrusted with the covenants, the law, the temple worship, and the lineage of the Messiah (Romans 9:4-5). Yet, despite these blessings, many of them had rejected Christ as the fulfillment of God’s promises and they are the ones who had him killed.
Paul’s declaration also underscores the tension he experiences as a Jew who has embraced Christ. Though he is now an apostle to the Gentiles, his love for his own people has not diminished. Instead, his heart breaks over their spiritual blindness, and he yearns for their reconciliation with God. His statement is not merely a rhetorical flourish; it is a window into his deep intercessory spirit and unwavering commitment to the salvation of his people, even at great personal cost.
This passage challenges believers to examine the depth of their own love and concern for others, especially those within their own communities or ethnic groups. Paul’s example calls for a selfless, Christ-like love that prioritizes the eternal well-being of others over personal comfort or security. It is a reminder that genuine love is willing to bear great burdens for the sake of others, reflecting the heart of God, who desires that all people come to a saving knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4).
My post is not a call for hatred or division, but rather a call for White people to engage in self-preservation and the pursuit of a prosperous future for their own like everyone else. So make the choice, and it is absolutely a binary choice—you can be “racist” or you can be replaced by those who are.
Andrew Torba
CEO, Gab.com
Christ is King
