Talk:Kinism

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:53, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Kinism Is Not White Supremacist
According to kinism.net (note that the website is currently unavailable as of May 28, 2018 @ 7:02 AM UTC, an archived version of the page can be viewed at https://web.archive.org/web/20080510150709/http://www.kinism.net/index.php/weblog/beliefs/):

"We further recognize the value, uniqueness, and preciousness of all the Families of Man to God, and their equal theoretical participation in the salvation offered by God through election."

This ideology does not claim that the white race is in any way superior to other races. It advocates for a degree of segregation between all races and is strongly against miscegenation. Thus, Kinism would be better classified as a "racial realist" ideology than a "White supremacist" ideology.

NeutralityWatchman (talk) 07:05, 28 May 2018 (UTC)


 * "White Supremacy" is a bad wording anyway. Using it is a sign of weak analytical capabilities to put it mildly. Supremacy implies that group A should rule over group B. It also can mean that group A (or members thereof) has presumably legitimate demands against group B. Simple believe in the cultural, intellectual or moral superiority of one's own group over others doesn't suffice to be "supremacist", but it can be a legitimising factor in a supremacist ideology. E.g.: Koranical Islam is per definition 'supremacist' in the sense that it doesn't only believe that Islam is a Religion/Belief System superior to others, but also insist that Muslims must ultimately rule the world. Biblical Christianity on the other hand proclaims that it is the only true faith, but it doesn't insist on a mandate to Christians to conquer the world and set up a world government. Preaching the gospel was the mandate given to the Apostles, but that's where it stops. Anyway. Nationalist / Separatist Groups and ideas need to be distinguished from imperialist/supremacist ones. In fact they contradict each other. 105.12.7.176 (talk) 17:26, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Other (...) Christian Sects?!?
It is actually a sign of extreme ignorance to label Creativity, and especiall Wotansvolk, as other "white supremacist Christian sects", like this article does. They are not christian by the broadest of definitions, whereas kinism, even though I personally strongly disagree, could be seen under that label. 84.61.176.122 (talk) 22:55, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Only if Kinism proclaims group A must rule group B. Personally I don't know of any ethnonationalist or conservative group that insist on having something like a god-given right to rule over other groups. What you may find is Americans that quite correctly assume that the Founding Fathers designed the United States as a "White Man's Country" with "religious freedom for Christians". They'll argue that "even if it doesn't say that explicitly in the constitution" this was "tacitly presume". This is btw. also the notion of those that insist that "America is a racist country". --105.12.7.176 (talk) 17:33, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

R.J. Rushdoony and Christian Reconstruction NOT Kinist
In reassessing the representation of Kinism and its alleged association with Christian Reconstructionism, it is crucial to address significant inaccuracies and avoid misrepresentations. Firstly, the current article incorrectly associates Kinism with the Christian Reconstructionism movement by stating that 'Southern heritage' separatists form part of this movement. This is misleading as Kinism is widely regarded as heretical within Reformed Christianity and is explicitly rejected by mainstream Christian Reconstructionists.

Furthermore, the article suggests that the works of Rousas John Rushdoony play a large role in the ideology of many kinists. While it is true that kinists may reference Rushdoony, they often misapply his views. To provide clarity, Mark Rushdoony, R.J. Rushdoony's son, has explicitly stated regarding his father's views on interracial marriage: I once heard him specifically say regarding inter-racial marriages that we cannot forbid what the Bible does not. I was not involved in most of the marriages he performed, but I know he did perform at least one inter-racial (black/white) marriage, that of the son of a friend. As that last fact would certainly show, he was not a Kinist.''' '

This firsthand account emphasizes that Rushdoony's theological focus was on religious and cultural compatibility, not racial segregation. Therefore, a more accurate representation might state: 'While the works of Rousas John Rushdoony are referenced by many kinists, their interpretations frequently misapply his theological perspectives, which emphasize the unity of faith over racial distinctions.'

These revisions are proposed to ensure the article provides a balanced and accurate portrayal of the relationship between Christian Reconstructionism and Kinism, as well as the proper context for understanding Rushdoony's works. Misrepresentations of his stance as racially motivated should be corrected by incorporating detailed interpretations that highlight his theological basis, advocating for a more nuanced understanding in the encyclopedia Desire Mercy (talk) 06:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)


 * In light of previous comments, it's essential to clarify that R.J. Rushdoony’s views on 'inter-racial' and 'inter-cultural' marriages were primarily concerned with the potential cultural and religious differences that could impact the covenantal purpose of marriage, rather than racial differences per se. Mark Rushdoony provides important context, noting that his father's use of terms like 'inter-racial' and 'inter-cultural' was intentional, focusing on the significant cultural variances that can exist even among individuals of the same racial background. For instance, a person of Japanese descent raised in the U.S. might have very different cultural influences from someone raised in Japan, which could affect marital unity.
 * This nuanced understanding should be reflected in the Wikipedia article to correct any misinterpretations of Rushdoony’s stance as racially motivated. Instead, his theological concern was ensuring marriages are formed on a strong, shared foundation capable of fulfilling their covenantal purpose, which can be complicated by cultural differences. Including this clarification will enhance the article's accuracy and help dissociate Rushdoony's views from the racial ideologies promoted by Kinists.
 * For further details and direct quotes that support this clarification, please refer to Mark Rushdoony’s explanations on the Chalcedon Foundation website here: https://chalcedon.edu/blog/ask-chalcedon-racism. This source is crucial for understanding the depth of R.J. Rushdoony's perspectives on these complex issues. Desire Mercy (talk) 06:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sources for RJ Rushdoony Poor & Irrelevant
 * Continuing this discussion, the sources provided for "The works of Robert Lewis Dabney and Rousas John Rushdoony play a large role in the ideology of many kinists."
 * Don't Apologize for Your Ancestors while maybe unpopular to those who prefer certain racial narratives, is neither inherently racist, nor does it support any belief inherently Kinist. If anything, the article repudiates Kinism: > And she was asked after seeing Africa, how she felt about having her people “snatched” and “taken away from their homeland”. She said “Taken away? We were rescued!”
 * Schaeffer quotes no sources, no direct quotes, and is a second-hand source. Rushdoony did not deny the Holocaust and he never states interracial marriages should be illegal. Rushdoony never suggests races should be "kept pure". See previous comments from Mark Rushdoony on his father.
 * The SPL selectively quotes Rushdoony, selectively cutting quotes off and providing no context, save for their own. SPL is not unbiased or objective source.
 * Desire Mercy (talk) 07:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Correcting Misrepresentation of Kinism's Relationship to Christian Reconstructionism
There's a discrepancy in the article on Kinism that suggests it is part of Christian Reconstructionism. This contradicts the source by Kathryn Joyce in 'Quiverfull', which states Kinists 'splintered off from ' Christian Reconstructionism. The difference is crucial: Kinism is not a current faction within Christian Reconstructionism but a separate movement that emerged from it.

I propose revising the introduction to accurately reflect Joyce's wording:

'Kinism is a movement of anti-immigrant, "Southern heritage" separatists who splintered off from Christian Reconstructionism...'

This change aligns with the source and corrects the narrative. For additional context, see my earlier comments on the talk page regarding related misinterpretations. Desire Mercy (talk) 06:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)