Just took a quick look here: http://neorxn.com/introduction/ I'm intrigued to keep looking. I'm disappointed that he tries to tie theonomists in with kinists, a lot of theonomists view kinists as heretics (not that I expect you to care as a non-Christian, just sayin' )
Ethno-nationalists are one of the biggest problems in the theonomy movement, BTW. Most non-kinist theonomists tend to ban kinists (ethnonationalists) from the theonomy movement. I'm told they're more dangerous than they're willing to admit to in public. Good stuff, BTW. I'll take a look.
And yes, I hate modernity as well Do you have any particular blog you'd recommend?
What are the other two wings, just out of curiosity? 1. Yes, you could leave for any reason. 2. I would. I can't speak for anyone else. THough admittedly there is the question of how big it would have to be exactly. If you had one random household say they "secede" but they're engaging in homosexuality I would think they could be punished. If they want to start their own society the next county over, be my guest. Most recons are decentralizationists and I am too. 3. Unfortunately if enough people conspire its hard to do anything, but there is a law allowing you to challenge a witness and if the witness is actually a liar they receive whatever penalty they wanted for you. But its true that if both witnesses and court are corrupt I don't know what could be done. I want to learn more about this.
The Wiki article had two sources, but only one link. In the link that was there, I didn't see a quote. If it isn't true, you might want to consider editing it; it is Wikipedia, after all. You should read other NRx blogs and such, you'd probably find a lot to like. There's a big theonomist contingent, though to be fair, it is probably the smallest of the three wings. You're definitely right that I would want to run a society much differently than the US is now, or has ever been. I do like the Constitution insofar as it serves my values, by the US as a construct has always been a product of my much-hated modernity. I do have some questions about theonomy: 1. Would a theonomic civilization allow anyone to leave for any reason? 2. Would they allow secession for a contingent in their controlled geographic area who disagree with them? 3. What would stop someone from conspiring to falsely accuse someone of a capital crime such as homosexuality? What would the standard of evidence be?
Honestly, from what I remember from your posts you're probably closer to what I believe than most other people here. You'd probably want to run a different type of society in part of what we now know as "The United States" which I'm fine with. I've only briefly read on Neoreactionary but from what I've read I'm pretty much in line with the general idea. And a lot of people at the supposed ultra-conservative Patrick Henry College DO NOT like my positions... oddly both for being too authoritarian and too libertarian at the same time.
OK, so if you can actually find a quote (not a wikipedia article that doesn't actually quote him) saying that Gary North wants to stone people just for being unbelievers or that he wants to impose a global theocracy by force (key distinction, believing a global theocracy will eventually come about BY EVANGELISM is obviously very different) let me see the quote so I can denounce him. I definitely don't support that, and I don't know of any other theonomist that does either.
Connect With Us