A Microcosm of How Social Media Allows White Nationalist Ideas into Christian Thought

TIME Magazine named Taylor Swift their Person of the Year 2023, and white nationalist activist Richard Spencer is not pleased. He posted on X that Swift and her fans are “basic” and that she belongs “in the category of an upscale chain restaurant in a suburban mall.”

That a featured speaker at the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally, who believes, “To be white is to be a striver, a crusader, an explorer, and a conqueror,” is not a Swiftie is not something of significant note. But that Michael Moore, a YouTube and social media personality who produces content under the moniker “Honest Youth Pastor” uncritically reposted Spencer with the one word response, “Yep,” very much is.

To be perfectly clear, I have absolutely no reason to believe that Moore is a fan of Richard Spencer—he likely had no idea whose content he was sharing. Most of what Moore writes about is theological error within the church (and much of his content is theologically sound and edifying). I highly doubt that Moore would knowingly direct his fans to the account of one of America’s foremost white nationalists. The issue is that the free-for-all that is social media incentivizes these type of shoot-from-the-hip responses and disencentivizes taking the time to research the person behind every account.

I have no desire to pick on Moore, but this small slip-up is a microcosm of an issue that has become more prevalent within the conservative Christian thought-space, as of late: that of white nationalist and fascist ideology creeping into accepted discourse, because the average public theologian and pastor is not educated on its more esoteric ideas and promulgators. For instance, only a few in the conservative evangelical world took note when, in November, the self-described “Christian” journal, American Reformer, published a piece by Matthew Pearson praising the political philosophy of the “friend/enemy distinction” from German fascist and unrepentant Nazi Party member Carl Schmitt¹. Few spoke about how Andrew Isker recently attempted to convince Doug Wilson, Joe Rigney and Jared Longshore that Talmudic Jews aren’t authentic Jews, and that they are a problematic people, in a podcast published by Canon Press. When Stephen Wolfe, himself a promulgator of the friend/enemy distinction² and now a regular American Reformer contributor, wrote The Case for Christian Nationalism, I was so taken aback by how almost no reviewers picked up on the traditional fascist and ethno-nationalist theory littered throughout the book, that I felt compelled to write a book-length counter-argument.

Social media theologians, such as the Honest Youth Pastor, do an excellent job of detailing the doctrinal errors being pushed upon the conservative church by theologically liberal pastors, through doctrines such as the prosperity gospel and Critical Theory. Unfortunately, they do not put the same effort into examining the underlying political beliefs driving idolatry from the other end of the spectrum, nor do they take the time to learn of the many personalities promulgating those ideas. The result is that extremist content and personalities are making headway in conservative Christian online discourse. Unless the most prominent, trusted personalities in the space begin examining the history of this thought, with the same rigor they devote to “wokeness,” I fear this will be an increasing trend.

1. Proponents of Schmitt will often claim that the writings they cite are from before he joined the Nazi party in 1933. This is true; during the 1920s, Schmitt was a far bigger fan of Benito Mussolini and the Italian fascists, and he was already a rabid antisemite.

2. One could also argue that Wolfe’s Christian Prince (and others’ statements of a “Red Caesar”) is an application of Schmitt’s theory of the “state of exception,” that societies often reach a point where control must be handed over to a strongman.