Closing statement round of the Race Debate between Rev. Bryan Wolfmueller and Linnaeus.
Debate thesis: There is only one race, the race of Adam.
Rev. Wolfmueller affirms:
Opening Statement
Rebuttal
Cross Examination of Wolfmueller
Wolfmueller’s Closing Statement
Linnaeus denies:
Opening Statement
Rebuttal
Cross Examination of Linnaeus
Closing Statement Below
As we conclude this debate, I want to once again thank Rev. Wolfmueller for his affable and collegial spirit in this exchange. It has been enjoyable.
In this debate, I have argued that race denotes degrees of consanguinity, as achieved through shared lineage according to the flesh.
In cross-examination, we saw that Wolfmueller also believes in the category of lineage according to the flesh. He believes that Japanese and Ghanaians—though sharing their ultimate origins in Adam and Noah—differ in their more proximate lineage, making them different people groups.
As “people group” is a euphemism for “race,” this means that Wolfmueller believes in race. It is a settled question, even if he won’t use that term.
If, then, we agree on the biological basis of race, where is our disagreement? Is it lexical?
Certainly, in the course of this debate objections have been raised by Wolfmueller (and commentators) about the semantic application of the term. “Race” as only applicable to Adam’s level of human taxonomy is the thesis that Wolfmueller is defending, after all.
However, this makes no more semantic sense than to say that “there is only one family, the family of Adam.” The lexical range for the two terms, “family” and “race” is effectively identical. A fact which Wolfmueller himself confirmed when he concluded his opening statement by saying, “…we confess that there is one human race, one human family…”
But, simultaneously, Wolfmueller would have to agree that his children, mother and father, and sisters and brothers, are his “family” in the most immediate sense.
His aunts and uncles, first and second cousins, and their offspring, are his “family” in an extended sense.
If he is in Denmark and meets someone with his surname, and both trace their bloodlines back to the same village eight generations ago, he’d exclaim that “we must be family!” But by this he would neither mean “human family” nor “immediate family,” but rather in an intermediate sense.
Wolfmueller is even fond of the phrase “Noah family reunion,” which he uses to denote the fact that we are a “family” with all men across the globe.
So, again, does a universal “human family” mean that there is no such thing as more proximate uses of the category denoted by the term “family”? Clearly not! Then neither is “race” bound only to refer to Adam and not also to other, more proximate groupings of shared lineage according to the flesh.
Of course, as I argued in my opening statement, in English we typically reserve the word “family” for more proximate relations, whereas the word “race” typically encompasses a broader swath of consanguinity, but that is largely conventional. Perhaps we should abandon both terms and go with the German “Geschlecht” instead?
But, setting the word aside, what is Wolfmueller’s real objection to this concept? What causes him to make his central claim, that “the way the Bible teaches us to speak of humanity excludes speaking in terms of races,” when this is so clearly false?
After all, the Bible uses racial designation of groups: Israelites, Moabites, Edomites.
It applies such designations to individuals: Ruth the Moabite, Uriah the Hittite, the Ethiopian eunuch.
It even records God’s command to wage war against entire cohorts of peoples, identified according to their races: Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites.
The reason is that Wolfmueller has fallen victim to the program described by Yuri Bezmenov:
What [Ideological Subversion] basically means is: To change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that—despite the abundance of information—no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country. It’s a great brainwashing process which goes very slow, and it’s divided into four basic stages, the first one being demoralization. …
[The people] are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their minds. Even if you expose them to authentic information, even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. …[E]xposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures. Even if I take him by force…he will refuse to believe it…
The Christian West’s efforts to spread the Gospel to the four corners of the world made us many enemies, who now wage war against us by way of deception. One such program of deceit is to convince the European family that our extinction via dispossession and attrition is not worth noticing, much less resisting.
After all, it would be racist to insist that your family’s inheritance be reserved to, well, your family! Being against the dispossession of your kin is sinful partiality—you don’t love your alien neighbor enough, Nazi. Your nation belongs to the people of the world, now. Anyone who cares to claim a share of it gets one. After all, when a bunch of people who are not of your nation’s pedigree start saying that they’re members of your nation, well then they are—to say otherwise would be to deal in immutable categories, and that’s just not God’s way!
Enter Wolfmueller, here to play the court theologian and baptize the ideology seeded by the enemies of his people. And not out of any guile or malicious intent on his part, but because he has been beguiled, like most living members of the European race. We have been conditioned to believe that advocacy of any racial interest is licit—as long as it’s not White. The best way to prevent White collectivization? Say that there is no such collective—race does not exist! And so we are cowed into accepting our own extinction.
May we learn instead to be men of valor again, and defend our own heritage.