Islam is facing record levels of apostasy and Christianity is growing once more in Europe, especially in France, Germany & Spain. France for example has seen in 2024 7000 new baptisms, which is a 2000 person increase from 2023. It's predicted it will reach 10,000 in 2025. That is if we can trust government data.
You make a good point. I suppose I was thinking the UK specifically. It could be that sections of Europe become cordoned off from Christianity for a while. Give it another reconquista in another few hundred years maybe. People are going back to Church because all the progressive whining in the world doesn't actually fix problems.
You do realise that the UK (Yoo-kay) has a population of 70-80 million people, of which only 5 million are Muslims? I know Americans find this hard to believe and will reiterate that we british people do in fact live under sharia law, but it's not true.
Watching/reading slop will not give you an accurate assessment of another country's situation.
It's never over. Besides, the birth rate of foreigners falls below the native birth rate after the first generation. Globally birth rates are falling in all countries.
America is in a far worse position as it is now majority minority. In Britain and in Europe, foreigners tend to be localised and highly concentrated in particular towns and cities whereas the rest of the country is 90% native.
I studied game theory extensively for about a year and remember perceiving the “always cooperate” strategy as Christian and the “tit-for-tat” as Jewish. It attracted me to the Old Testament and other Jewish teachings, as I felt Christians were too optimistic in their forgiveness and were easily taken advantage of. Your piece sheds light on a much more discerning forgiveness—only to those who repent. I believe your investigation and alignment of the forgiving “tit-for-tat” with original Christian teachings is absolutely dead on. Phenomenal piece!
Thanks! I hope that this was helpful for a number of readers. It's something we're all kind of aware of, but I don't think any one has clearly articulated these ideas before.
Is the forgiveness always irrational though? Given the second order effects, its often more rational - at least that's the way I've viewed it. It depends who and what you are forgiving. Have you read 'The Weirdest People in the World' by Joseph Heinrich? It is a social psychological/anthropological account of how the West out competed everyone else. There's a large section on Christianity and I actually ripped one if his chapters for a uni presentation on how Monogamy stabilises a society because it provides low status men with wives, socialising them and integrating them into society, when otherwise, they would be up to no good (of course in most tribal societies the higher status men would have more women).
Oh yeah, do you believe woke progressivism/safteyism/over emphasis on care is in part a result of ever increasing forgiveness over time from Christianity, to the point there's nothing else, and people can take advantage? It seems you implied it, but I know its a touchy subject on the dissident right to suggest wokeness came from Christianity.
In the immediate it's irrational in comparison to our historic and evolutionary modes of thinking I'd argue. It's become rational now only in retrospect once we can see the benefits of large-scale cooperation via the nation-state and global economics. The capacity to abstractly rationalize forgiveness for the sake of national economics isn't exactly common. Making the act inherently irrational for the vast majority of people.
Wokeness is an ideological parasite that found a population that lacked immunity. It didn't "come from" Christianity so much as an overly forgiving form of Christianization created a habitat for it. An anti-dote would be nice, but even without one, the disgusting parasite, and those possessed by it, will destroy its host habitat and die. We need to build a culture that's far less hospitable to its tricks.
Hmm, I was thinking more of social psychological sense on an individual level. Even within tribes, within families, intuitive 'socialites' or individuals with high EQ I'm guessing may have perceived that they are more successful when they occasionally forgive. When someone has wronged them unjustifiably, and instead of doing what they normally do - retribution, which the wrongdoer has seen before, they forgive. As a result, the wrongdoer becomes dedicated to them, loyal in a way that otherwise might be difficult to attain. Of course, as I suggested, this forgiveness must be employed under a greater reputation of resilience, and at times, even ruthlessness, whereby the forgiver has shown he is not one to be messed with.
That's a great way to frame it actually, some necessary nuance to the discussion (you could write an article about it?): That an overly forgiving form of Christianity has created a habitat for wokeness, and other anti-Christian beliefs.
Mathematics is not my preferred discipline, but I absolutely adore your synthesis between that art form and Christian theology. Truly, the Rhetorician and the Mathematician will reach the same conclusions about Reality, given that they are both honest.
My first exposure to Faith was through mathematics. You can find a reflection in set theory if you dig deep enough. I think that it's necessary for the coming cultural shifts to meld materialism and theology in ways that we haven't before. Take a look at my article above "Materialism has not slain God, Truth is His restoration".
We need to move into a new century a lot more open minded than people thought we'd need to be. Let go of the Hegelian prejudice we've grown up with through the sciences.
What a beautiful way that is to encounter the Faith. I have that article in queue, as a matter of fact. You are certainly not alone with your inclination; appealing to and understanding all inclinations is the meaning of evangelism.
I liked this analysis, and I am working on am extension of your thesis but with a small rebuttal.
The thesis that by introducing selective forgiveness Jesus unlocked the cap of complex societies to grow beyond the trust level of their immediate circles is very interesting but I think it is one of the 2 strategies to actually break the cap and grow to civilizational level societies, the thesis you approached I call the Abrahamic method which is introduce forgiveness and introduce a superior deity which is the ultimate arbitor of the rules thus giving every single believer the rule of forgiveness to his community, muslims also have the concept of misericordy, forgiveness and ummah (community).
One of the good after effects of this is stopping the inter-clan warfare and creating a nexus that allows the trust to expand from family/clan to the whole society as you explained.
I think the other solution is the extreme opposite, double down on clan and family but regulate through costly and ritualized rules the interactions between members/clans to such a degree it is comical. This is the Confucian strategy and the one China/Korea/Japan adapted.
This basically explains why Abrahamic religions and Confucian world came to build civilizations and allow a higher level of trust and thus social complexity to build while India, Africa or Native america took longer or didnt, because usually it was just one tribe having the role of leader and oppressing everyone in the path.
That's an excellent rebuttal, and basically completes my worldview of the system in question. I think you're absolutely correct. I think that both the West and the East developed more complete social systems permitting the expansion of civilization well beyond the tribe without the need for constant direct coercion. Jesus did it in the west by introducing an overly generous system of forgiveness, and Confucius did it in the east by formalizing a highly rigid and complex set of structured hierarchies and rituals. The method that Jesus used is ultimately superior to the one used by Confucius as it allows for social (and technical) innovation over time with a lot more flexibility than the system used in the East.
Without such a system... constant coercion and an ever present threat of violence is required to maintain order in civilizations that expand broadly beyond the clan. Constant coercion and enforcement is very expensive and effectively wasted resources. This is why traditions outside the scope of the Christian model and Confucian model have so much trouble scaling civilization.
I'm going to stick to calling it the "Christian/Muslim" model because the original Jewish system was highly clannish and still doesn't allow for broadly scaled civilizational function without running into the same clan-based issues. Even today Israel often faces internal riots and strife due to clans rubbing up against each other poorly. That's why there's so much distrust and corruption when it comes to internal social order... even in times of direct conflict.
I agree with your first paragraph but with a small caveat. It succeded wherever the true values of balanced forgiveness penentrated enough to set the fertile ground for expansion. While trying to poke holes at your thesis I found many examples in Islamic and Christian lands where the forgiveness failed to either break up the inter-clan violence or helped expand trust among the believers. A few examples of this are Albania (Muslim and Christian), Celtic Lands (Scotland/Ireland), Afghanistan, Africa (Christian or Muslim).
For some and I agree, this comes from religion not breaking those cultures enough to adopt the full tenets of their belief because in North Africa while there is still a legacy repartition between amazigh tribes traditionally the tribes had trust between them due to the common faith of Islam.
As for the superiority, I agree that the Abrahamic (or as you call it Christian/Muslim) model is better because the tenet is that it imposes brotherhood and forgiveness amongst believers. And in the case of Islam the religion clearly states that that trust must be also expanded only to “the people of the book” meaning Christians and Jews. But the reality is that confucianism has never truly been tried in those civilization to the extent Islam or Christianity has because it suffers from being a philosophy and not a religion. There is no God after death to impose a strict moral code and Confucianism ebbed and flowed between the different dynasties. But you can see that when it was truly applied, those were the Chinese golden ages like the Tang or Song dynasty.
Fully agree with the second paragraph.
I prefer to call it Abrahamic because the modern Jewish faith (after the Bar Kokhba rebellion) expands that level of trust to Jews only. The difference is that the Jewish religion doesnt have the divine mandate to proselytize like Christianity or Islam. And Jewish people are pretty united even if you see it from the outside, the might bump into each other but they still see every Jew as part of the group and deserving of that trust vs a Palestinian. Jewish people are basically a clan because they never had the will or code to expand beyond that.
The apprent strife you see is no different than Sedevacantist vs average Catholic, or Sunni muslims of different interpretations. Each would still trust his own more than the other religions.
I'd want to disagree with the claims about a form of Islam growing in Europe, I think Islam will face the same problems you described with paganism tbh.
A number of people have stated this. While the UK is collapsing under the weight of Islam, that's not true of all European nations. I may be jumping the gun with that statement, but I'll leave it in for the time being.
What do you think about Jesus’ life as a zero knowledge proof? You don’t need to know anything about Jesus, but there were disciples who were ordinary people who were willing to face horrendous deaths rather say he wasn’t who he said he was.
It's not really relevant to the article, but yes I am Christian (obviously). I prefer the life of Jesus spoken of in the mythic rather than attempting to pin it to the prosaic. It means a lot more in retelling if we don't overanalyze it and instead listen to the stories.
I liked the article until the end when you tried to link it to modern politics. So reductive. So nonsensical. But I guess it had to be that way if you wanted to make that connection. If you wrote anything longer than 2 paragraphs, the holes would start showing by the dozens.
I don't mind partisan politics if they're of quality, but ending a good article with "the woke pedos" seems so pointless and low effort. Seems like a waste for an otherwise interesting subject. I would call this out if it were leftists doing that to Reps for example as well.
I enjoy pointing out that Woke progressives are evil violent lunatics hell bent on harming innocent people every time it comes up. I think that message will need to be reinforced over and over in the coming decades to culturally salt the earth so their filth can never again grow in our societies.
"Europe will turn to Islam." Lol, I doubt that. Europeans show very little interest in Islam, I.e the complete and absolute submission to God's love, because it's way of being is utterly foreign and alien to the European mindset. Europe will only become Islamic if there's a wholesale replacement of native Europeans.
You speak about paganism in very negative terms and present a theory that Christianity won out because of it's superior organisational capacity but I disagree. If that really was the case, how does one explain the Bronze Age civilisations (and older) or the Persian empire or the Greek city states or the Roman Empire? All of which were quite advanced and highly organised.
Maybe game theory isn't quite such an accurate model for human behaviour.
Going back to the original point, I think Europeans will either revert back to either Christianity or paganism or a weird synthesis of the two. That seems far more likely than an Islamic takeover.
What is your biblical basis for asserting that Jesus did not advocate forgiveness in every situation, but instead advocated eliminating persistent wrongdoers (not just persistent wrongdoing)?
Because advocating forgiveness in every situation in that culture and at that time was suicidal. Learning to forgive those who are not-family as well as those who are-family was a huge hurdle. A lot of what Jesus did was trying to drive home the point to people that simply could not fathom a different method for social organization.
Christianity mostly enabled cooperation by destroying underlying clan structures, thus creating a more individualistic society. One, more malleable and easier to direct by the higher estates or a centralized bureaucratic state.
Pagans did scale up their societies beyond clan & tribal rivalry.
Would you rather be poor or black?
Christianity leads to Brazil not due to its universal ideology, but due to female consent and a justice system replacing vendetta.
Islam is facing record levels of apostasy and Christianity is growing once more in Europe, especially in France, Germany & Spain. France for example has seen in 2024 7000 new baptisms, which is a 2000 person increase from 2023. It's predicted it will reach 10,000 in 2025. That is if we can trust government data.
You make a good point. I suppose I was thinking the UK specifically. It could be that sections of Europe become cordoned off from Christianity for a while. Give it another reconquista in another few hundred years maybe. People are going back to Church because all the progressive whining in the world doesn't actually fix problems.
I foresee the same result and England’s situation is enough to reduce me to tears.
You do realise that the UK (Yoo-kay) has a population of 70-80 million people, of which only 5 million are Muslims? I know Americans find this hard to believe and will reiterate that we british people do in fact live under sharia law, but it's not true.
Watching/reading slop will not give you an accurate assessment of another country's situation.
White Anglo-Saxons are the minority of births in the UK at this time so... I think it's probably already ogre without major expulsions/resettlements.
It's never over. Besides, the birth rate of foreigners falls below the native birth rate after the first generation. Globally birth rates are falling in all countries.
America is in a far worse position as it is now majority minority. In Britain and in Europe, foreigners tend to be localised and highly concentrated in particular towns and cities whereas the rest of the country is 90% native.
America is undergoing ethnogenisis right now and will be regarded as a different ethnic group from Europeans within a generation or two.
I'm not sure I agree woth you there. Normally for ethnogensis to occur, there has to be some manner of stability to allow that to happen.
In my opinion, the future of Europeans is in Europe. I wouldn't be surprised if the USA ends up looking something like Brazil or Latin America.
I studied game theory extensively for about a year and remember perceiving the “always cooperate” strategy as Christian and the “tit-for-tat” as Jewish. It attracted me to the Old Testament and other Jewish teachings, as I felt Christians were too optimistic in their forgiveness and were easily taken advantage of. Your piece sheds light on a much more discerning forgiveness—only to those who repent. I believe your investigation and alignment of the forgiving “tit-for-tat” with original Christian teachings is absolutely dead on. Phenomenal piece!
Thanks! I hope that this was helpful for a number of readers. It's something we're all kind of aware of, but I don't think any one has clearly articulated these ideas before.
Is the forgiveness always irrational though? Given the second order effects, its often more rational - at least that's the way I've viewed it. It depends who and what you are forgiving. Have you read 'The Weirdest People in the World' by Joseph Heinrich? It is a social psychological/anthropological account of how the West out competed everyone else. There's a large section on Christianity and I actually ripped one if his chapters for a uni presentation on how Monogamy stabilises a society because it provides low status men with wives, socialising them and integrating them into society, when otherwise, they would be up to no good (of course in most tribal societies the higher status men would have more women).
Oh yeah, do you believe woke progressivism/safteyism/over emphasis on care is in part a result of ever increasing forgiveness over time from Christianity, to the point there's nothing else, and people can take advantage? It seems you implied it, but I know its a touchy subject on the dissident right to suggest wokeness came from Christianity.
In the immediate it's irrational in comparison to our historic and evolutionary modes of thinking I'd argue. It's become rational now only in retrospect once we can see the benefits of large-scale cooperation via the nation-state and global economics. The capacity to abstractly rationalize forgiveness for the sake of national economics isn't exactly common. Making the act inherently irrational for the vast majority of people.
Wokeness is an ideological parasite that found a population that lacked immunity. It didn't "come from" Christianity so much as an overly forgiving form of Christianization created a habitat for it. An anti-dote would be nice, but even without one, the disgusting parasite, and those possessed by it, will destroy its host habitat and die. We need to build a culture that's far less hospitable to its tricks.
Hmm, I was thinking more of social psychological sense on an individual level. Even within tribes, within families, intuitive 'socialites' or individuals with high EQ I'm guessing may have perceived that they are more successful when they occasionally forgive. When someone has wronged them unjustifiably, and instead of doing what they normally do - retribution, which the wrongdoer has seen before, they forgive. As a result, the wrongdoer becomes dedicated to them, loyal in a way that otherwise might be difficult to attain. Of course, as I suggested, this forgiveness must be employed under a greater reputation of resilience, and at times, even ruthlessness, whereby the forgiver has shown he is not one to be messed with.
That's a great way to frame it actually, some necessary nuance to the discussion (you could write an article about it?): That an overly forgiving form of Christianity has created a habitat for wokeness, and other anti-Christian beliefs.
I could steelman the argument by saying that historically, more Christian women have filled semetic slave pens than vice versa.
Christian forgiveness just results in Muslims & Jews selling your women into pornography and slavery.
The response isn't developing a cuck fetish instead of committing genocide.
The holy land is still their's.
Modern Christianity isn't really Christian in the sense that matters. It's far too forgiving. We need a little more fire and brimstone.
9 time out of 10 that seems to be the key.... it's that 10% difference that matters in large social systems.
Mathematics is not my preferred discipline, but I absolutely adore your synthesis between that art form and Christian theology. Truly, the Rhetorician and the Mathematician will reach the same conclusions about Reality, given that they are both honest.
My first exposure to Faith was through mathematics. You can find a reflection in set theory if you dig deep enough. I think that it's necessary for the coming cultural shifts to meld materialism and theology in ways that we haven't before. Take a look at my article above "Materialism has not slain God, Truth is His restoration".
We need to move into a new century a lot more open minded than people thought we'd need to be. Let go of the Hegelian prejudice we've grown up with through the sciences.
What a beautiful way that is to encounter the Faith. I have that article in queue, as a matter of fact. You are certainly not alone with your inclination; appealing to and understanding all inclinations is the meaning of evangelism.
I liked this analysis, and I am working on am extension of your thesis but with a small rebuttal.
The thesis that by introducing selective forgiveness Jesus unlocked the cap of complex societies to grow beyond the trust level of their immediate circles is very interesting but I think it is one of the 2 strategies to actually break the cap and grow to civilizational level societies, the thesis you approached I call the Abrahamic method which is introduce forgiveness and introduce a superior deity which is the ultimate arbitor of the rules thus giving every single believer the rule of forgiveness to his community, muslims also have the concept of misericordy, forgiveness and ummah (community).
One of the good after effects of this is stopping the inter-clan warfare and creating a nexus that allows the trust to expand from family/clan to the whole society as you explained.
I think the other solution is the extreme opposite, double down on clan and family but regulate through costly and ritualized rules the interactions between members/clans to such a degree it is comical. This is the Confucian strategy and the one China/Korea/Japan adapted.
This basically explains why Abrahamic religions and Confucian world came to build civilizations and allow a higher level of trust and thus social complexity to build while India, Africa or Native america took longer or didnt, because usually it was just one tribe having the role of leader and oppressing everyone in the path.
That's an excellent rebuttal, and basically completes my worldview of the system in question. I think you're absolutely correct. I think that both the West and the East developed more complete social systems permitting the expansion of civilization well beyond the tribe without the need for constant direct coercion. Jesus did it in the west by introducing an overly generous system of forgiveness, and Confucius did it in the east by formalizing a highly rigid and complex set of structured hierarchies and rituals. The method that Jesus used is ultimately superior to the one used by Confucius as it allows for social (and technical) innovation over time with a lot more flexibility than the system used in the East.
Without such a system... constant coercion and an ever present threat of violence is required to maintain order in civilizations that expand broadly beyond the clan. Constant coercion and enforcement is very expensive and effectively wasted resources. This is why traditions outside the scope of the Christian model and Confucian model have so much trouble scaling civilization.
I'm going to stick to calling it the "Christian/Muslim" model because the original Jewish system was highly clannish and still doesn't allow for broadly scaled civilizational function without running into the same clan-based issues. Even today Israel often faces internal riots and strife due to clans rubbing up against each other poorly. That's why there's so much distrust and corruption when it comes to internal social order... even in times of direct conflict.
I agree with your first paragraph but with a small caveat. It succeded wherever the true values of balanced forgiveness penentrated enough to set the fertile ground for expansion. While trying to poke holes at your thesis I found many examples in Islamic and Christian lands where the forgiveness failed to either break up the inter-clan violence or helped expand trust among the believers. A few examples of this are Albania (Muslim and Christian), Celtic Lands (Scotland/Ireland), Afghanistan, Africa (Christian or Muslim).
For some and I agree, this comes from religion not breaking those cultures enough to adopt the full tenets of their belief because in North Africa while there is still a legacy repartition between amazigh tribes traditionally the tribes had trust between them due to the common faith of Islam.
As for the superiority, I agree that the Abrahamic (or as you call it Christian/Muslim) model is better because the tenet is that it imposes brotherhood and forgiveness amongst believers. And in the case of Islam the religion clearly states that that trust must be also expanded only to “the people of the book” meaning Christians and Jews. But the reality is that confucianism has never truly been tried in those civilization to the extent Islam or Christianity has because it suffers from being a philosophy and not a religion. There is no God after death to impose a strict moral code and Confucianism ebbed and flowed between the different dynasties. But you can see that when it was truly applied, those were the Chinese golden ages like the Tang or Song dynasty.
Fully agree with the second paragraph.
I prefer to call it Abrahamic because the modern Jewish faith (after the Bar Kokhba rebellion) expands that level of trust to Jews only. The difference is that the Jewish religion doesnt have the divine mandate to proselytize like Christianity or Islam. And Jewish people are pretty united even if you see it from the outside, the might bump into each other but they still see every Jew as part of the group and deserving of that trust vs a Palestinian. Jewish people are basically a clan because they never had the will or code to expand beyond that.
The apprent strife you see is no different than Sedevacantist vs average Catholic, or Sunni muslims of different interpretations. Each would still trust his own more than the other religions.
There was no jesus
Brilliant!!
I'd want to disagree with the claims about a form of Islam growing in Europe, I think Islam will face the same problems you described with paganism tbh.
Oh but also fantastic piece I shouldn't put that in my original comment lol
A number of people have stated this. While the UK is collapsing under the weight of Islam, that's not true of all European nations. I may be jumping the gun with that statement, but I'll leave it in for the time being.
Amazing, grateful to have read this.
What do you think about Jesus’ life as a zero knowledge proof? You don’t need to know anything about Jesus, but there were disciples who were ordinary people who were willing to face horrendous deaths rather say he wasn’t who he said he was.
It's not really relevant to the article, but yes I am Christian (obviously). I prefer the life of Jesus spoken of in the mythic rather than attempting to pin it to the prosaic. It means a lot more in retelling if we don't overanalyze it and instead listen to the stories.
Interesting stuff
Fantastic
I liked the article until the end when you tried to link it to modern politics. So reductive. So nonsensical. But I guess it had to be that way if you wanted to make that connection. If you wrote anything longer than 2 paragraphs, the holes would start showing by the dozens.
Thanks for the input. It's always tricky to attach some of these ideas to current events.
I don't mind partisan politics if they're of quality, but ending a good article with "the woke pedos" seems so pointless and low effort. Seems like a waste for an otherwise interesting subject. I would call this out if it were leftists doing that to Reps for example as well.
I enjoy pointing out that Woke progressives are evil violent lunatics hell bent on harming innocent people every time it comes up. I think that message will need to be reinforced over and over in the coming decades to culturally salt the earth so their filth can never again grow in our societies.
the only thing being soured with that attitude is the quality of your writing. In my view, of course.
Probably a bit.
"Europe will turn to Islam." Lol, I doubt that. Europeans show very little interest in Islam, I.e the complete and absolute submission to God's love, because it's way of being is utterly foreign and alien to the European mindset. Europe will only become Islamic if there's a wholesale replacement of native Europeans.
You speak about paganism in very negative terms and present a theory that Christianity won out because of it's superior organisational capacity but I disagree. If that really was the case, how does one explain the Bronze Age civilisations (and older) or the Persian empire or the Greek city states or the Roman Empire? All of which were quite advanced and highly organised.
Maybe game theory isn't quite such an accurate model for human behaviour.
Going back to the original point, I think Europeans will either revert back to either Christianity or paganism or a weird synthesis of the two. That seems far more likely than an Islamic takeover.
What is your biblical basis for asserting that Jesus did not advocate forgiveness in every situation, but instead advocated eliminating persistent wrongdoers (not just persistent wrongdoing)?
Because advocating forgiveness in every situation in that culture and at that time was suicidal. Learning to forgive those who are not-family as well as those who are-family was a huge hurdle. A lot of what Jesus did was trying to drive home the point to people that simply could not fathom a different method for social organization.
Your comment is a great example of how hatred blinds us. You missed the entire the essay to be an edgelord.
His behavior is exactly the type of behavior I was referencing in the article.
Are you ok with your daughter marrying blacks?
https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/whatever-happened-to-european-tribes/
Christianity mostly enabled cooperation by destroying underlying clan structures, thus creating a more individualistic society. One, more malleable and easier to direct by the higher estates or a centralized bureaucratic state.
Pagans did scale up their societies beyond clan & tribal rivalry.
Would you rather be poor or black?
Christianity leads to Brazil not due to its universal ideology, but due to female consent and a justice system replacing vendetta.
https://manglacharan.com/1843+Suraj+Prakash/Forgiveness+vs+Fighting
ਦੋਹਰਾ।ਦਾਦੂਸਮਾਂਬਿਚਾਰਕੈਕਲਿਕਾਲੀਜੈਭਾਇ।
ਜੇਕੋਮਾਰੈਈਟਢੀਮਪਾਥਰਹਨੈਰਿਸਾਇ।੨੪।
Dadu, in contemplating the state of our Age of Darkness, if one hits you with a mud brick, ferociously strike back with a stone bolder."
Ultimately, Christendom is just the remnants of Rome.
Outside Europe it's wherever colonial rule was won militarily.
This is true of every faith.
Institutions spur mass adoption via normalization.
I think liberalism will give way to Christianity again, but white Christianity is done.
You're describing the problems with managerialism, not Christianity.