Now that I’ve spent some time exploring the Kinist community a bit more, I think it would be helpful to delineate what I see as major divisions among adherents. These divisions are good things in my view:
1. The divisions are real and significant, yet Kinists for the most part maintain cordial relations with one another despite disagreements. It is the anti-Kinist element that seeks to impose a uniform, legalistic and extra-Biblical test of faith.
2. The divisions also demonstrate that Kinism is not an “ism” in the normal sense. Usually “isms” in the church and society at large are the result of the ideology of one charismatic leader, and monolithic beliefs lead to many cult-like qualities. To the contrary, the cult-like, intolerant behavior is among the anti-Kinists. This is because, though they do not realize it, the anti-Kinists are pushing their own “ism”, Cultural Marxism. Just as a fish is not aware of water, anti-Kinists do not realize how thoroughly they have been catechized in political correctness, to the extent that they seek to persecute their Christian brothers who disagree. Thus Kinism can be seen as an organic rediscovery of the universal human preference for one’s own people, created by Providence, and only repressed in the last fifty years under the Orwellian regime of Cultural Marxism. Kinism is simply the most thorough form of Christian anti-Marxism, a rejection of the reduction of all men to interchangeable parts.
What are these divisions in the Kinist community?
I see three major breaks, logically, among Kinists. I will call these positions Weak Kinism (my personal conviction), Strong Kinism and Stronger Kinism.
The universal beliefs among Kinists are a recognition that ethnic and racial differences are real and Providential. A preference for one’s own people and culture is healthy and natural. The divisions are basically disagreements over the law of marriage.
Weak Kinism: a Weak Kinist believes that interracial marriage is at best very unwise. At worst, it is sinful if it involves disobedience to the father’s authority to veto specific suitors for his daughter (a father does not have the authority, however, to forbid his daughter to marry at all, or by implication to be so restrictive in approving suitors that marriage is nigh impossible). A Weak Kinist also believes that, whatever the moral or wisdom status of an interracial marriage, once formed it is a legitimate marriage and ought to be respected. The difficulties associated with such marriages, and any ill effects on children of the union, are simply the consequences of a sinful and/or foolish decision. Weak Kinists also believe that if the government passes an anti-miscegenation law, such a law should be respected as a lawful law in that it does not proscribe something God commands.
Strong Kinism: Strong Kinists take things a bit further, insisting that interracial marriage is always a sin based on their reading of OT law (Rushdoony, at least early in life, held to this position). The division between Weak and Strong Kinists is the most significant division.
Stronger Kinism: Some Strong Kinists are Stronger Kinists, who extend their interpretation of OT law to include the remedy of Ezra and Nehemiah to their people’s miscegenation. Stronger Kinists believe miscegenators should “put away” foreign wives and children and that such marriages are Biblically nullified, akin to homosexual “marriage”.
The stronger variety I believe to be the most impolitic and hard to swallow, though I respect someone’s right to hold to it. None of the positions are heretical, in that all recognize the multi-racial nature of Christ’s Church. Many seem to be confusing Kinism with Christian Identity, or else deliberately misinterpreting Kinist beliefs to avoid engaging with them.
What unites all Kinists is our desire to be left alone to raise our children by our convictions, convictions that were nearly universal among our Christian ancestors just 100 years ago. We want the ability to live in peace with liberty of conscience without worrying about self-righteous inquisitors seeking to ruin our friendships, sow discord in our churches or endanger our employment. The unreasonableness of the opposing position (all Kinists are heretics who deserve to be fired from their jobs and excluded from polite society) is becoming more and more obvious. Kinists should continue pressing their case, confident that truth will once again prevail against the Gospel of Marx.