Aside from caveats from “Leaving the Cathedral” regarding the underpowered nature of Neuroscience, there are a few studies that largely confirm that religion is politics.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5180221/
"Processing challenges to political beliefs was associated with relatively increased activity in regions of the DMN, including the precuneus, the posterior cingulate cortex, the medial prefrontal cortex, the inferior parietal lobe, and the anterior temporal lobe"
What this is saying is that there was increased activity in these regions when the subjects were presented with things that challenged “political” beliefs.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7195862/
"The findings implicate several brain regions potentially associated with R/S development and behavior, including the medial frontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, precuneus, posterior cingulate cortex, default mode network, and caudate.”
This is saying the same thing, except talking about “religious / spiritual development and behavior”.
Bunch of other studies on the same thing, but common thread in all of these studies seems to be the activation of these areas:
Cuneus
Precunius
Medial Frontal / Prefrontal Cortex
Posterior Cingulate Cortex
There’s probably more, but these are the most consistent. So when dealing with religion, political or theistic, you’re dealing with a particular part of the brain, with the result being the destruction of inquiry and understanding on things which activate these parts of the brain.
Interestingly, another study on Israelis and Arabs found greater activation of Precuneus associated with more negative views of Israelis (if an Arab) or Arabs (if an Israeli):
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.057
- In the paper, however, they also found greater activation of the Posterior Cingulate Cortex, and slightly less activation of the Medial and Dorsomedial Prefrontal Cortex, so similar areas to religion.
Buch of other studies I read through:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31259793/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2748718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7935065/
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.057
—
Speculations:
Religiosity works the same neural pathway as politics, that’s boring and at this point uninteresting. What’s more interesting is that group identity seems to also work through these pathways. This sometimes creates conflict.
For example, “Christians”. If you imagine yourself part of some mythical group, “Christian”, that will inevitably conflict with your racial group. This creates a bizarre situation where someone like Matt Heimbach, who is supposedly a “white nationalist”, claiming that he would take a black “Christian” over a white atheist.
This is explained by the fact that the same areas associated with religiosity are also associated with identity. So the problem of “Christian Nationalism” (oxymoron) seems to be a function of this neurological thing. The original form of Judaism does not have this problem as the religion only applies to Jews, who are a limited group with proscribed membership criteria.
Another thing this implies is that “conservatives” are going to be far less groupish than shitlibs. And this is what we see in the scale and extent of riots, the ability of shitlibs to “march through the institutions” and in institutional censorship and exclusion of those with deviant religious beliefs once they took over.
Simply put, “conservatives” just have less activation in key religious regions of the brain. They’re less religious! As a result, they don’t drop the hammer on deviants to anything like the degree that shitlibs do.
This pattern, I imagine, also played out in the rise of “Christianity” in Rome. Christians, firing on the religious wiring, were able to march through the Roman institutions, while the non-christian Romans, being less religious at a neurological level, going through the motions of upholding the old gods, would have sporadic pushback against the Christians, not realizing what they were up against until it was too late, ushering in the fall of Rome and the Christian ages (aka “Dark Ages”).
This was of course a period of hyper-trinket “nationalism”. Trinket “nationalism” being things like “German” or “Gaelic” or later “Anglish” or “Frankish” or “Hispanic” or “Lusitanian”. Or even shittier - a particular nobility.
But, there’s a whole industry dedicated to denying the Christian ages / dark ages, along with denial of Christianity’s role in destroying Rome, often referencing the “survival” of the eastern wing of the empire - but even that was merely survival. And the survival of the eastern wing can be explained by the same geographic reasons that the Byzantines later held on in that region as long as they did, and that the Ottomans held on as long as they did despite by 1914 having the manufacturing capacity of Belgium. It was a tough region to invade!
More germaine to today, is that modern shitlibs are going to have much more of their identity tied up in their religion than “conservatives”, just as the Pagans were far less Pagan than “Christians” were “Christian”. This explains the genocidal anti-white rhetoric we get from modern universities, the overt discrimination against whites, coupled with endless exhortation against the evils of white (“supremacy”, “nationalism”, “privilege”, etc.), and the limp and ineffectual response by whites against it.
The essential neurological correlate of what is called “conservatism” is.. the amygdala. An area that is associated with more than just fear, that’s a bit of an oversimplification, but it is, in fact, associated with fear and suspicion.
Pretty grim stuff. Non-religious whites really aren’t going to fight back, they’re at a decided neurological disadvantage, and are losing the same way the Pagans lost. On a faster time scale as everything moves faster than in the 300s and 400s, but it’s the same basic process.
But it also reminds me of something Himmler and Hitler said. To paraphrase, they liked recruiting from “communists”, and found that they were more likely to make a German or even “Aryan” ultra-nationalist out of a “communist” than a “conservative”.
This makes perfect sense when you realize that “nationalism” and “big woo cause” use the same neurological circuitry. I did a video on that, “The Nazi-Communist Pipeline was Real”, going through electoral data which showed that yes, the Nazis were in fact flipping a great number of “communists”.
In my position, all I can do it point out that this is happening. That things that win, win by hooking into that religious circuitry. I don’t have the power to create a new religion, BUT
It’s a lot easier to destroy than it is to create. So I throw myself into deconstruction.
Is your website gone for good? Im sure if you held a fundraising drive on a stream you could get people to cover the hosting costs. It was one of my best resources for debates.
Most normie christian conservatives implicitly agree with shitlibs on the anti White stuff they're just not as explicit about it, even the worst excesses of leftism doesn't elicit anything close to the vitriolic reaction pro White stuff does in them. They'll side with literal pedos over anyone they perceive as a nazi, you'll never seem them say 'I don't agree with nazim but...' like they routinely do with trannies & similar topics. They’re always quick to clarify that they don't hate whatever the left is pushing but not so with anything that's unabashedly pro White.