On Doxxing and Pseuds
Given the recent doxxing of a controversial online figure and publisher named Lomez by a pro-antifa marxist-atheist Jason Wilson, I began to ask myself why a faithfully married father, beloved former university professor, and successful entrepreneur wouldn’t be the object of admiration rather than scorn? Especially when compared to the lamprey that had attached itself to him and others in the form of this journo and his “anti-colonial” sponsors.
And then I asked a further question. Why would such a man feel the need to protect himself by adopting an anonymous profile? For those of you that don’t know, Lomez is a cryptic Seinfeld reference to Kramer’s Orthodox Jewish friend who was always around but never seen.
What does it tell us that a misandrist without a wife or children who harasses people about their dead family members or calls their wives while supporting and encouraging the siege of the Federal building in downtown Portland can write and operate with his given name?
And, more than operate, get promotions and fellowships? In order to understand this I thought back to two of the famous pseuds in American history; Publius, the pseud used alternately by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay when publishing the Federalist papers and Mark Twain, the pseud Samuel Clemmons used when publishing his humorist essays and subversive novels.
In both cases, these men understood that thinking outside the reigning social constraints was a potential personal and civil liability. In the colonial context, speaking about federalism under your real name in an era of state sovereignty could have put their necks in nooses or their wrists in irons as the local or state government saw their own authority being corroded. In Twain’s time, writing about race, class, and religious practice as openly and clearly as he did, likewise put the author in danger. And so in both cases, the ability to continue speaking truth necessitated a kind of hiddenness. As Christians, what should we take from this?
In an era where Christian truth is welcomed as normative and the Bible is openly acknowledged as God’s word, where public Christian prayer is accepted, where maleness and femaleness are centered on both our given natures and on the biblical reality of Genesis 1:28, where Nature is respected and perfected by grace, those who speak from behind a screen should be held at a distance for further scrutiny. However, much to our misfortune, we live in a world where the state has made sacred what Christians cannot acknowledge as sacred.
And this is why the young men in your churches are in private group chats. Because it is only in secret that they can speak openly against the state mandated religious iconography. If they send an email, their work can expose them, as happened to Boise State Professor Scott Yenor, whose sin was, as the article was titled, “Wanting a Society where Christians Wield Power”. Or where, as a teenager, burning out on a crosswalk can get your face splashed across national news. Or where publicly declaring non-egalitarian views of women can get you fired from Google, not for lack of performance, but strictly for refusing to bow to our current ruling orthodoxies.
And, as I wrote about previously in American Reformer, the state has in many cases allied with corporate capital to support the sacralization of the profane. It has not allowed Grace to perfect nature, it has annihilated nature completely. Definitions of maleness and femaleness no longer exist, prayer has been restricted to the private and personal spheres, and the Bible has not only been banned from public schools, it has been degraded by being just another “religious book”. One among many.
In a situation like this, the Christian who wishes to speak truth often must do so from a place of hiddenness lest he risk the destruction of those he loves. Like David hiding in the caves or Jesus coming down from the mountain, he must veil his glory in order to accomplish the will of his Father. This is why innumerable Christians working in corporate America remain silent in the face of diversity training which violates their core religious convictions. Sometimes life in the world calls for such shrewdness. Those who say Christians may never justly use something like deception would have David marching around Jerusalem shouting that he is the true anointed king –and die. But that is not the time and place he finds himself in, and it isn’t what the moment called for. They would have Jesus at all times unveiled rather than, as he did, speak in parables for those who had ears to hear. As scripture tells us, “Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” our lord commands his disciples in Matthew 10. And he is right.
For the Christian to succeed in our current world he must be shrewd, often selling his Master’s stores to win friends for himself or allying himself with those who may not fully agree with Christian transcendence, but agree with the realities of nature. To this end, the group chat becomes a vehicle whereby Christian men can exhort, and council, one another in the face of a culture hostile to them. Within those walls, the Christian man can talk about maleness openly, can “fat shame” one another to greatness, can recognize and pursue nature, and can discuss those things that would otherwise be labeled as “hate speech” by a Pride-filled culture and its Pride pushing federal legal arm. Historically, this is not a new position for Christian men to find themselves in, but it is a new position for most Americans.
And like any war, the first step toward victory is identifying the enemy. So where does this need come from to speak anonymously or within the GC. This hostility has been given many names, but the best characterization of it was put forward by the aforenamed Lomez in a First Things essay from 2023. The Longhouse. The “longhouse” is a world where male action and male friendships are seen as inherently dangerous and needing to be controlled. Where male only spaces need infiltration. Where feminine virtues of inclusion, consensus, and compassionate empathy are prioritized both by custom and recently by law.
Now we begin to see the necessity of the pseudonymous account. Now we begin to see the importance of the closed group chat (GC). Now we also see why the lampreys are circling, hoping to prop up the current regime. You cannot have your anonymity. The GC’s must be infiltrated. They pose a threat to the status quo that these bloodsuckers feed on for their strength. In a world that has abandoned not just Christian truth, but nature itself, only the GC isn’t Longhoused.
Image Credit: Unsplash
