New study shows ‘alt-right’ views linked to infrequent church attendance and divorce

Washington D.C., Aug 9, 2018 / 03:30 pm ([CNA]( Newly released data shows that those Americans who only occasionally go to Church services are more likely to hold so-called “alt-right” views, compared to those who regularly attend or never go at all.

The Demography of the Alt-Right, a demographic analysis released Aug. 9, breaks down the cultural, social, and economic factors which seem to overlap with a tendency toward white nationalism and “alt-right political views.”

The analysis identified three key attitudes which it says are held by people affiliated with racist and alt-right groups. It then examined what circumstances and characteristics people holding these views tend to have in common. The traits with the highest incidence among those with racist views were found to be infrequent Church attendance, divorce, low income, unemployment, and identification as a political independent - all of which were present in about 18 percent of “alt-right” respondents.


If you look at the political viewpoints the “alt-right” ostensibly hold, they look a lot more like extreme leftists. They’re essentially “Black Lives Matter” or “La Raza” for white people.


From the linked article:

Hawley gathered data from the 2016 American National Election Survey. Among survey respondents, 28 percent expressed strong feelings of white identity; about 38 percent expressed strong feelings of white solidarity; and about 27 percent felt that whites suffer a meaningful amount of discrimination in American life. A much smaller minority, about 12 percent of respondents, expressed all three opinions

Hawley noted that the leadership of far-right radical groups “appears to be less religious and socially conservative than earlier far right movements - though parts of the white nationalist movement have always expressed antipathy toward Christianity and other organized religions.”

Like I said, BLM or La Raza for white people.


So, less than 1 in 5 people in the “alt-right” are infrequent mass goers, and are divorced. Well, about 80% of baptized Catholics “leave” the church when they become independent of parental authority. And 18% are divorced. You mean 18% in opposition to the national divorce rate with is about 52%. Infrequent church attendance… again, about 80% of baptized Catholics don’t go at all by the time they are 25.
This sounds like an article/study trying desperately to form/draw a questionable conclusion from sketchy data at best.


“Alt-right” is not synonymous with “racist”. I doubt that whoever wrote this article has a clue what “alt-right” is. I’m often not even sure the purported members of the “alt-right” agree on what it is.


I think that passage is worded wrong.
What the study showed was 18% of all divorced non-Hispanic whites held alt-right beliefs NOT 18% of alt-right supporters were divorced.


They are white people who think they’re oppressed by the system and have adopted identity politics, like BLM or La Raza or the NAACP or any other race based interest group.


Divorced? That’s a surprise to me. I just figured they were all angry virginal incels that blame everybody else for their own misery. Maybe that’s just the 4 Chan types.


Not to them. Whether you think their grievances legitimate or not is largely irrelevant, they think they’re legitimate and the beliefs they hold are little different from those of BLM, etc, they just apply to whites instead of Blacks, or Browns, or LBQT, or Muslim, or whatever other grievance group you care to name. They’re not “alt right”, they’re “alt-left”.


It the social hierarchy of victimology CAF members are advise any white man loses to black man who loses to white woman who loses to black woman who loses to any LBGQTRYX….gender of the month club who loses to Muzlim who currently beats everybody until next Tuesday when the ministry of victimology will reissue score card. Also Asians do not exist for victimology purposes especially at Harvard. They work too hard.


Now the real joke is, the alt-right is nothing but the prognosticated response of tribal membership in an increasingly hostile identity politics environment brought to by the champions of intersectionality. Enjoy


Whenever I think of 4chan, what comes to mind is weaponized autism.


It doesn’t matter whether you or I think their grievances legitimate, it matters that they do.

Exactly, it’s white people who’ve looked at how well identity politics have worked for non-whites, and figured they’d get in on the action. And it’s not like their grievances don’t have any merit at all. The black son of a Harvard educated doctor will get preferential treatment in college admissions over the white son of an unemployed coal miner. It doesn’t matter to the white son of an unemployed coal miner that some of is ancestors may have benefited from “white privilege”, he’s worried about his own life and future, not the life and past of his late great-great grandfather’s.


18% and they say everyone who is alt-right is like that? Seems a very low percentage to base such an opinion on.

THAT SAID I can see the correlation. I know some people with alt-right leanings and they tend to be the sort of folk who have very high pride, who are yet easily swayed by fear and who are very, very disgusted with the far-left pushings that have been overwhelming our culture.

The ones with alt-right tendancies I know also tend to be the sort of people who religion with zeal. The one alt-right leaning couple I know are traditional Catholics who stopped attending Mass because they believe the NO is an insult to God and to continue attending would have been participating in sin (yup, not joking).

Now i realize MY experiences are an even poorer pool than the 18% of the unemployed, divorced, low income, low church attending alt-right respondents polled but I don’t think the logic is off.


I wonder if any of the commentators in this thread have listened to alt-right, white nationalists? I’ve listened to folks like Richard Spencer. What I hear is a lot of fear, a lot of discomfort with a system that seems to be attempting to eliminate and demonize ‘whites’ and a desire to ‘save themselves’.

I don’t agree with them but when I hear the left saying things like: All white men are violent. Kill all white men. White men should never be allowed power. White men should be silent. When I see black only zones, when I see universities fighting for no whites allowed days… Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. … I don’t think why WOULD they be white nationalists? I ask myself why WOULDN’T they be?

Extremism begets more extremism.


It is also the fact that the intersectional perpetually aggrieved have ramped up their rhetoric and are actually doing bodily damage to individuals based on their lack of preferred pigmentation. It is happening and it is undeniable even if the media choses to ignore it. What is nice about the alternate media is you can get news Lester Holt won’t read. because it doesn’t fit the liberal narrative. So, as identity politics grows more malignant you will see more tribal identification.


Tell you what, you head out to the “Unite the Right” rally in DC this weekend you tell them that they’re just a bunch of stupid racists who are just getting what they deserve because “white privilege” and see how far that takes you. My position isn’t one of moral ambiguity, it’s one recognizes that these are people too and they have hopes and aspirations and they think, rightly or wrongly, or being frustrated. Telling them that they’re just stupid racists doesn’t really get you anywhere.


Not to mention that many of them are far from unintelligent. Many are quite eloquent, well spoken and well informed.


Some have even been to college. Richard Spencer, I think, has an MA from the University of Chicago, which is a top 10 university.


People like to paint them like drooling, fumbling neanderthals but they are actually very intelligent and well spoken (the ones who ‘lead’ anyway). I’ve listened to tons in the last year and I found none that came off like redneck hillbillies with no intelligence or education.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit