HEARTLESS LOVE: CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM IN APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA AND TRUMP’S AMERICA
Many Americans refer to “Christian nationalism” as a new threat, but the concept has deep and unsavory roots in South African history. (1) In the 20th century, the Afrikaners—white descendants of 17th century Dutch, French, and German settlers—embraced Christian nationalism to unite their people, or volk, and promote their common interests. (2) For Afrikaner politicians, cultural leaders, and clergy, promoting their own interests meant maintaining their existence as a separate white nation. It was not a far leap from Christian nationalism to racism and ethnic exclusion; in fact, Christian nationalism and apartheid were two sides of the same coin. While the United States is not about to become an apartheid state, there are some troubling affinities between historic Afrikaner Christian nationalism and current political discourse in America, as both have championed self-love while denigrating empathy for the most vulnerable.
During the 20th century, Afrikaner nationalists thought their volk was threatened by two outside forces: British Imperialism and African Nationalism. At the turn of the century, Afrikaners had lost the Anglo-Boer War to the British after a bitter and devastating conflict. Their children were forced to speak English in state schools, and they were publicly humiliated if they spoke Afrikaans—their own language. Afrikaners had also undergone rapid urbanization, and they often found themselves unable to compete against English-speaking whites and Black people in the industrialized economy. Afrikaners faced high levels of poverty, malnutrition, and disease. Nationalists thought these challenges posed an existential threat to the volk, and they began coordinating their efforts for “national salvation.”
Above all, nationalists sought to promote “a love for one’s own” among their people. Afrikaner teachers did this through “Christian-National” education, which offered young Afrikaners “mother-tongue” instruction across all subjects and a heavy dose of the nationalist version of history. School children learned that God had given their volk a special task in history, and each Afrikaner could only fulfill God’s sovereign will if he or she remained a loyal member of the volk. (3) Outside of schools, cultural leaders pioneered numerous organizations that promoted Afrikaner identity, commemorated Afrikaner history, and organized celebrations of the Afrikaner’s food, literature, music, and dance. (4) From the cradle to the grave, Afrikaners learned to love their own people and culture.
Economically, Afrikaners were encouraged to patronize Afrikaner-owned businesses and keep their money at Afrikaner-owned banks. Politically, the Afrikaner National Party achieved equal recognition of Afrikaans in 1925, and it also implemented a “Civilized Labor Policy,” which gave unskilled Afrikaners an advantage over Black South Africans on the job market. The National Party could also boast new a flag (1928) and national anthem (1938) that celebrated the Afrikaners’ history. In 1961, the party achieved its greatest victory over the Empire when South Africa became a Republic, fully independent of the British Crown.
Afrikaners insisted that theirs was a “Christian nationalism.” In the early 20th century, most Afrikaners belong to one of the three Dutch Reformed Churches, which preached the Gospel to the volk while championing its national interests. Their Christian nationalism was not theocratic per se, as it did not envision any Church exercising direct control over politics or economics. On the contrary, Afrikaner nationalist theologians believed that all “spheres” of life were independent. The Church could not dominate education, economics, politics, the arts, or the family; its only proper role was preaching the Gospel and administering the sacraments. (5) This did not, however, preclude symbolic domination of society, as it was the duty and obligation of every Christian Afrikaner to bring the Gospel to bear on every sphere of national life. Afrikaner Christian nationalists argued that by itself, nationalism was a wild, unpredictable, and violent force, but with strong Christian influence, it could be directed toward achieving God’s good purposes.
By the middle of the 20th century, Afrikaner nationalists had secured their position against the English language and British liberalism. Yet after the Second World War, Black Africans increasingly demanded political representation and participation. Black Christian elites founded the African National Congress in 1912 to protest land alienation, and by the middle of the century, it was working with the Communist Party to promote universal, non-racial franchise and the nationalization of certain economic sectors. The breakaway Pan Africanist Congress went beyond non-racialism, declaring that “Africa was for Africans.” By the 1960s, decolonization was accelerating across much of Africa, and many whites were returning (and some fleeing) to Europe.
Afrikaners viewed these developments with trepidation. They feared that if Black Nationalists or Communists took power, white South Africans would have nowhere else to go. Demographically, white South Africans frequently expressed the fear of being “ploughed under” if majority rule were achieved. Statistically, White people were projected to make up less than ten percent of the population by the year 2000, and most agreed that white minority rule could not be justified in perpetuity. Even still, many Afrikaners were emphatically against gelykstelling, or equality with people of color, and Afrikaner nationalists equated any movement toward majority rule with “national suicide.” How could they reconcile the nationalist’s “love of one’s own” with Christianity’s universal love?
Their solution was apartheid. In 1929, the Rev. J.C. du Plessis used the word “apartheid” to describe the Dutch Reformed missionary policy of establishing separate Churches for different ethnic groups. Each person, du Plessis argued, should be able to hear the Gospel in his or her own language, and you shouldn’t have to change your culture to be a Christian. It was also a convenient excuse for having all-white churches. By the early 1940s, nationalist politicians had developed the Church’s missionary policy into a racial policy. Their argument was simple enough: different people groups not only required different churches, but also different schools, social organizations, economies, and geographic territories. (6)
The so-called architect of apartheid, Hendrik Verwoerd argued that “separate development” (his preferred term for apartheid) was the only possible solution for maintaining white self-determination and satisfying Black political aspirations. By creating separate destinies for South Africa’s people groups, it would solve the demographic problem—Black South Africans would become citizens of their own respective “Homelands,” thus having no claim to equal political rights in the “White Area.” Many conservative Afrikaner theologians thought apartheid was completely in line with the Gospel. There was, they thought, a kind of justice to it— “what I demand for my group I willingly give to yours.” It would also allow each volk to hear the Gospel and live life to the fullest in its own language and culture. Nationalist ideologues claimed this was not racist; it merely did justice to the reality of cultural differences. They said British liberalism demanded conformity to English standards, but Christian nationalism allowed people to be themselves.
The brutal reality of apartheid never came close to the ideologues’ ideal. What was a romantic pipedream for Afrikaner intellectuals became an unrelenting nightmare for Black South Africans. The apartheid-era government displaced a staggering 3.5 million Black people, many of whom were forcibly removed from their life-long homes. The “homelands” could never have supported intended populations, and they effectively became cheap labor reserves. Black South Africans were dependent on the “white economy,” and the “white economy” could not function without Black people’s labor and skills. To enter “White Areas,” Black people had to carry passbooks and quickly find employment, or they risked “removal.” Those who were removed to “Homelands” often found themselves in places they had never been before. The apartheid system split up families and made children especially vulnerable. While Afrikaners embraced and loved “Christian-National” education, Black students found it limited their opportunities. Those who protested the apartheid regime faced banning, exile, beating, imprisonment, and death. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission estimated that there were some 21,000 deaths related to political violence during the apartheid era. Political prisoners often died under mysterious circumstances. The leader of the Black Consciousness Movement, Steve Biko, was savagely beaten by police and then driven across the country on the back of a police truck before he died. The Minister of Justice, Jimmy Kruger, said he was unmoved by Biko’s death. In apartheid-era South Africa, Christian nationalists could feel shockingly little empathy.
Much of the coverage of “Christian nationalism” in the United States is thankfully negative. Many Catholics, mainline protestants, and evangelicals have gone on record against “Christian nationalism.” (7) While many Americans might think abstractly of the United States as “a Christian nation,” 54% had never heard of term Christian nationalism, and only 5% had a favorable opinion of it. (8) Given these unimpressive statistics, I have been tempted to dismiss recent talk of Christian nationalism in America as a “bogeyman,” something that we are all afraid of but does not constitute an actual threat. After all, we certainly do not have the coordinated effort to promote Christian nationalism that Afrikaners had in the 20th century.
There are, however, some worrying trends. A handful of particularly pugnacious politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Josh Hawley have self-identified as Christian nationalists, and it is quite possible that other conservative American Christians will follow their lead. (9) While he is a South African, Elon Musk is neither an Afrikaner nor a Christian. He does, however, share the nationalistic obsession with demographics. He worries about the statistical future of Western European nations (and humanity in general), and he has occasionally espoused some version of the “great replacement theory.” (10)
Afrikaner Christian nationalists and contemporary conservative American leaders have both promoted the “love for one’s own” as a virtue. In a much-discussed Fox News interview, Vice President and devout Roman Catholic J.D. Vance said we ought to love those nearest to us before loving those further away, and we are obligated to love our nation before we love the world. While many Catholics (including Pope Francis) disagreed with Vance, others supported his contention as logical and theologically sound. (11) Perhaps this is why the conservative Christians are so enthusiastic about deportation—the further they move people away, the less obligated we are to love them.
Christian nationalism’s love of self dampens any impulse toward empathy for outsiders. Some American evangelicals have even declared that empathy is decidedly un-Christian, if not sinful. Musk warns that “the empathy trap,” by which he means feeling sorry for marginalized communities, is one of the greatest threats to western civilization. The implication is that conservatives and Christian should harden their hearts to the millions of migrants who now live in fear of I.C.E. and deportation, possibly to places they have never been. Christian nationalists ought to show no concern for the Venezuelan men deported to a Salvadoran prison, even if their only crime was having a tattoo. If people who relied on USAID face starvation, the Christian nationalists should answer “let them do for themselves as we do for ourselves.” For Christian nationalists, the problem is not racism but rather talking about racism. Programs for diversity, equity, and inclusion are declared “anti-white,” while images of Black people, women, and members of the LGBTQ+ community are hidden from public view.
Even as hundreds of thousands of refugees in the United States are losing their status, the Trump administration promises to open America’s doors for “the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees.” (12) The Afrikaners have long been a cause célèbre of the American right, which has latched onto grossly exaggerated claims of “white genocide.” Conservative American media has most recently criticized a South African law that allows land expropriation without compensation, which they compare to the disastrous land reform program in Zimbabwe. (13) While a few Afrikaners have expressed interest in migrating to the U.S., most want to build a future in South Africa. Some 400 white South African church leaders (many of whom are Afrikaners) attached their name to a letter that opposed the narrative of “Afrikaner persecution” and expressed serious concerns about the end of U.S. humanitarian aid in South Africa. (14) Some conservative Afrikaners, however, seem to think that they have found an ally in President Trump. While they don’t want to move to America, some have asked the president to “help us here.” (15) It seems, however, that Trump embraced the Afrikaners not because they are most in need, but because he sees them as the ultimate victim of social justice; they have lost a tremendous amount of privilege since the end of apartheid. For Trump and many conservative Americans, rural white Afrikaners are not all that different “than us,” and they need to be protected from left-wing Black-majority governments that threaten their land and livelihoods. Trump’s policy toward Afrikaners, and most every group, seems to follow the Christian national playbook: love the ones who look most like us and ignore the desperate cries of the poor.
Reformed Theological Seminary Chancellor and Presbyterian pastor Ligon Duncan said, “For me, the term Christian nationalism seems very recent. I can’t really remember hearing it more than five years ago.” “What does it mean to be a Christian Nationalist?” The Gospel Coalition.
The word “volk” can be simply translated as “nation,” but because it carries a strong ideological connection to German romanticism and nationalist ideology, it tends to be left untranslated.
R. G. MacMillan, “Christian National Education,” Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, Number 28 (May 1967): 43-56.
For a full account of these organizations and their influence, see Dunbar Moodie, The Rise of Afrikanerdom: Power, Apartheid, and the Afrikaner Civil Religion (University of California Press, 1975).
This idea was largely borrowed from the Dutch Protestant theologian Abraham Kuyper. A number of scholars have debated the extent to which Kuyper’s thought led to Apartheid. For a contemporary conversation about Kuyper’s legacy, see Michael Wagenman, “Abraham Kuyper: Cancel or Celebrate,” Banner September 13, 2021.
Hermann Giliomee, “The Making of the Apartheid Plan,” Journal of South African Studies Volume 29, Number 2 (June 2003): 209-237.
“Episcopal leaders confront the urgent danger of Christian nationalism,” Episcopal News Service October 4, 2024; Kate Scanlon, “‘Christian nationalism’ is opposed to Catholic teaching,” National Catholic Reporter April 18, 2024; “Paul Miller: Nationalism vs. Patriotism,” National Association of Evangelicals January 16, 2024 Christians Against Christian Nationalism
“45% of Americans Say U.S. Should Be a ‘Christian Nation,’” Pew Research Center October 27, 2022. The study found “widely differing opinions about what it means to be a ‘Christian nation’ and to support ‘Christian nationalism.’”
Amanda Tyler, “Marjorie Taylor Greene’s words on Christian nationalism are a wake-up call,” CNN July 27, 2022 and Josh Hawley, “The Christian Nationalism We Need,” First Things September 4, 2024
Miles Klee, “Elon Musk all but endorses the Great Replacement Theory,” Rolling Stone January 5, 2024
“Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa,” The White House, February 7, 2025
“Ernst Roets: Attacks on Whites, Attempts to Hide It, and Trump’s Plan to End It,” The Tucker Carlson Show March 3, 2025.
The Afrikaner separatist Orania Movement made this plea to President Trump in a letter on February 9, 2025.
