As H.L. Mencken Said . . . Hate Mail

Sorry, I assumed that you would understand what "allotropic" as Mencken used it in support of Nietzsche's anti-democratic anti-Christianity - among those things listed - means.  That was the basis of my commentary.

Allotropy, according to Merriam Webster online means "the existence of a substance and especially an element in two or more different forms (as of crystals) usually in the same phase".  

In terms of human beings and human societies, that means  "pluralistic," as in different racial identities, different national and ethnic identities, different religious orientations, etc.  Universally, remember that Nietzsche and so many of his admirers, male and, oddly enough, female, are deeply misogynist, it means male and female, the male always being the default form of humanity, women being there to be used and oppressed.  Such female admirers of Nietzsche as who like to think of themselves as feminists are responsible for explaining that basic, fundamental and inherent contradiction in their ideological program, I can't square that circle. 

Clearly, you can contrast the pluralistic inclusiveness of Christianity as expressed by the man who can be considered as turning the Jesus movement into Christianity,  Paul.  
 
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.  Galatians 3:28

Would that those who professed Christianity for the next two thousand years had lived up to that.   

You have to conclude it's that kind of thing that Mencken and Nietzsche just hated about Christianity, what so many professed Christians have ignored, to the damage of the reputation of Christianity among so many.  

I will note that what Nietzsche hated about democracy was pretty much the same thing.  It must have really pissed them off that egalitarian democracy was something that those they despise as "weak" "inferior" "other" the millions and billions who such elitists and snobs desperately like to believe they are better than, more fit than, more worthy of life than, have everything to gain from the vision of Paul, the universal practice of the teachings of Jesus, even if in the second-hand expression of those in democracy, than they do in allowing the oligarchs and aristocrats and rich gangsters to rule them.  

I remember how, in the 1970s as it descended into the Republican-fascism, the fascist-chic movies from Hollywood,  University of Chicago "classical economics" etc. how many people suddenly started quoting the admirer of Nietzsche, Mencken. 

 It became, first, really annoying, then, as I looked at what Mencken actually said, it looked like a disturbing promotion of his pathological thinking.   I had to conclude it wasn't unrelated to how things were going.  I remember even the emblematic liberal economist,  the often quite cynical John Kenneth Galbraith was doing it.  Unlike most of the others who did it, I was fairly confident he'd have actually read Mencken.   I can't say that it didn't lead me to think differently of his political economics, seeing them more skeptically than when I'd first read them.   Maybe it has something to do with where I've come to, today.