I think you’re confusing politics with theology ... Dispensationalism is mostly fairly new and pops up around 1830 with a theologian-lawyer named Darby, predating all that political identity nonsense that’s so popular among the anticapitalist crowd.
Dispensationalism didn’t take root deeply in the US until after the publication of the Scofield reference bible in the early 1900s.
Poor old John Nelson Darby. He gets all the blame. But I'm not a "dispensationalist." I'm a Noachide, which means I'm not a chrstian at all.
What you folks don't seem to realize is that there is a beautiful and simple logic to discarding chrstianity for Noachidism or Judaism. As a fundamentalist Protestant I was taught that J*sus had taken our place in hell so we didn't have to go. There was no ceremonial, no rituals, not commandments . . . nothing. The "old testament," I was taught, was just there to prove that all human effort was utterly vain. The problem with Fundamentalist Protestantism is that there are a zillion different versions and "your opinion is as good as mine." It's utter and total chaos, and I was also well aware that it didn't have the historical roots of the "baptized heathenism" of the ancient churches. So I investigated Roman Catholicism and eventually (believe it or not) converted.
Immediately I was hit with cognitive dissonance for a very good and logical reason: if G-d demands human effort, commandments, rituals, holidays, and ceremonies, what in the sam hill was wrong with the ones G-d directly gave Israel in the Bible??? None of the ancient churches (who constantly invoke the "old testament" to justify their own post-Biblical rituals and laws) are able to answer that question.
Then in addition to all the problems with Catholic orthodoxy is the fact that Catholicism (and all the ancient "apostolic" churches) are eaten up with liberalism and ethnic identity politics (you know, like those awful Jews "palaeos" hate so much?). So here we have all these "unchanged and unchanging" ancient churches who subscribe to evolution and Biblical criticism. Between this and the inconsistencies and illogic of their orthodoxy I experienced enough cognitive dissonance to make me physically ill.
So next I investigated Eastern Orthodoxy. And at this point a clear pattern began to emerge. You see, while Catholicism doesn't believe in innate total depravity, Eastern Orthodoxy doesn't even believe in original sin. Furthermore, from the Eastern Orthodox perspective all western chrstians (including Catholics) are Calvinists who don't realize it.
At this point a very clear pattern was emerging. As one moves backward into chrstian antiquity, from Protestantism to Catholicism to Orthodoxy, the less that's wrong with us and the more it's up to us to save ourselves. This leads quite naturally to the question: why did we need a new religion in the first place?
But my "epiphany" really came when while I was reading an Eastern Orthodox polemic against original sin that was fulminating against the "arch-heretic" Augustine and the "pagan Greek" notion of original sin. It actually said "the true doctrine of human nature is to be found in the Talmud." Yes, it actually said that! So what else was I to conclude? This was an admission that chrstianity was absolutely unnecessary and groundless!
Now, anybody want to hit me with John Nelson Darby? Or C.I. Scofield? Or the "International Jewish Conspiracy?"
Furthermore there is another factor at work here of which "palaeos" and liturgical chrstians seem to be totally ignorant: Biblical sentimentalism. While fundamentalist Protestants reject any and all rituals, ceremonies, and "works righteousness," there is a tremendous fascination for and pull towards the Biblical ritual and ceremonial (and holidays) because they are Biblical. I suppose this is something else "palaeos" can't understand.
We Bible-thumping rednecks have no use for Constantine or Theodosius or Justinian or Tiridates or Menelek or Arthur or Roland or El Cid. We don't want your medieval Europe. We don't want your chrstendom. Don't you get it? We want the Biblical world! There now, does that sound like the sinister Rothschilds at work? Is that Oxford University Press printing Scofield on the orders of the International Jewish Conspiracy? If you can't understand this, then you're simply mentally deficient. I'm sorry.
Therefore, why in the world would we exalt the chromosomes of Western European Man over the Word of G-d? Your racialism is not only idolatrous and stupid, but it has no roots in the ancient chrstian past you "palaeos" so worship. I have news for you: your "blood and soil" nationalism is a very recent creation, dating back no sooner than the late nineteenth century (wow . . . that's even younger than dispensationalism!). The ancient and medieval chrstians you so idolize were universalists who believed the entire human race was a single unit, and would gladly have copulated with any pygmy who was willing to be baptized. So you "palaeos" aren't even really "palaeo." Your racialism is a pitiable, pathetic infant with no roots in your idolized chrstian past.
I doubt this penetrates anyone's skull, but these are the facts that no one seems to consider. At any rate, the opinion of me held by "palaeos" is of no concern to me. I'm concerned with G-d, not any of you, and not with anybody's chromosomes.