Loading Posts...

Contra Vitium: How VICE Mischaracterized a Religious Movement

Thor Battering the Midgard Serpent by Henry Fuseli

Thor Battering the Midgard Serpent by Henry Fuseli


How VICE Mischaracterized a Religious Movement Through Poor Research

by Dan Capp


Have you ever adored a creature so much you felt like you could smother it to death? If so, you’re not alone—it is a known phenomenon called ‘cute aggression’, apparently, and something similar was portrayed in the classic novel Of Mice and Men. Lennie—a migrant field worker in the story—kills his puppy while stroking it, and then a lady likewise. Lennie’s friend George quickly anticipates the vengeance to come and gives Lennie a painless resolution instead. Lennie’s story is a rather bleak yet philosophical tale I think you’ll agree.

An argument offered in metaphorical form can often cool a heated debate. Trigger words can be more easily avoided, and the opponent is invited to consider one’s point in a more objective sense. Our brief glimpse into Of Mice and Men underlines my metaphor of choice as I attempt to respond to an article which appeared recently in VICE Magazine: How a Thor-Worshipping Religion Turned Racist by Rick Paulas. The writer of that political piece set out to demonstrate the prevalence of racism throughout the Pagan religion which honours the Germanic pantheon of Gods and Goddesses; at moments with sound reason, yet at other times with a degree of slander that can only arise from the depths of a predetermined agenda.

The article which appeared in VICE ultimately dismisses any display of ethnic-exclusivity, for whatever reason, as racist and unacceptable. I know from my own experiences that those who take this position are often genuine, seeking a better world, but I would suggest that they are akin to Lennie in Of Mice and Men; so passionate about diversity that they inadvertently end up killing it. Multiculturalism is a wonderful thing – it maintains the rights of a multitude of rich and beautiful cultures (usually quite ancient) to be preserved. Yet for multiculturalism to succeed, cultures must be allowed to remain in the safe hands of those people who have historically guarded them. In this case, Paganism of the Germanic strain—popularly referred to as ‘Asatru’, ‘Odinism’, or ‘Heathenry’—is under attack for being overtly linked to people of Northern European ancestry.

Rick Paulas rightly identifies certain organisations—often based within the American prison system—as using Heathen symbols, words, and talismans to pursue a specifically political, rather than spiritual, agenda. I have encountered them myself. Some of these groups are undoubtedly populated by men and women who are hatefully racist bordering on violent, and in exposing this the VICE writer has done some justice to the title of his article. Yet there is a contradiction to this—in the author’s own words:

‘It’s not so much that the white inmates believe in the religiosity of Odinism as much as they need to be affiliated with religious organizations to be granted certain rights behind bars.’

You cannot label a religion ‘racist’ and in the same breath suggest that those example racists within it do not actually follow the religion. Any extremist organisation can co-opt a reserved and peaceable belief system, but misdoings should never reflect upon the vehicle, only its driver. We could look at the religion of Islam and how well-meaning Liberals insist that wrongdoings by its adherents do not reflect upon Islam’s teachings. Ironic then that the same people seem intent on giving Heathenry a very different treatment—ready to insist that when unsavoury people misuse its teachings that the religion has then ‘become’ bad. Truthfully, a more fitting title (and focus) of VICE’s exposé should have been: How an Ancient European Religion Was Hijacked by Gangs.

This contradiction is no innocent mistake. The VICE article is not one which adheres to fairness or logic, but is one driven by a deeply pervasive political worldview that attempts to redefine language and perception for its own nefarious purposes. This agenda can be illustrated by the following excerpt:

‘Generally speaking, in this in this context, “folk” actually means “racist”‘

Stephen McNallen with Changes

Stephen McNallen with Changes

A ‘folk’ are a definable body of people. In the context of Heathenry ‘folkishness‘ simply refers to those of the religion who hold a decidedly ancestral focus. Despite the kind of misconceptions born by VICE, folkish Heathenry does not imply racial hatred. In its unadulterated form, folkishness would only question why a person would choose to practice an ancestral religion which their ancestors did not, and in order to uphold that position effectively—for the good of all peoples worldwide—would exercise a sensible exclusivity. Stephen McNallen—leader of the Asatru Folk Assembly—is quoted by VICE thusly:

‘I never claimed that non-Europeans cannot practice Asatru. But I wonder why they would want to follow European native religion rather than the entirely valid and worthy native religions of their own ancestors. I wonder what their own ancestors must feel at being slighted so.’

This, apparently, is racism. We’re supposed to believe that there is no essential difference between the overtly violent, racial hate of some prison gangs and the worldview of a man who has risked life and limb for the natives of Burma, Tibet, India, and Africa (as his Wikipedia entry attests to). Stephen McNallen has his fair share of critics and their accusations generally centre around two things: his associations with people who hold political ideologies considered to be unacceptable, and his unapologetically folkish approach to religion (which is what VICE’s attack on Heathenry is really all about). We live in an age of fractured ideologies—seemingly a new belief system for every dozen believers. The strong man or woman must therefore be capable of finding common ground with those whose beliefs they do not entirely share, free from guilt-by-association. Not so, according to some. Apparently we’re all empty vessels waiting to be infected by the irrational hatred held by those we communicate with.

The only sense that can be gleaned from this kind of schizophrenia—whereby interracial philanthropy and mindless hate are tarred with the same brush—is that it all boils down to how we define ‘racism’. Despite needing to invoke examples of undeniable racial hatred—mainly confined to prison gangs—Rick Paulas badly wants his readers to believe that an innocent and timeless conception of exclusivity is some kind of evil that can only lead to strife. Meanwhile organisations, religions, and charities exclusive to people not of European origin exist in vast numbers across the Western world. I don’t imagine VICE will be flinging the ‘R’ word at many of them, but hey ho… At the risk of presuming to know what Paulas’ specific views are, people with similar gripes all-too-often operate a double-standard when it comes to issues of ethnic identity. The pride expressed by minorities is interpreted as hate when similarly expressed by a white majority, and this would suggest that the freedom to uphold one’s ancestral ways is determined by whether one is deemed to be a member of the dominant group in society or not. But Heathens are not a dominant group! Our ways are more endangered than many minority religions, and will become increasingly under threat if subjected to this type of dismemberment.

Danish Children in Traditional Dress

Danish Children in Traditional Dress

If you claim to favour the global patchwork that is multiculturalism then you cannot set about removing chosen patches from that quilt. You also cannot take it upon yourself to redefine any of those patches lest the cultures that they represent have set out to harm you—and even then you’ll be fighting the force of a million forefathers who have slowly woven that world for their descendents. This goes for any folk around the world—all of whom deserve control over the culture of their ancestors. In practical terms this control may manifest as a sense of exclusivity, but consider this: exclusivity maintains the boundary between one thing and another—forest and field; football and rugby; public and private. It is no more hateful an act than it would be to reject D♯ from a musical composition in the key of A-minor.

There is a famous quote: ‘If every man is my friend then no man is my friend.’

My editor and I felt compelled to challenge VICE on this subject precisely because the opening argument too often goes unchallenged. There is a lengthy debate raging out there as to why that is, but suffice it to say the precepts VICE put forth are handed down from above, academically and legally sanctioned in most cases. They are the precepts of a society which does not understand tribal spirituality and so projects all kinds of monsters onto it to keep onlookers at bay. Furthermore, the VICE article in question may well be intended as ‘clickbait’—a deliberately controversial piece which attracts enough attention to keep site-advertisers happy. It is a distinct possibility.

‘Bandy no speech with a bad man:
Often the better is beaten
In a word fight by the worse.’

—The Hávamál

This passage from the realm of Heathen lore is gnomic advice that I may wish I had heeded. Then again, those responsible for the VICE article probably aren’t bad men. They are likely just products of an era in which words are being redefined and perceptions skewed for the sake of the prevailing political ideology. That said. we at the Heathen Harvest Periodical enjoy demonstrating that we are not afraid of the dark, so to speak (and no, that’s not a deliberate pun). Musically we challenge the merit of mainstream music, where needed, and intellectually we challenge the politicisation of art and culture. On this occasion we deemed it necessary.

If and when diversity dies, those who unknowingly slaughtered it may wish that someone had attempted to stop them, particularly if it turns out—as is the case with Lennie in Of Mice and Men—that the unwitting killer is mentally limited.

[Heathen Harvest would like to also express our gratitude to Christopher Plaisance of the Journal of Contemporary Heathen Thought for his assistance on some matters herein.]

  • Dan. Thank you for the honest assessment of the Asatru religion, stating its wide spectrum of belief accurately, and most of all for being fair to Folkish Asatru in general and specific Folkish Asatruar specifically.

    Researching topics really does make an article a better read and product!

  • Thanks for the feedback Clifford! I’m glad you feel I did the matter justice.

  • In my experience, the most racist people I have known have inevitably been those who cry “racist” at the suggestion of anything folkish.

  • I also find it telling that neither VICE nor the article’s author have bothered to respond to the honest criticism that has arisen.

  • Greetings and thanks yous from a ANARCHIST heathen collective

  • Heimlich A. Laguz

    Rick Paulas certainly deserves to be dealt with sternly. That said, I want to make the point that many Heathens identify as universalist or tribalist, and do not subscribe to the rigid narrative of exclusivity that folkish Heathenry relies on. Why? Because, despite folkish rhetoric, it does not seem to be justifiable on mythological, historical, or archaeological bases. Ancestor worship, it follows, is not necessarily wedded to cultural or ethnic isolationism.

    Folkish Heathens often like to present Heathenry as though it is, by default, folkish. This is nothing more than intellectual sleight of hand, sectarian dogmatism that unintentionally plays into the hands of hacks like Paulas. Readers who are curious to know more might enjoy an article published on Heathen Harvest on 2014: https://heathenharvest.org/2014/09/28/arguments-in-favor-of-universalist-heathenry/

  • Varg Vikernes

    Reblogged this on Thulean Perspective and commented:
    Some Óðalist thoughts formulated by our dear Dan Capp.

  • “The Germans, I am apt to believe, derive their original from no other people; and are
    nowise mixed with different nations arriving amongst them…” -Tacitus, Germania

  • “For myself, I concur in opinion with such as suppose the people of Germany never to have mingled by inter-marriages with other nations, but to have remained a people pure, and independent, and resembling none but themselves. Hence amongst such a mighty multitude of men, the same make and form is found in all, eyes stern and blue, yellow hair, huge bodies, but vigorous only in the first onset.” -Tacitus, Germania

  • A fine piece Mr. Capp, but perhaps too timid.

    First, what is the distinction between “bad men” and “products of an era in which words are being redefined and perceptions skewed for the sake of the prevailing political ideology?” Are you suggesting that they have no agency? No, they are have chosen to be agents of a culture-destroying ideology either because it is profitable or because they are cowards. Probably both reasons are true. In either case this still makes them bad men in my book. But don’t worry about having bandied words with them because you haven’t. You exist outside of their echo chamber. Even if they read this piece it will not affect them, because culture destroyers don’t actually care about any truth. They care about short-term gains.

    The goal for the likes of Vice and others (including many people in the post industrial music scene), is to reduce heathenry and the pantheist traditions to mere vapid baubles and meaningless trinkets, fashion accessories to be worn for status signaling purposes. Anything that defies their universalist human-centered world view must be hollowed out until only the husk remains. If you haven’t already, I recommend reading Richard J. Herbert’s review of the book Bringing Race to the Table: Exploring Racism in the Pagan Community, posted at Counter-Currents here: http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/04/anti-racism-vs-neo-paganism/

    True pagans must be vigilantly on the watch for entryists who seek to invade and destroy.

    Second, why do you posture heathenry as “non-violent” when every other group is willing to use violence to forward their cause? The state is a violent entity and those who co-opt state power for their cause are using violence against their opponents. When a major media outlet deems to label an entire religious movement as racist this is a form of violence, because the state has coerced private entities to oppose and marginalize anybody who is classified as racist. If people are affiliated with a religious group that is deemed racist they look forward to losing their job and social ostracization at the very least if they become exposed. However, I need people who have been physically attacked for their beliefs by so-called anti-fa.

    No. We should not hide behind a stance of “non-violence” because in reality we are a threat to the monotheist cabal that is responsible for the current state of affairs on planet earth in which the biosphere is collapsing because of greed and human ego inflation. We must fight because if we do not then they will win. I’m not talking about becoming a thug on the street but I am talking about working strategically to overturn the system in place and punishing those who are responsible for it.

    Let them fear us.

  • Heimlich A. Laguz

    Regarding the Tacitus quote:

    It is evident that Tacitus is often an unreliable source. Sometimes his statements can be corroborated, but unfortunately he brings his own biases, and more than that, often relied on hearsay. To a Roman aristocrat – a member of what was probably the most cosmopolitan society on Earth at that time – the Germanic peoples would have certainly seemed isolated and provincial. That doesn’t mean they were.

    The article I linked above points to a range of archaeological and genetic evidence which indicates that the ancient Heathens did not live in an Hermetically sealed box. For example, one of the genetic points of interest in that article is the finding that in Scandinavia genetic variation has decreased since antiquity, hardly consistent with the notion that inter-cultural relations are a modern development.

    Yet more to the point, in the quote above Tacitus does not claim that the ancient Heathens had a purposeful policy of isolation, and indeed their history of both peaceful and militant engagement and integration with the Roman Empire underscores this point. So even if his statement were accurate, it does not provide any basis for a modern Heathen to say that an active policy of exclusivity is justified according to ancient custom. Tacitus is remarking on what, in the limited vision of Empire, seemed like primitive peoples hailing from a northern backwater (this sort of arrogance is still seen in modern Western attitudes to traditional cultures of all kinds).

    If one reads something like this quote from Tacitus in a superficial way, and does not pause to consider either its context, its authorship, its intended audience, or the picture painted by other sources, then perhaps it might seem like a compelling justification for exclusivity. But that would be profoundly shallow. It is not surprising that shallowness and paranoia about the outer boundary of a community would go together. I do hope that you are willing to relinquish your folkism enough that you can permit yourself to genuinely go deep into the current of the ancestral spirituality. You might think that is a paradoxical statement, but I assure it goes far beyond.

    Speaking more generally, dualistic styles of belief are an ugly relic of Christianity. It is a shame to see it so active among people who call themselves Heathen.

  • I very much agree with Heimlich’s last point above about dualism, and above all this is what I was trying to address with my article – there are grey areas which are seldom considered. We are polarised and through that polarisation we come to represent caricatures of the extremes, with beliefs incorrectly ascribed to us by the opposing side.

    Heimlich also made some good points in his argument in favour of universalist or tribalist Heathenry. I have, as expected, been drawn into some debates about my own article since it was published and this has helped me to clarify a few things:

    1) Words are still being misused, or used varyingly. To the universalist or tribalist, ‘folkish’ still means ‘racist’, no matter how eloquently I try to argue otherwise. And to the folkish Heathen, a universalist is spitting upon his or her ancestors. I’ve found this not to be the case. There are lots of misconceptions and generalisations on both sides.
    2) Ultimately it all comes down to faith. It is a religion after all. I and Heimlich could spend weeks formulating logical arguments, and each of us would come up with quantifiable points, but it boils down to whether you intuitively believe: a) That the Aesir and Vanir are the progenitors of all mankind or only those of Germanic stock, b) That the Gods and Goddesses only truly call upon their own blood kin.

    I don’t think point 2 can ever be resolved by logical argument.

    There is a further point to be made – Religion has a social context, and the social context of today is vastly different to that of 6th century Germania. For a start, Germans (and English, Colonials and even Scandinavians) are no longer all “eyes stern and blue, with yellow hair and huge bodies”, as Tacitus once described. So if his report is to be taken literally then there has been change – mixing if you will. Secondly, we live in an age where the identities of certain nations are under threat. It is – I believe – no wonder that modern Heathens would take a decidely more intolerant line on identity than their forebears did (if indeed, as Heimlich argues, our forebears were open to outsiders).

    Claus – Thanks for the comment and recommendation. Firstly it must be said that my article was intentionally civil. In private I may be more scornful of both Vice and of the prevailing neo-marxist ideology sweeping the western world, but in trying to get some key points across to our accusers I felt it was prudent to be reasoned and respectful. It is for this reason I didn’t want to make ironcast assumptions about our ideological opponents being ‘bad men’. For a start, when I was in my mid-teens I was a typical ‘Liberal’, looking up to ‘idols’ like Che Guevara, protesting the ‘fascist establishment’; and I’d have been capable of writing an article chastising the me of today. I wasn’t a ‘bad man’ (or kid), I was just misinformed. I believe that many of our opponents are simply misled and it can be difficult to discern from them those who genuinely and knowingly wish harm upon our people, culture and identity(s).

    Your point about violence is one I agree with – violence is not only physical. Political and psychological violence can actually be more damaging. However, as esoteric as you or I might prefer to be in dealing with these matters, we must speak the ‘common language’ – in which ‘violence’ means ‘physical force’. In truth the political climate uses political and psychological violence which is far more effective and vicious than it would be in the form of armed police knocking on the door of every dissident.

    I could get even more esoteric over all of this and I have some theories as to what this divide is really about. Suffice to say, for now, that the forces of expansion and contraction are gathering souls. Both sides of this debate are expressing the energy of their higher chosen path.

  • Reblogged this on Inis Ealga – Insula Nobilis.

  • A ‘new hate’ seems to have arisen from the political left in recent decades – one which is directed against those it deems opposed to ‘tolerance and diversity’. Sitting in a position of self-appointed judicial moralism, by imposing tokenistic labels such as ‘fascist’ upon those opposed to its principles, it has become the evil beast it seeks to oppose. The well-meaning ‘mob’ have sleep-walked into the control of totalitarian globalism, and – like ISIS/DAESH – will attempt to anhilate the diversities of the past in order to establish their own Caliphate of righteous intolerance, rejecting everything which is not ‘diverse’ by their own nefarious definition. Great article.

  • Heimlich A. Laguz

    Two quick thoughts:

    1) On the subject of faith. Faith is a sufficient basis for religions based on orthodoxy, or “right belief,” such as Christianity. It is inadequate for religions based on orthopraxy, or “right action,” such as Heathenry or Buddhism or Hinduism. When asked if he believed in god, Jung famously replied that he did not believe god existed, he knew god existed. This is the kind of immediacy that orthopraxy implies and indeed requires.

    So if you’re resorting to an appeal to faith in order to avoid working through matters of fact such as the content of myths, or of archaeological findings, or genetic science, then to my mind that’s no better than insisting the world is only 6,000 years old despite what we know about geological history. Such a stance is far from universally accepted even among those who follow orthodoxic faiths; it follows there must be little room indeed for such an attitude when it is expressed in the context of an orthopraxic tradition.

    2) The level of paranoia, xenophobia, victim stance, and hatred expressed in some of these comments makes them self-discrediting. Paulas would no doubt see them as a vindication of his thesis, which is most unfortunate for those of us in the Heathen community to whom such attitudes are repugnant. Reminds me of the saying “with friends like these, who needs enemies?” I know there’s no point arguing with someone who is chronically, pathologically reacting from the fight/flight portion of their brain, so I’ll leave it at that.

  • endays

    I don’t think a Folkish approach to Heathenry requires any kind of clinging to ethnic “purity”. It should be clear to anyone who does their homework that ethnicity is a changing and adaptive thing, particularly amongst the Germanic tribes. But I certainly feel that ethnic Germanic descendants of the elder Heathens should logically have the primary rights to their ancestral culture, and ultimately who should or should not be allowed into a given group ritual or ccultural Heathen expression. Heathenry is inseparable, historically, from the Germanic tribes. It was never an “open religion” in the sense that anyone who had no direct interaction with the Germanic peoples was encouraged to pick it up.

    If you are not ethnicly descended from the Germanic tribes, and feel an attraction to ethnic Germanic tribal culure, the most logical thing to do would be to approach ethnic Germanic tribal groups directly for access to their culture. So much of modern culture developes apart from direct relationship and so skews our perception of relationship, especially in terms of attempting to revive what should inherently be a product of environment and a generational interaction between the people of that place.

    If you want to be a Heathen, first be a person of place. Then find descendants of the Elder Heathens and encourage culture that developes out of direct interaction v.s. getting caught up in religious debates with people who have no direct impact on your life nor share your direct environment. Heathenry divorced from place and the people who are a physical procust of the ancestral relationship with that given place, is nothing but a fantasy religion without context.

    If Indigenous culture is place based, and we all descend from from place based ancestral cultures, it would follow that ancestry and place would be the platform for any kind of resurgence of Heathenry.

    Please excuse any lack of clarity in my words here, as I am typing with my thumbs on a soddy internet connection!

    • Heimlich A. Laguz

      Hi Endays – Thanks for your thoughts. Perhaps I could have exercised more taste and passed over in silence where there was nothing more to say. I would humbly submit, however, that my comment occurs in a passing situational context, as opposed to being the attitudinal basis of a worldview.

  • endays

    * typo: The word “procust” in the third to last paragraph of my last entry should read as “product”.

  • endays

    And Henry, I want to say I understand your frustration. But you won’t have much success in changing minds if you buckle to making indirect attacks on other peoples mental faculties, even if your argument is sound. It would seem that your last comment was oriented from the same fight/flight category you just put your adversaries in.

  • Endays – You’ve actually stated my position very well. The only purity that exists in this world is in the strife for purity. There are degrees in the strength of all relationships and it is simply my belief that those who have the strongest relationship with something are best suited to take care of it. It is a matter of respect. I would not consider myself as worthy to edit the works of JRR Tolkien as his son Christopher is.

    Being allowed control over who is and isn’t allowed into your Heathen community is, I’m told, ‘Tribalism’. Most Tribalists dismiss both Folkish and Universalist Heathenry, or so they claim. In reality they seem to essentially share the Universalist worldview but with the minor token caveat that someone must have permission to practice with them. In practice I can’t see a difference. Tribalists also tend to misjudge folkishness as racism, persistently.

    Heimlich – Please don’t confuse my point about aspects of Heathenry – particularly where the significance of ancestry is concerned – requiring faith, with me claiming that the whole religion is about faith.

    As for your second point, I find it strange that a Heathen would adopt the stance of a mother telling her son “you’re just imagining it”. Even for those of us who’d rather not have our religion tainted with politics we are forced to acknowledge that we cannot exist in a vaccuum and for hundreds of years our ways and traditions have been systematically hounded. You cannot dispute this, so why would you deny that it goes on to this day in different forms? The difference seems to be that the witch-hunts are now internal to the movement.

  • Reblogged this on The Call of Thule and commented:
    Мало Одалистичких мисли нашег пријатеља Ден Капа.

  • Reblogged this on Blood of the Isles and commented:
    Great article, and a very interesting read.

  • This person, Rick Paulas tried to interview me first for this article, and it was amusing because he did not really get anything he could *use* in the way he wanted to. This article and its comments look interesting and I shall have to come back and read this properly later, but, in general, what I saw on the original Thor article itself and its comments amounted to controlled opposition.

    I agree with the commenter above that all of this is a bit “too timid”. After all, I am a woman, and even I cannot be controlled in this way, and although I see the importance of defending ourselves, I am never apologetic when someone calls me a “racist”. I generally thank anyone who calls me a “Nazi whore” etc. for saying so, and sometimes add something along the lines of “I’m am Odinist by birth, a racist by the Grace of the Gods”. It is, after all, utter garbage, is it not? Why would anyone grovel and apologize and go down on their knees to homosexuals who write smut articles, such as Paulas, and not think it dishonorable?

    Getting to the controlled opposition aspect, I must say I am not impressed with Mr. McNallen’s supposed activities, such as those in Burma, either. I have been to Burma too, but I am not interested in helping the Karen tribe, but MY OWN tribe, nor would I ever apologize for doing so, or seek to placate the those who wish us to apologize for existing, and who hate us even for wishing to continue to exist. Things have gone way to far for that have they not? I was actually removed from Mr. McNallen’s wall on the orders of a self-described homosexual Jew, the only time I ever participated, apparently for the “crime” of posting an album of Holodomor, a White genocide.

    My feeling is simple and I believe true. It is that all of us should help our own people, who desperately need help. See our Odinist Creed. https://odinia.org/the-odinist-creed/ It would seem I am the closest thing there is to a Volva in the present age, so I say this as well for those who will listen. Be men, and if you follow anyone or have anyone as a role model, let it be Arminius, a warlord, a *real* man, not a McNallen. We are so much more than these ridiculous yuppies…. and we can be free again if we have great courage and act upon it.

  • Hi Seanna; Thanks for the comment. Anyone who is honest about their true beliefs is to be admired. But please do not think that refutation of the ‘racist’ label is automatically disingenuine and thus cowardly. Again – it all comes down to definitions. I grew up to believe that a ‘racist’ is someone who hates people simply for belonging to a certain race. That doesn’t describe me, and I don’t believe it describes most folkish Heathens. The opponents of diversity are now trying to expand the definition of ‘racist’ so that it includes people who even take the remotest ancestral view of identity.

  • Pingback: Contra Vitium: Cómo VICE tergiversó un movimiento religioso mediante una pobre investigación « Círculo de Investigaciones PanCriollistas()

  • Good article Dan. The comments are likewise well done, except for the latter post by Odinia. Some one said earlier, “with friends like this who needs enemies”, as your information, Odinia is badly skewed or you have another agenda.

  • Dear Dan,

    I quite agree with you that racism has come to mean something far different from its original definition. Now all one has to do in order to qualify as a “racist” is to be a live White person .. Speaking as someone who grew up in a Black neighborhood, what I am trying to get across is that there will be no reasoning with those who are going to seek to exterminate us, and that all of us who are on our side need to be ready.

    @Thorgun Your comment is strange indeed. My information is not skewed. There are pictures of it. You seem to be accusing me vaguely of having an ulterior motive for calling out someone for throwing out two European women, one of whom had posted about Holodomor (me), because a self described homosexual Jew did not like the mention of Holodomor. The only answer I have to this is that I fight for my own people openly and do not apologize for it. Anyone who betrays our folk is not worthy of our Ancestors.

  • You’re right Seanna – ultimately, anyone who hates true diversity and would like to erase European heritage will disobey the laws of nature, reason and debate to achieve their goals. I don’t believe for a moment that my article will halt the attack on our heritage, but I do believe in ‘putting up a good fight’ along the way, both in the realms of reason and – when necessary; when our enemies ride rough shod over all fairness and reason – in all manners necessary. Nothing is off the cards when it comes to defending the collective honour of my ancestors, so long as I know that whatever means we’re pushed to using, we know that our enemies drew first blood and that we remained as reasonable and peaceful as we possibly could each step of the way.

  • If you claim to favour the global patchwork that is multiculturalism then you cannot set about removing chosen patches from that quilt.

    Dan I hope to keep this excellent quote of yours stored in my head for when I get doubts about supporting and being proud of a lot of the beautiful legacy my ancestors passed on to me. Whether we’re religious or atheist we still like to belong to something that bigger than us.

  • Very interesting read and I feel it eloquently conveys various thoughts of my own. I also applaud the author for his moderate stance, which I have to admit is a nice change in the tone of conversation that I often here from Heathens.

    Gone are the days where we could defend our honour in a square of hazel, now we must fight this war with words.

    Much in the same way that Islam is struggling to redefine its violent history, Heathenism must also modernize or be forever lambasted as some outdated nationalist cult which it isn’t. Heathenry should not be political but personal; to you, your family, your friends, your kinsmen. It has been misappropriated by the romanticization of Nordicism in the 19th Century and has continually been used by nationalists as a nostalgic perception of a time gone by, which simply never was!

    Embrace your ancestors, embrace your homeland and embrace all who come to you with kind intentions.

Loading Posts...