Racialist and Universialist Bigotry
Jarlemoore
I agree fully.
Alaric
Swain Wodening <wode...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:8a6ksh$ac2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Wesath hal!
>
> Okay, I am a little miffed as I write this because of an exchange on one
> of the lists in the past 24 hours. The Folkish vs. Universialist crap
> surfaced again in an arguement.
>
>
> Now everyone that knows me knows I am a tribalist, that is I wish to
> follow and practice the religion of my tribe, be it the one of my
> ancestors or one in which I was fortunate enough to be adopted into.
> This view has allowed me to associate with both the RoT, the AA, and AFA
> without much undo criticism. It has also allowed me to observe what
> folks believe and do. And what I have observed is the Racialists (note
> I say Racialist and not Folkish as I think feel I am one myself) and
> Universialist have ne thing in common: They'd rather concentrate on
> their own personal agendas than do sqaut for Asatru or Germanic
> Heathenry. I have many Folkish friends and I consider them honourable
> and their viewpoints not far from my own. I also have friends the
> Folkish consider Universialists, yet they too share some of my own views
> and those of the Folkish. This leaves us with the two groups I do not
> get a long with very well... the PC Universialists an the Racialists.
>
> Why don't I get along with them? Because they share same basic trait of
> refusing ever to see the views of the other side. And to me all this
> does is cause needless fighting and arguing. Here is the hard truth for
> both sides:
>
> 1) Germanic Heahtenry was a tribal religion in ancient times. That
> means it was an ethinic religion linked with the language, culture, and
> yes, people that had certain genetic traits in common. That was and is
> its origin.
>
> 2) Even THEN, people not of the Germanic tribes could and did worhsip
> our Gods, practice our ways, and yes, even become members of the
> Germanic tribes through marriage, adoption, or conquest. Ethinic
> identity was and is based as much, if not more so, on factors such as
> language and culture and religion.
>
> 3) This is America, no one can force you to accept folks into your
> kindred. Asatru is a religion, not a social organization, we can
> excluge people that do not share our beliefs.
>
> I have friends that are Folkish that hold the above views and folks that
> are non-folkish. People in the AA, AFA, and RoT hold these views and may
> be close to the majority. It is only a very vocal bigoted few that
> place their personal political agendas that are keeping us from helaing
> the wounds caused by them in the past. Maybe it is time all reasonable
> Asatruar tell them both to take a hike, that will we "adopt into our
> tribes", admit to our kindreds whomever we please. We do not NEED their
> criteria.
>
> Frith eac Gear!
> A pissed off,
> Swain Wodening
> --
> Asatru and Heathen Deja Community
> http://www.deja.com/~asatru
> Haedengyldas
> http://haedengyldas.webjump.com
> Angelseaxisce Ealdriht Webpage
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6909
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Swain Wodening
Lavrans
Swain Wodening wrote:
It's tough being a "centrist" sometimes- you get flack from both extremes. It helps to keep in mind
that the extremists are a very loud but very small minority and are outnumbered by the Good Guys.
(Us and our friends.)
I am, btw, in complete agreement with your statement above.
Just out of curiosity, which list was it? The JSP mind-police gang ?
Lavrans
"Better to be pissed off than pissed on" -Lavransmal
RedWolf
What I can't understand is why you are upset. If there are people still
grinding this axe (this debate has gone on at least for 3 or 4 years now, if
not longer), what makes you think that they are going to stop now. It is up
to the rest of the collective to move forward and choose to see the
similariies between the many different versions of the folk. I will always
choose to believe that all of the different versions of the folk will one
day be able to come together under one banner.
The majority of this post, I could not agree with you more. What I will add
is that any group has a right to have what people they choose to have in it.
If a group wishes to discriminate by race or sexual orientation or by
political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice, but
do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
May the gods walk with you
Mike
"Swain Wodening" <wode...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:8a6ksh$ac2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Swain Wodening
lavr...@earthlink.net wrote:
extremes. It helps to keep in mind
> that the extremists are a very loud but very small minority and are
outnumbered by the Good Guys.
> (Us and our friends.)
> I am, btw, in complete agreement with your statement above.
> Just out of curiosity, which list was it? The JSP mind-police gang ?
>
> Lavrans
>
> "Better to be pissed off than pissed on" -Lavransmal
No, actaully it occured on one of the other list in an exchange between
one of the Folkish and one of the more tolerant Universialists. Still,
got my goat though.
Frith!
Swain
OOKAMEI
>
>Lavrans
>
No...the whole hub-bub occured within a small two hours span... the moderator,
once logging on..saw the thread and asked for it to stop...WITHOUT taking
sides, I might add.
I appreciate Swains highly honorable, and "NON-yappy" attitude of ...it was
just on a list.
It is a very good list, of which that kind of occurance is extremely rare...
of which, the exchange was only between two people for the most part, anyway.
In Troth,
--Mike
RKN
:RtR:
William Bainbridge
>
> Swain Wodening wrote:
>
> > Wesath hal!
> >
> > Okay, I am a little miffed as I write this because of an exchange on one
> > of the lists in the past 24 hours. The Folkish vs. Universialist crap
> > surfaced again in an arguement.
> >
> > Now everyone that knows me knows I am a tribalist, that is I wish to
> > follow and practice the religion of my tribe, be it the one of my
> > ancestors or one in which I was fortunate enough to be adopted into.
* * *
> > Why don't I get along with them? Because they share same basic trait of
> > refusing ever to see the views of the other side.
* * *
> > 3) This is America, no one can force you to accept folks into your
> > kindred. Asatru is a religion, not a social organization, we can
> > excluge people that do not share our beliefs.
Speaking as a longtime Friend Of Swain in good standing, I should like
to point out that one of the primary traits of tribalism is to support
one's tribe against those not of the tribe, which can on occasion cause
one not to acknowledge to outsiders what one sees personally as
shortcomings of members of the tribe when one believes that doing so
would place the tribe at a disadvantage. Asatru is a religion, but not
a tribe. There can be and are multiple tribes in Asatru, and not all in
Asatru are in a tribe. There are differences in beliefs within Asatru
that are strong and important enough that they can and do form a basis
for excluding, whether deliberately or in their effect, other Asatruar.
Not commenting, of course, on the context that gave rise to the original
post, since I am not on that list. And not to take issue with any
single comment in the post, but rather to point out that they do not all
head in the same direction.
> It's tough being a "centrist" sometimes- you get flack from both extremes. It helps to keep in mind
> that the extremists are a very loud but very small minority and are outnumbered by the Good Guys.
> (Us and our friends.)
> I am, btw, in complete agreement with your statement above.
Centrism is, almost by definition, not tribalism. The closest things
to tribes in modern Heathen religion generally stand for significant
things in ways that tend to be far too passionately committed to be
"centrist," and they continue to stand for those things regardless of
popular perceptions as to where the largest number of people might come
down at any given time.
> Just out of curiosity, which list was it? The JSP mind-police gang ?
>
> Lavrans
>
> "Better to be pissed off than pissed on" -Lavransmal
Better not to throw stones than to throw them and miss. Speaking as a
longtime member of the non-racial Heathen "tribe," there are many people
who have spent time on that side of things who have shown fewer of the
tribal/Asatru virtues, such as courage, loyalty and steadfastness, and
have proven less trustworthy to the tribe, than Janna.
--
William Bainbridge
tysg...@travelin.com (608) 238-2903
1313 Dale Avenue, Madison, WI 53705-1237
Swain Wodening
ook...@aol.com (OOKAMEI) wrote:
> >Just out of curiosity, which list was it? The JSP mind-police gang ?
> >
> >Lavrans
> >
>
moderator,
> once logging on..saw the thread and asked for it to stop...WITHOUT
taking
> sides, I might add.
> I appreciate Swains highly honorable, and "NON-yappy" attitude of
...it was
> just on a list.
> It is a very good list, of which that kind of occurance is extremely
rare...
> of which, the exchange was only between two people for the most part,
anyway.
>
> In Troth,
> --Mike
> RKN
> :RtR:
>
Yes, it is a VERY good list which makes the name calling more
disturbing! At least we do know it won't happen again on that list for
a long time!
Swain Wodening
"RedWolf" <md...@shore.net> wrote:
> Greetings Swain,
>
> What I can't understand is why you are upset. If there are people
still
> grinding this axe (this debate has gone on at least for 3 or 4 years
now, if
> not longer), what makes you think that they are going to stop now. It
is up
> to the rest of the collective to move forward and choose to see the
> similariies between the many different versions of the folk. I will
always
> choose to believe that all of the different versions of the folk will
one
> day be able to come together under one banner.
>
> The majority of this post, I could not agree with you more. What I
will add
> is that any group has a right to have what people they choose to have
in it.
> If a group wishes to discriminate by race or sexual orientation or by
> political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice,
but
> do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
>
> May the gods walk with you
>
> Mike
Mike, to be honest, I don't know why I let it get to me. It has been
going on for as long as I have been publicly part of the national
community and that is going on 10 years now. Nothing says, as Bill
notes that the seperate "tribes" of Asatru have to get along, but I just
wish they could. I have folkish friends that are very close to me, and I
have non-folkish as well. And what I have seen is that most of us are
not that far apart on the issue of race and ancestry.
I can recall an arguement with one of my folkish friends that should
have never taken place... I was trying to argue the race issue, when he
bluntly said, "my ancesrty is just my reason personally... if someone
who is not Germanic wants to be Asatru I am not going to say they
cannot. I may even let them in my kindred. I would just ask why they
want to be." Considering every kindred questions newbies regardless
that wish to join, this does not seem to be a big deal. I have
questioned plenty of folks on why they want to be Asatruar on a pretty
wide variety of criteria. While ancestry has never been one of them, I
can understand why it could be an issue in sme folks' eyes.
It is difficult for me as I have friends like Bill, whom's stand on race
is clear. I respect Janna although I disagree with her very strongly
(helping her with her symbel at Trothmoot was fun), on how to handle the
racialists. And I have many folkish Asatruar friends. Which I guess why
it upsets me. I simply feel that we can all agree on the issue of
ancestry without seriously compromising people's views someday.
The only form of Asatru I am totally agianst is Nazitru and the extreme
racialists, But I count them as a different issue... there you are going
so far against our values, and the poltical social structure of the
ancient tribes as to be heresy (if heresy is possible in Asatru).
Anyway, I have ranted enough I guess.
Welga!
Dirk Bruere
RedWolf <md...@shore.net> wrote in message
news:HhDx4.226$fV3....@news.shore.net...
> is that any group has a right to have what people they choose to have in
it.
> If a group wishes to discriminate by race or sexual orientation or by
> political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice, but
> do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
On what grounds do you make that set of moral judgements? Clearly not on
their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people who do
not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
Dirk
Tim Doughty
>> political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice, but
>> do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
>
>On what grounds do you make that set of moral judgements? Clearly not on
>their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people who do
>not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
>
Yes, but in any culture there is a large set of moral standards which are
shared by a majority of people and to which we can confidently apply the
adjectives "fair, just, and honorable" by commen consent. (Not UNIVERSALl
consent, just common consent). These change over time, and hopefully society is
always changing in the direction of greater social and moral accuracy and
truth.
For example, as little as 70 years ago in the United States it was considered
fairly normal to have separate laws, facilities, etc. for non-white people.
Even then, many folks considered this wrong, but if you did hold that belief it
was accepted. Nowdays, there is still a small majority holding the view that
non-whites are second-class citizens, but it is no longer considered an
acceptable view to hold. That is, that vast majority of Americans would
consider those views as "dishonorable" ones. People are still entitled to hold
those views if they want, but almost no one would approve of it. On that
basis, someone (including me) could say that it is "wrong" to believe that a
black person is naturally inferior to a white one.
Tim Doughty
Swain Wodening
"Dirk Bruere" <art...@kbnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> RedWolf <md...@shore.net> wrote in message
> news:HhDx4.226$fV3....@news.shore.net...
> > is that any group has a right to have what people they choose to
have in
> it.
by
> > political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there
choice, but
> > do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
>
> On what grounds do you make that set of moral judgements? Clearly not
on
> their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people
who do
> not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
>
>
>
Dirk,
I do not know about Mike's moral grounds, but I base mine at least as
far as Nazi political ideas go on the start contrast with the lore. Too,
one must recall Hitler's regime was called the Third Reich for a reason.
The First Reich was Charlemange's, the second the Holy Roman Empire,
and the first holocaust was the slaughter of the Heathen Saxons. That
alone would seem to indicate where Nazi thought came from.
Frith!
Shield Maiden
<wode...@geocities.com> wrote:
> Wesath hal!
It is only a very vocal bigoted few that
> place their personal political agendas that are keeping us from
> helaing
> the wounds caused by them in the past.
You are beginning to sound like the Pope. Get over this guilty liberal
mentality! It is not your responsibility to heal any wounds caused by
other individuals or cults. The day I will apologize for the actions of
other people will be on the day the Jews apologize for their bigotry
against non-Jews (and genocide of Palestinians) and the day the
Christians apologize (and pay reparations) for the horrendous deeds
their ancestors have committed against mine.
As to "political" agendas. Our religion and folkways was political.
You cannot take the "ways" out of the "folk." In a time when only our
people are not allowed to form groups based on race and culture, you
can expect racial issues to surface in any cultural group whose base is
European-Americans. To defend and advance the folk was the most
important rule of the tribes. The universalists are trying to change
that (like the conquerers of our tribes did), and add in native
American spirituality, U.N. morality, etc.. They are the very people
who work against our folkways and infiltrate our groups to promote more
whitebashing. They seem more worried about what the otherfolk think
than thier own folk. They sit there on thier high horses and promote
new age religion as a way of replacing the things about thier ancestors
they didn't like. They bring in Eastern and Christian morality, things
like "forgiveness" and "loving your enemy." I hate my enemies and will
not be fooled into thinking they are my friends. I believe in revenge.
I would never hug the killers of my child and excuse thier behavior as
being caused by "racism." Revenge is one of the tribal traits. Always
protect thrice as fiercely as one is attacked! The universalists would
have been tied down and drowned in the boglands if they had been the
traitors some of these universalists are. They are unlikely to defend
the folk and more likely to open the gates to the enemy. I consider
Steve McNallen's search for the truth about Kennewick Man to be in line
with the guiding principals of the folk. I consider the universalists'
support of the Indian tribes on this issue to be nothing short of
treason and cowardice. Those who act out of FEAR of retaliation or
name-calling are not worthy. On the issue of Kennewick Man, these (5
of 9)rules have been broken by the new-age liberal U.N. groupie
universalists:
1) HONOR your folk with truth and fairness.
* It is unfair to our ancestors to side with the government and Indian
tribes to seek to block DNA testing. Fear of the truth is cowardice.
2) PROTECT with savagery your blood and kin.
* Working against the folks' interest is treason.
3) KNOWLEDGE is power
* To ignore facts and side with the enemies of knowledge is ignorance.
4) FAIRNESS-always see both sides.
* To say "It's the Indians' ancestor," while ignoring other finds and
facts is not in the spirit of fairness.
5) CONFLICT- Always be prepared for it.
* Yes, thier will be conflict when information that challenges the
"Indian-only" mummy policy is presented. The universalists back down
from the conflict out of sheer cowardice and avoidance of conflict.
I suggest they become Dhali Llama followers instead of Asatruar.
When I say "enemy," I am referring to those who seek the emotional
destruction of my people, whatever their race, national origin, etc...
An Indian who is fair-minded is not my enemy.
Maybe it is time all
> reasonable
> Asatruar tell them both to take a hike,
Who is reasonable? Those who have no feeling of kinship with thier
folk? Those who are too cowardly to defend their folk against slander
and libel? Those who walk with the Gods, but ignore the Code?
P.S. Heathen is a biblical word, as is defamatory to the folk.
Shield Maiden
> --
> Asatru and Heathen Deja Community
> http://www.deja.com/~asatru
> Haedengyldas
> http://haedengyldas.webjump.com
> Angelseaxisce Ealdriht Webpage
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6909
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Shield Maiden
recognize differences. BTW_ There was a poll taken at one of the
Ivy-league colleges, and the majority said they did not oppose racial
separation, provided that it was not forced and that everyone's rights
were respected. I submit that my rights are not being respected today.
When the first school was integrated, I believe about 95% of the people
opposed it. It was imposed on the people and today if you hold
"bigoted" views, you are ostracisized by the TV viewing public, because
our minds are captive and only one view is allowed to be presented.
THAT is unfair.
In case you think I am a "supremecist", think again. I prefer my own
folk and folkways, but believe supremacism is wrong and that have a
right to self-determination.
Shield Maiden
Dirk Bruere
Tim Doughty <tsdo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000309143932...@ng-dc1.aol.com...
> >> If a group wishes to discriminate by race or sexual orientation or by
> >> political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice,
but
> >> do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
> >On what grounds do you make that set of moral judgements? Clearly not on
> >their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people who
do
> >not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
> Yes, but in any culture there is a large set of moral standards which are
> shared by a majority of people and to which we can confidently apply the
> adjectives "fair, just, and honorable" by commen consent. (Not UNIVERSALl
> consent, just common consent). These change over time, and hopefully
society is
> always changing in the direction of greater social and moral accuracy and
> truth.
Nevertheless, there comes a point where we disagree with the majority and
their morality. That is one reason why 'Asatruar' is not a common term. Some
things I go along with, and some I don't. Since this thread is partly about
racism I'll state my position: everyone should be judged on their own merits
and not as an *involuntary* member of a class. So, looking on the dark side,
while I am against racism I am very tolerant of 'religious intolerance', and
'political intolerance' etc Where people have chosen to be counted as
something I don't like I feel no moral obligation to treat them as equals.
Dirk
Dirk Bruere
> > > political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there
> choice, but
> > > do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
> > On what grounds do you make that set of moral judgements? Clearly not
> on
> > their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people
> who do
> > not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
> I do not know about Mike's moral grounds, but I base mine at least as
> far as Nazi political ideas go on the start contrast with the lore. Too,
> one must recall Hitler's regime was called the Third Reich for a reason.
> The First Reich was Charlemange's, the second the Holy Roman Empire,
> and the first holocaust was the slaughter of the Heathen Saxons. That
> alone would seem to indicate where Nazi thought came from.
See my other post.
I have no objection to discrimination on political grounds, one way or
another.
Dirk
RedWolf
I am just a tad curious, do you actually belong to any of the folkish
groups?
May the gods walk with you
Mike
"Shield Maiden" <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:01906254...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com...
RedWolf
These comments will come and these comments will go, the main thing is to
stay focused on moving forward. All of our folk will come together someday,
and when that day happens they will begin to argue who is to get the
credit. : )
May the gods walk with you
Mike
"Swain Wodening" <wode...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:8a7ig4$v8e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
RedWolf
"Dirk Bruere" <art...@kbnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:mrSx4.8731$Zj2.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>
> RedWolf <md...@shore.net> wrote in message
> news:HhDx4.226$fV3....@news.shore.net...
> > is that any group has a right to have what people they choose to have in
> it.
> > If a group wishes to discriminate by race or sexual orientation or by
> > political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice,
but
> > do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
>
> On what grounds do you make that set of moral judgements?
I call it, the way I see it. My opinion on this subject has not changed in
at least 3 years.
> Clearly not on
> their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people who
do
> not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
Just because I may feel a group has a right to conduct itself as it deems
fit, does not mean that those actions are considered honorable.
William Bainbridge
>
> Greetings Swain,
>
> These comments will come and these comments will go, the main thing is to
> stay focused on moving forward. All of our folk will come together someday,
> and when that day happens they will begin to argue who is to get the
> credit. : )
(1) What constitutes "moving forward," and (2) who is "our folk?"
Without some manner of arriving at a reasonably widespread agreement on
those questions, how can anyone know when that day arrives?
Swain Wodening
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
Your LACK of knowledge of our folk leads me to believe you know nothing
of Heathenry or our ways!
1) Heathen is a GERMANIC word and I wear it with pride. It is not
Hebrew or Greek or Latin. It is found in Old Norse, Gothic, Old
English, and all the other ancient Germanic tongues. If you knew
anything of Asatru, you would know that. I seriously doubt you have
read the EDDAS or Sagas.
2) There is far more to Heathenry than blood. You need to know the
lore, worship the gods, and understand the tribal ways/
Explain to me Wyrd, frith, Theod (as in TRIBE). I bet you cannot, You
are still too caught up in your Xian right wing mentality, as shallow as
the PCers you rant against.
I am NO liberal, by no means. I am a former Theodsmen and cofounder of
another Theodish (i.e. tribal) organization. I reject many of the
modern ideologies as tainted by Chritainity or Humanism, and seek those
of MY genetic ancestors. I can list my ancestors back 50 generations in
some cases. I have correnspnded with McNallen and Murray both, and have
their respect. I do not see blood as required for being Asatru however,
and I will be damned if I allow a Hitler aplogist like you tell me who I
can and cannot admit into my family or my tribe.
I reject the rantings of folks like you who may well believe in the
teachings of the Third Reich. Hitler's Third Reich was meant as a
descendant in ideology of Charlemange's First Recih, and the Holy Roman
Empire of the German Nation. Charlemange the Unholy slaughtered Heathen
Saxons in the name of the Christian god, while the Holy Roman Emoire was
ordained at the command of the Pope at the expense of pagans everywhere.
The Third Reich its self was meant to forever destroy Germanic folk ways
such as democratic assmblies, and replace them with a more Christain
form of government, totalatrianism. Sorry I give up my freedom for no
one.
You CANNOT say "I am Asatru" just because you have Germanic blood, you
have to PROVE it as well. You cannot say "I am Asatru" period
regardless of who you are, unless you belive and practice it. I am
descendant of Heathen kings, a legitimate Wodening. But that DOES NOT
MAKE ME ASATRU. What makes me Asatru is my free willl choice to believe
in the Gods, and practice our ways.
Your post just proves what my original post was pointed out. Neither
racialist or PC Universialist understand our religion or give a DAMN
about Germanic Heathenry or Asatru. They just want to fuel their own
personal agendas, both stemming from Christian mentalities.
Swain Wodening, Ealdor
Angelseaxisce Ealdriht
Swain Wodening
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
> Tim: Not all who believe in tribalism feel they are "superior." They
> recognize differences. BTW_ There was a poll taken at one of the
> Ivy-league colleges, and the majority said they did not oppose racial
> separation, provided that it was not forced and that everyone's rights
> were respected. I submit that my rights are not being respected
today.
> When the first school was integrated, I believe about 95% of the
people
> opposed it. It was imposed on the people and today if you hold
> "bigoted" views, you are ostracisized by the TV viewing public,
because
> our minds are captive and only one view is allowed to be presented.
> THAT is unfair.
> In case you think I am a "supremecist", think again. I prefer my own
> folk and folkways, but believe supremacism is wrong and that have a
> right to self-determination.
>
> Shield Maiden
>
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
Your other post pretty much contradicts this one. In your attack on me,
you proved you know not spit about tribalism. You thought Heathen was a
Biblical word. You claim to believe in self determination, but you would
deny me the right to seek ways to heal the breaches in our religion, and
to admit who my tribe and I wish to admit into it. Care to explain?
Sounds to me like you are holding onto warped Xian beliefs.
Frith!
Swain
Swain Wodening
Dirk Bruere
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:01906254...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com...
>
every word found in the bible. In which case you'll be pretty silent.
Dirk
Tim Doughty
>their morality. That is one reason why 'Asatruar' is not a common term.
I have no problem agreeing with this. But as heathens we're part of the
minority so it's easy to take this view. In the future, one hopes that it will
no longer be considered honorable for society at large to discriminate or
otherwise look down on people who hold to a minority religion. But if you
belong to the majority party, be it white, Aryan, heterosexual,
mainstream-religion, or whatever else, your take on this is usually different.
Tim Doughty
Dirk Bruere
> >Nevertheless, there comes a point where we disagree with the majority and
> >their morality. That is one reason why 'Asatruar' is not a common term.
> I have no problem agreeing with this. But as heathens we're part of the
> minority so it's easy to take this view. In the future, one hopes that it
will
> no longer be considered honorable for society at large to discriminate or
> otherwise look down on people who hold to a minority religion. But if you
Don't count on me to speed that day. Religion is a *choice* and I
discriminate accordingly and don't object when others do so as well.
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
> In article <8a6ksh$ac2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Swain Wodening
> <wode...@geocities.com> wrote:
> > Wesath hal!
>
> It is only a very vocal bigoted few that
> > place their personal political agendas that are keeping us from
> > helaing
> > the wounds caused by them in the past.
>
liberal
> mentality!
IMHO Swain is not a liberal for tring to heal the wounds in our
community.
It is not your responsibility to heal any wounds caused by
> other individuals or cults. The day I will apologize for the actions
of
> other people will be on the day the Jews apologize for their bigotry
> against non-Jews (and genocide of Palestinians) and the day the
> Christians apologize (and pay reparations) for the horrendous deeds
> their ancestors have committed against mine.
Are your Grandparents Asatru? How about your Great-grandparents or
Great-great-grandparents. How far do you want me to go back. Or are you
the type that does not honor your ancestors unless they followed the
Gods?
> As to "political" agendas. Our religion and folkways was political.
> You cannot take the "ways" out of the "folk." In a time when only our
> people are not allowed to form groups based on race and culture, you
> can expect racial issues to surface in any cultural group whose base
is
> European-Americans.
[....]
To defend and advance the folk was the most
> important rule of the tribes. The universalists are trying to change
> that (like the conquerers of our tribes did), and add in native
> American spirituality, U.N. morality, etc.. They are the very people
> who work against our folkways and infiltrate our groups to promote
more
> whitebashing. They seem more worried about what the otherfolk think
> than thier own folk. They sit there on thier high horses and promote
> new age religion as a way of replacing the things about thier
ancestors
> they didn't like. They bring in Eastern and Christian morality, things
> like "forgiveness" and "loving your enemy." I hate my enemies and
will
> not be fooled into thinking they are my friends.
I consider myself a "universalist'...opps sorry PC universalist and
things like forgiveness and loving my enemy are not tru. Forgiveness is
in our history..it's called weirgild. If someone has done a wrong I
expect my price to be met..even is is a I'm sorry. The weirgild is my
choice.
I believe in
revenge.
A little angry are we???
> I would never hug the killers of my child and excuse thier behavior as
> being caused by "racism." Revenge is one of the tribal traits. Always
> protect thrice as fiercely as one is attacked! The universalists
would
> have been tied down and drowned in the boglands if they had been the
> traitors some of these universalists are. They are unlikely to defend
> the folk and more likely to open the gates to the enemy. I consider
> Steve McNallen's
Steve oh Steve may I kiss your robe
search for the truth about Kennewick Man to be in
line
> with the guiding principals of the folk. I consider the
universalists'
> support of the Indian tribes on this issue to be nothing short of
> treason and cowardice. Those who act out of FEAR of retaliation or
> name-calling are not worthy. On the issue of Kennewick Man, these (5
> of 9)rules have been broken by the new-age liberal U.N. groupie
> universalists:
>
> 1) HONOR your folk with truth and fairness.
> * It is unfair to our ancestors to side with the government and Indian
> tribes to seek to block DNA testing. Fear of the truth is cowardice.
> 2) PROTECT with savagery your blood and kin.
> * Working against the folks' interest is treason.
> 3) KNOWLEDGE is power
> * To ignore facts and side with the enemies of knowledge is ignorance.
> 4) FAIRNESS-always see both sides.
> * To say "It's the Indians' ancestor," while ignoring other finds and
> facts is not in the spirit of fairness.
> 5) CONFLICT- Always be prepared for it.
> * Yes, thier will be conflict when information that challenges the
> "Indian-only" mummy policy is presented. The universalists back down
> from the conflict out of sheer cowardice and avoidance of conflict.
> I suggest they become Dhali Llama followers instead of Asatruar.
I have not read these before the NNV that I live by are :Courage, Truth,
Honor, Loyalty, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self-reliance,
and Steadfastness. Why would I want to live by a list of mores that
includes Conflict.
> When I say "enemy," I am referring to those who seek the emotional
> destruction of my people, whatever their race, national origin, etc...
> An Indian who is fair-minded is not my enemy.
>
> Maybe it is time all
> > reasonable
> > Asatruar tell them both to take a hike,
>
> Who is reasonable? Those who have no feeling of kinship with thier
> folk? Those who are too cowardly to defend their folk against slander
> and libel? Those who walk with the Gods, but ignore the Code?
You for one are on of the people who isn't resonable!
> P.S. Heathen is a biblical word, as is defamatory to the folk.
P.P.S. Heathen is a word taken from the Gremanic lang. And Pagan is
taken from Latin.. Get a dictionary...and have a nice day:)
Mike
Lavrans
William Bainbridge wrote:
> Lavrans wrote:
> >
>
> > It's tough being a "centrist" sometimes- you get flack from both extremes. It helps to keep in mind
> > that the extremists are a very loud but very small minority and are outnumbered by the Good Guys.
> > (Us and our friends.)
> > I am, btw, in complete agreement with your statement above.
>
> Centrism is, almost by definition, not tribalism. The closest things
> to tribes in modern Heathen religion generally stand for significant
> things in ways that tend to be far too passionately committed to be
> "centrist," and they continue to stand for those things regardless of
> popular perceptions as to where the largest number of people might come
> down at any given time.
In this case, "centrism" means that I am identifying myself with what I percieve to be the Asatru
mainstream. It is very tribal, and most often referred to as Folkish. I am also opposed to radical
extremists in either the racist or anti-racist camps.
>
>
> > Just out of curiosity, which list was it? The JSP mind-police gang ?
> >
> > Lavrans
>
>
> Better not to throw stones than to throw them and miss. Speaking as a
> longtime member of the non-racial Heathen "tribe," there are many people
> who have spent time on that side of things who have shown fewer of the
> tribal/Asatru virtues, such as courage, loyalty and steadfastness, and
> have proven less trustworthy to the tribe, than Janna.
>
> --
> William Bainbridge
> tysg...@travelin.com (608) 238-2903
> 1313 Dale Avenue, Madison, WI 53705-1237
Sorry Bill, but the above statement is so convoluted that I might almost suspect you of being a lawyer!
;=)>
Seriously, I know that a few people enjoy the safety and very limited dialogs that occur on JSP's list.
Some like to play it safe. I prefer ARA or the new Asatru-N-Action list myself.
Throwing stones and missing? I consider Janna to be narrow-minded and mean-spirited. That's an opinion
to which I have every right.
Lavrans
Tim Doughty
mean-spirited. That's an opinion
to which I have every right.<<
Congratulations on your right to hold an opinion. But to someone who knows
Janna in sheds a lot of light on you. Thanks for sharing.
Tim
Robert
European religion fine.I agree that political ideologies shouldn't be mixed
but I don't see why they would be any less honorable buy not allowing people
like homosexuals minorities etc into their group. Personally I dont care
what other people do but I can understand why people don't allow or accept
certain groups of people into their ranks.
Dirk Bruere wrote in message ...
>
>RedWolf <md...@shore.net> wrote in message
>news:HhDx4.226$fV3....@news.shore.net...
>> is that any group has a right to have what people they choose to have in
>it.
>> If a group wishes to discriminate by race or sexual orientation or by
>> political affiliation (i.e. National Socialism), that is there choice,
but
>> do not believe for a second that it is fair, just, or honorable.
>
>their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people who do
>not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
>
>
>
>
nie...@my-deja.com
"RedWolf" <md...@shore.net> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I am just a tad curious, do you actually belong to any of the folkish
> groups?
>
>
> Mike
No and if there are people like Shield Maiden there why should I.
Dirk Bruere
> > Clearly not on
> > their moral grounds. So, all you have said is that a group of people who
> do
> > not share your moral standards do not share your moral standards.
> Just because I may feel a group has a right to conduct itself as it deems
> fit, does not mean that those actions are considered honorable.
Perhaps my definition of 'honour' is different from yours.
I consider someone honourable if they abide by their own moral principles,
if necessary to their own personal detriment. It does not mean that I agree
with those principles. Indeed, those principles may make them an enemy, but
I do try to recognise honourable behaviour as I define it.
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
"Robert" <fr...@skylink.net> wrote:
> Majority rules not the minorityand if a group wants to keep it an
ethnic
> European religion fine.I agree that political ideologies shouldn't be
mixed
> but I don't see why they would be any less honorable buy not allowing
people
> like homosexuals minorities etc into their group. Personally I dont
care
> what other people do but I can understand why people don't allow or
accept
> certain groups of people into their ranks.
Well is a personal issue? Does the person in question have a prob w./
gays and people of color, or Is it a religious stand they are taking.
Is Asatru a religion that fits the people or is it a religion that the
people make fit thier ideals?
I feel that if you have a prob. with gays or people of color it does not
matter what religion you are in todays world it is considered wrong and
bigoted. If you are looking at it only in a religious context (i.e. from
the lore and have proof) then you may have an arguement. But remember
for almost every proof taken from the lore there is more than likely a
counter in it also.
In Frith,
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8abfop$r8a$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> I feel that if you have a prob. with gays or people of color it does not
> matter what religion you are in todays world it is considered wrong and
> bigoted. If you are looking at it only in a religious context (i.e. from
Depends what you mean by 'problem'.
Is it a problem if you get along fine with both types, but still consider
'people of colour' to be somewhat less intelligent on the whole, and
homosexuality to be a behavioural disability?
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
I would consider that definition stereotyping. And for an individual to
do that I would not consider him/her kin or a relation (spiritually) to
myself. To place titles on groups of people I consider to be narrow in
ones look of the world. If you "get along with fine" but still place
them as inferior what makes you any better than them? The thought that
blacks are less intelligent makes me wonder how much of an education the
person who is speaking has. And I was asked earlier if I had been to any
folkish events...and my reply is, If I would have to listen to the BS of
white being smarter than blacks and shit like that I would never step
into any event that spouts sentiment and ideals reminiscent of Hitler
and the KKK. And if this your thoughts are you wearing you SS suit now?
If not it must be because it is in the cleaners. We have been talking
about majority rule well, as a person that is part of the MAJORITY of
the United States you opinion is over ruled.
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8abq6k$3ho$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Depends what you mean by 'problem'.
> > Is it a problem if you get along fine with both types, but still
> > consider
> > 'people of colour' to be somewhat less intelligent on the whole, and
> > homosexuality to be a behavioural disability?
> I would consider that definition stereotyping. And for an individual to
So, being short sighted is an optical disability, but homosexuality is not a
sexual one? Peculiar world you inhabit.
> do that I would not consider him/her kin or a relation (spiritually) to
> myself. To place titles on groups of people I consider to be narrow in
Classification is the basis of our language and science. I call people who
suffer from a disability 'disabled', and those who have pure african
ancestry 'Black' (or whatever the latest PC term is for people of African
ancestry). It seems that you merely prefer titles and classifications that
suit your POV.
> ones look of the world. If you "get along with fine" but still place
> them as inferior what makes you any better than them? The thought that
Well, I'm considerably and measurably better than most people in several
areas physical and mental whether Black or White. However, that's not how I
judge the quality of a person from a moral POV. There the standard is one of
honour.
> blacks are less intelligent makes me wonder how much of an education the
> person who is speaking has. And I was asked earlier if I had been to any
If you want a clue as to my education do a search in deja on my name.
> folkish events...and my reply is, If I would have to listen to the BS of
> white being smarter than blacks and shit like that I would never step
> into any event that spouts sentiment and ideals reminiscent of Hitler
> and the KKK. And if this your thoughts are you wearing you SS suit now?
I am not old enough to have joined the SS. It was extinct several years
before I was born. As for whether I believe that Whites are smarter than Bla
cks, I'd have to give a qualified 'yes' on that one. In much the same way if
asked whether I considered the Japanese smarter than Whites, that would also
rate a 'yes'. I guess racists just aren't what they used to be.
> If not it must be because it is in the cleaners. We have been talking
> about majority rule well, as a person that is part of the MAJORITY of
> the United States you opinion is over ruled.
I'm British (ethnic English), so I piss on your conclusion jumping and
kneejerk reaction.
Majorities don't impress me. Right and wrong is not a voting matter - never
has been and never will be.
Dirk
Tim Doughty
>Is it a problem if you get along fine with both types, but still consider
>'people of colour' to be somewhat less intelligent on the whole, and
>homosexuality to be a behavioural disability?
That's a simple yes.
Tim
Dirk Bruere
So, you don't believe it's true, or you don't believe one should say so?
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
> I'm British (ethnic English), so I piss on your conclusion jumping and
> kneejerk reaction.
> Majorities don't impress me. Right and wrong is not a voting matter -
never
> has been and never will be.
Well and good. But the point I am tring to make that I don't feel
labeling groups of people is the proper thing to do. I feel that you
should judge people on an individual basis. To make a blanket statement
about a group of people Does no honor ot the people who don't fit into
your statements. You can piss on what ever you like. These are my
opinions just like yours are your own. We will not accept the others
opinion and that is that. We can argue day and night and never accept
the side. As for the kneejerk I made assumptions just like you have made
of me so as far as that goes I appologize...I placed you in a stereotype
and you did not fit it...go figure.
RedWolf
My question was meant for Shield Maiden. So take it easy with that
warhammer you are swinging around, please no friendly fire incidents.
: )
May the gods walk with you
Mike
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ab45b$hu7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <H%Yx4.79$qT6....@news.shore.net>,
> "RedWolf" <md...@shore.net> wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I am just a tad curious, do you actually belong to any of the folkish
> > groups?
> >
> > May the gods walk with you
> >
> > Mike
>
>
> No and if there are people like Shield Maiden there why should I.
>
RedWolf
It is good to see you posting here again.
"William Bainbridge" <tysg...@travelin.com> wrote in message
news:38C86F1B...@travelin.com...
> RedWolf wrote:
>
> (1) What constitutes "moving forward," and
The main idea is to continue to work your plan, without spending time
addressing the petty actions of a few people.
> (2) who is "our folk?"
All of the people who honor the gods of the Aesir and the Vanir.
> Without some manner of arriving at a reasonably widespread agreement on
> those questions, how can anyone know when that day arrives?
I am going to be very straight forward and honest but you already know the
answers to the questions that you have asked. It now comes down to whether
you choose to be difficult. It is easy to point at a group of people and
disagree with their point of view and say they are not a part of my folk.
It make no difference if you are a unversalists, folkish, or the poor stiffs
caught somewhere in the middle, we are in this together. We will either
succeed together or we will fail individually.
Maybe I have just become to much of an optimist, but I do believe that some
day the folk will stand together.
Shield Maiden
and society in general to describe immoral, evil people. I don't
believe our people named themselves "heathens." Murderers are called
"heathens" on the editorial pages of major newspapers. Romans is not a
word used to describe aweful people and does not carry a negative
connotation in the modern day, so your correlation doesn't make sense
to me. Romans were named Romans for a reason. Heathen is not an area.
It is akin to using the word "savage" to describe American Indians (I
meant Siberian-Americans).
William Bainbridge
>
> Greetings William
>
> It is good to see you posting here again.
Here's hoping it turns out better than the last time.
> > (1) What constitutes "moving forward," and
>
> The main idea is to continue to work your plan, without spending time
> addressing the petty actions of a few people.
To quote the fellow in _Beyond Thunderdome_, "Plan? There's no
_plan_." More seriously, that may well be moving forward for an
individual, or even a coherent group, but for a religion, there must be
a plan before it can be worked, and quite often, the conscious plans of
the people practicing the religion are only a part of the equation, and
possibly not even the largest part. In addition to plans, there is
orlog, individual and group, there is thew and its effects on the
individuals and group, and there are the gods, and all the forces that
condition their works. It becomes very much more complicated than there
simply being a plan.
> > (2) who is "our folk?"
>
> All of the people who honor the gods of the Aesir and the Vanir.
That's one possible answer, but it has been my understanding--and if
it's in error, this would be the place to obtain correction, wouldn't
it--that at least those who really popularized the use of "folkish" a
few years ago would have a much broader definition. And, if one
conceives of the religion as being primarily a thing of the "folk," then
who the folk are has a tremendous impact on just what it is that one
means by "Asatru," and on how one should go about practicing it. This
has all been gone over in great length, and I dislike getting into the
same unproductive argument twice, but I do not think it is possible to
bridge important differences without understand what they are. At least
as things stood a couple years ago, your answer to the second question
would put you on one side and not the other, which is a difficult place
to be if you would also like to be a bridge, which is what it seemed to
me like you wanted to be.
> I am going to be very straight forward and honest but you already know the
> answers to the questions that you have asked. It now comes down to whether
> you choose to be difficult. It is easy to point at a group of people and
> disagree with their point of view and say they are not a part of my folk.
> It make no difference if you are a unversalists, folkish, or the poor stiffs
> caught somewhere in the middle, we are in this together. We will either
> succeed together or we will fail individually.
What's a "universalist?" I've seen many definitions, sometimes even
from the same people, so it is hard to know what it means when any given
person uses it. Personally, I tend to think of it as meaning someone
who believes that his/her religion, or religion in general, is, or can
or should be, for everyone, or that it proclaims things which are
universally true for everybody, which Christians believe, and people
like Buddhists and new agers believe to some extent, but which hardly
anyone in Asatru believes, regardless of how important they think race
is.
I really don't know the answers to the questions. I know what I tend
to think and how I have tended to practice, but sometimes I have really
moved forward when I thought I wasn't, and sometimes the opposite has
been true, and I really do not know in any ultimate or, shall I say,
"universal" sense who "the folk" are. I suppose that in one way, who
they are depends on why it is important to one, and that is something we
all have to decide for ourselves. But I do not think your last sentence
is true. Some people succeed and others fail quite without regard to
anything called "Asatru," and if what we are practicing becomes so
different that it really isn't the same religion at all, which is a
possibility, then what it is that succeeds or fails depends rather on
one's point of view. Indeed, the whole problem can be summed up in your
use of the pronoun, "we," with the apparent confidence that it means
something definite in the context of this place. I have previously
called this problem "pronoun creep," but it would probably be more
productive to just refer to it as an indicator of just how profoundly
differences of opinion can complicate understanding by insinuating
themselves into even the simplest uses of language.
Best of luck to you!
Shield Maiden
I believe the only insult I threw was regarding the Pope! As I stated
in my first post, I am new to Asatru, I am here to learn. I don't
expect to be reemed for little mistakes, such as calling "heathen" a
biblical word. Right there in that sentence you were attempting to
discredit the argument by discrediting the person. Now, that's not
very tribal, is it? YOU do not have the authority to determine that I
don't know "spit" about tribalism, as you said. You don't even know me.
What, do you expect me to be a good tribal member and just agree with
you? Is that tribalism? Are you being tribal when you say we should
throw out those with views you don't care for because you don't like
the image problem created by racialists?
My kind of tribalism is individualistic, not authoritarian. Though
there was always a leadership presence within the tribes, but thier
folkways were individualistic in nature. Just because they
collaborated with each other does not mean they were dependent on an
all-powerful leader. Which brings me to the point that leaders weren't
necessarily the political police, they had other issues that required
leadership.
You CAN be a tribalist and disagree (heartily) with others. That is not
a contradiction. Where, sir, did I "deny" you the right to try to
"heal" the wounds allegedly caused by others? I disagreed with the
concept of having Asatru ruled with an iron-fisted leader who keeps
tabs on the political correctness of the folk. This concern of yours is
based on what non-tribal members think. Who cares what they think? No
where in your short post was a refutation or even an attempt at
discussion of the points I brought forth.
Is this the way a "leader" behaves himself? Perhaps it is you who
doesn't know "spit" about tribalism. When a member of the tribe
disagrees, a leader will listen and open the discussion up for debate,
not try to body slam those with opposing points of views in an effort
to discredit the person as a way of closing off the discussion.
Swain Wodening
"Robert" <fr...@skylink.net> wrote:
> Majority rules not the minorityand if a group wants to keep it an
ethnic
> European religion fine.I agree that political ideologies shouldn't be
mixed
> but I don't see why they would be any less honorable buy not allowing
people
> like homosexuals minorities etc into their group. Personally I dont
care
> what other people do but I can understand why people don't allow or
accept
> certain groups of people into their ranks.
Robert,
And there is really nothing wrong with that. You cannot be expected to
allow folks within your kindred, within your firthstead, your "tribe"
that you cannot get along with. Myself, I have no problem with folks
raised in a Germanic culture. Those outside of it, I would question why
they want to be Asatru, but I still would not deny they can worhsip
whomever they please. I know others feel differently and accept that.
My only stand is that every group has its own right to determine who to
let in, and as long as it is not based on racial hate or a political
agenda, that is perfectly okay.
Frith!
Swain
--
Asatru and Heathen Deja Community
http://www.deja.com/~asatru
Haedengyldas
http://haedengyldas.webjump.com
Angelseaxisce Ealdriht Webpage
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6909
Tim Doughty
>>As for whether I believe that Whites are smarter than Bla
cks, I'd have to give a qualified 'yes' on that one. In much the same way if
asked whether I considered the Japanese smarter than Whites, that would also
rate a 'yes'.<<
Ah, now I finally understand. The conversation is over as far as I'm
concerned. It's been fun.
Tim Doughty
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ac0su$8i2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> > I'm British (ethnic English), so I piss on your conclusion jumping and
> > kneejerk reaction.
> > Majorities don't impress me. Right and wrong is not a voting matter -
> never
> > has been and never will be.
> Well and good. But the point I am tring to make that I don't feel
> labeling groups of people is the proper thing to do. I feel that you
Labelling groups of people as groups of people is how communities and
governments etc interact, and are meant to interact.
> should judge people on an individual basis. To make a blanket statement
If you read what I've written elsewhere you'll see that I agree with that
statement. Still, do you deny that there is such a thing as 'national
character' for example? Or is (say) Iraq as a collective no diferent from
(say) Japan?
Dirk
Dirk Bruere
I guess that thing about the Japanese being smarter than your lilly white
ass really got to you. Enjoy being on the receiving end of racism? :-)
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
"RedWolf" <md...@shore.net> wrote:
> Greetings Mike,
>
> My question was meant for Shield Maiden. So take it easy with that
> warhammer you are swinging around, please no friendly fire incidents.
>
> : )
>
>
> Mike
>
In Frith,
Mike
nie...@my-deja.com
"RedWolf" <md...@shore.net> wrote:
> Greetings Mike,
>
> My question was meant for Shield Maiden. So take it easy with that
> warhammer you are swinging around, please no friendly fire incidents.
>
> : )
>
> May the gods walk with you
>
> Mike
Well I guess that dis-proves her theory of Universalists being
passifists..
nie...@my-deja.com
face to face and then continue the discussion..But until then I'm
finished with it. Not that I don't have more to say I just think we are
spinning our wheels, and getting no where.
Shield Maiden
I wonder why it hasn't been posted? Are you or one of your friends the
moderator? In that case, what I wrote in the post stands even truer.
Shield Maiden
you seem the type that would use what I said to discredit those you
disagreed with.
#2- My family were mostly athiests, my great grandfather forced to go
to Catholic school. He refused to cite the hail Mary and was beaten for
it. Most of my ancestors are from Scotland, and I have no record of any
of them following the ancestral religion. However, I am aware of the
reason why, and seek out my roots. I will not bow down to foreign Gods.
And a question or two for you: Are the only people welcome to your
kindred those who have already acquired all of the knowledge relating
to the faith? Just curious because of your arrogant question about who
in my family were followers of the ancestral religion. Is there a
requirement that newcomers comes from families that kept the old ways
alive?
Did you vote Clinton/Gore?
Are you an activist in the SPLC?
Are you in favor of open borders and the displacement of
European-Americans?
Do you feel guilty that wealthy English and Dutch folks owned slaves
and feel that my children should pay for their deeds?
Are you in favor of preferences?
RedWolf
"William Bainbridge" <tysg...@travelin.com> wrote in message
news:38C9B417...@travelin.com...
snip
I believe the problem is that everyone has a plan and everyone is going in
the different directions. I see no need to look at outside factors, we are
responsible for our own actions and no outside force can change that. All
of us have done the hard part, that is finding our way back home, now we
need to take the next step and start standing together. I will agree that
my answer may have been different (regarding who makes up the folk) a couple
of years ago, some things can change if you are willing to put the warhammer
down long enough to listen.
snip
> I really don't know the answers to the questions. I know what I tend
> to think and how I have tended to practice, but sometimes I have really
> moved forward when I thought I wasn't, and sometimes the opposite has
> been true, and I really do not know in any ultimate or, shall I say,
> "universal" sense who "the folk" are. I suppose that in one way, who
> they are depends on why it is important to one, and that is something we
> all have to decide for ourselves. But I do not think your last sentence
> is true. Some people succeed and others fail quite without regard to
> anything called "Asatru," and if what we are practicing becomes so
> different that it really isn't the same religion at all, which is a
> possibility, then what it is that succeeds or fails depends rather on
> one's point of view. Indeed, the whole problem can be summed up in your
> use of the pronoun, "we," with the apparent confidence that it means
> something definite in the context of this place. I have previously
> called this problem "pronoun creep," but it would probably be more
> productive to just refer to it as an indicator of just how profoundly
> differences of opinion can complicate understanding by insinuating
> themselves into even the simplest uses of language.
This is where we differ, I do not believe that the rites that all of the
various sects practice is that different. Some groups may be more or less
magical than others, some may do the hammer rite or not but the main core of
the rites in my opinion are the same. I happen to like the word "we" and it
is a shame it is not used more often by this religion. When all asatruar
start to believe that we are one folk, then we will all stand together.
> Best of luck to you!
It has nothing to do with me, alone I cannot accomplish the goal, no one
can, but with all of us together, we will not need luck, the future will be
ours.
William Bainbridge
> I believe the problem is that everyone has a plan and everyone is going in
> the different directions.
That is somewhat at odds with my observations--"everyone" is a pretty
broad brush to paint with--but it's not that important to what you are
saying.
I see no need to look at outside factors, we are
> responsible for our own actions and no outside force can change that.
Orlog isn't an outside factor. Thew is exactly what you are talking
about when you mention responsibility for our actions. Some of us
regard the gods as at least in some important ways outside of ourselves,
but that, too, doesn't affect what you are talking about. Orlog,
however, does to some extent. Setting aside "responsible" for a second,
orlog is the momentum of everything that has been done and said. We can
decide to go in a different direction, or as you seem to be saying,
coordinate our "plans" in some way, but orlog doesn't just go away. The
sagas are full of examples of this. The present is the effect of all
the causes all of us have put into motion, and many of those causes were
put into motion for real and substantial reasons. I am not saying you
should not advocate a different course if you feel it is needed, but at
the same time, Wyrd and her sisters are "outside factors" that most
certainly can change things, so that failing to take them into account
is something one does to his/her own peril.
> need to take the next step and start standing together. I will agree
that
> my answer may have been different (regarding who makes up the folk) a couple
> of years ago, some things can change if you are willing to put the warhammer
> down long enough to listen.
I confess to not knowing what it would have been a couple of years ago,
but am delighted to know that you are not swinging a warhammer now.
> This is where we differ, I do not believe that the rites that all of the
> various sects practice is that different.
That is hardly something we differ on. Virtually all the rites are
functionally the same, but I don't think that has ever been much of an
issue.
Some groups may be more or less
> magical than others, some may do the hammer rite or not but the main core of
> the rites in my opinion are the same. I happen to like the word "we" and it
> is a shame it is not used more often by this religion. When all asatruar
> start to believe that we are one folk, then we will all stand together.
Oh, "we" is a fine enough word, but any word is useful only so far as
it aids communication, which it does when it means roughly the same to
those who use it, and doesn't when it means different things. Taking it
to mean what you previously defined it as, I wouldn't take serious issue
with what you say. There are some other, wider meanings, though, that I
would have to consider beyond the scope of the religion we are trying to
practice, since by the definition I gave previously, I am no
universalist.
> > Best of luck to you!
>
> It has nothing to do with me, alone I cannot accomplish the goal, no one
> can, but with all of us together, we will not need luck, the future will be
> ours.
The future will be Skuld's. "Luck" has a fine tradition in Northern
lore, and was considered an exceedingly valuable thing to have. It is
one of the things, in fact, one can inherit from one's forebears, if the
stories have any merit to them. I should think we could all use a bit
of it here and there. But, as you would have it; have a nice evening,
then, and let luck take care of itself.
Wassail!
Shield Maiden
No, I don't "belong" to any group, i.e. I am not a dues-paying member
of any group. I have been to gatherings, but generally I am still in
the learning stage. For the most part, I have studied up on mostly
Celtic history. Now I am seeking my Germanic/Nordic roots. Since we
know less about the Celtic religion, I was attracted to Asatru.
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8acadl$f3u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Like Tim said no need to go on with this topic, Hope some day to see you
> face to face and then continue the discussion..But until then I'm
> finished with it. Not that I don't have more to say I just think we are
> spinning our wheels, and getting no where.
>
I had intended to wind up those who jump to conclusions by stating that I
thought it probable that Black Africans, on the whole, were of lower
intelligence than whites, and Japanese higher than the latter.
The reasoning is simple, and based upon the *average* childhood environment.
In Africa it is one of nutritional and educational deficit. The former is
*known* to affect adult IQ, and so is lack of intellectual stimulation in
children.
The Japanese educational system is also (probably) the most intense and
competitive on Earth. Additionally, the children are required to memorise
thousands of ideograms (kanji), which I assume partially accounts for their
superior performance compared to whites in IQ tests (pattern recognition?).
Dirk
Dirk Bruere
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:03632552...@usw-ex0107-050.remarq.com...
> Dirk: Heathen (or pagan for that matter) is a term used by Christians
> and society in general to describe immoral, evil people. I don't
> believe our people named themselves "heathens." Murderers are called
> "heathens" on the editorial pages of major newspapers. Romans is not a
> word used to describe aweful people and does not carry a negative
> connotation in the modern day, so your correlation doesn't make sense
> to me. Romans were named Romans for a reason. Heathen is not an area.
> It is akin to using the word "savage" to describe American Indians (I
> meant Siberian-Americans).
>
village) - the heath.
My name is derived from the French - in full it is de la Bruyere, meaning
'of (or from) the heath'. It is also related to the words 'briar' and
'heather'.
As for being pejorative, that is something that will change. Generally in
Britain we prefer it to 'pagan' and at the Heathen Conference I attended
this weekend (along with other members of Odinic Rite and other Northern
traditions) one speaker told how the editor of the Oxford English Dictionary
is very receptive to extending the definition to include Asatru.
Dirk
Shield Maiden
Please, would you specify why you wouldn't go to a gathering I may be
present at? I have been on this group for a day. How is it that you
know my heart so well? I don't recall ever making my faith contingent
on the exclusion of liberals!
I may not have a man around here to defend my honor, but I am a m,ember
of the Asatru Bitch Brigade, and if you ever said that to my face I
would take you over my knees and whip your scronty little ass right
where you stood!
Shield Maiden
them as inferior what makes you any better than them? The thought
> that
> education the
> person who is speaking has.
Mike: There is much literature on racial differences, which I have
read. I don't believe it is appropriate to classify and sterotype
pro-White Asatruar as "racists" who believe their race is "superior" to
another. Many understand the differences between the races. We are not
all equal. We are diverse, different, from different cultures and we
evolved differently. I don't judge all folks by European standards and
I recognize others' folkways are just as valid as my own. Blacks have
their separatist groups, so why is it you are obsessed with White
racialists' points of view, while ignoring Black racialists? If you
are a Black activist, Whites are now welcome in the Black Muslim sects.
For the record, there is no one in the Black groups who speak out in
favor of European-American rights. So why are you on here attacking
Asatruar for their beleifs?
And I was asked earlier if I had been
> to any
> folkish events...and my reply is, If I would have to listen to the
> BS of
> white being smarter than blacks and shit like that I would never
> step
> into any event that spouts sentiment and ideals reminiscent of
> Hitler
> and the KKK.
I have never been to an event that preaches this kind of stuff.
Individuals may hold their own views, but never have I witnessed these
views being brought up in a ceremony. What's interesting is that you
seem to speak the language of someone who is obsessed with a war that
ended decades ago and a group that is pretty much dead.
And if this your thoughts are you wearing you SS suit
> now?
You sound like a hysterical liberal here. Are you, sir, wearing the
uniform of the Soviet KGB? What about the "150 million?" Do you have
any wish to examine the past of the tribes or the history of oppression
of our people? What about the Volga Germans? What about the Spanish
under the Moors? Or are you more interested in regurgitating the
worn-out lines of holocaust promoters and guilt-mongerers? All we hear
today on the media and from "anti-racists" is about Hitler, the dead
guy! Why? Why not talk about Stalin or Mao or Lenin? Why not talk
about Cromwell or something? I am tired of listening to
holocaustomania every single day. IT IS OVER AND DONE WITH. I WASN'T
EVEN BORN AT THE TIME. Just because I veer to the right doesn't mean I
am Hitler personified any more than you are a damn Bolshevik! Get over
it Mike.
Stop pulling your little liberal guilt trips, I aint buying it.
Find another bully pulpit and leave me alone! I will not tolerate your
defamatory remarks against me because I am a honorable person who
happens to have a different point of view than you do. I have not the
power to discriminate against others. I am just trying to make a
living like everyone else. I am just searching for my soul, like
everyone else. My major beef is with Christians, so stop the Hitler
nonsense. I have never even read any Nazi material! I am not a
socialist, like Hitler was. I believe in self-determination for all
people. Sorry I am not one of those freaks who believe racism will be
eliminated by eliminating race via mixing. That doesn't mean I "hate"
anyone, it means I embrace my own folk. I just want the same right to
organize for my people as others do theirs. I BELIEVE IN EQUAL RIGHTS,
BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THERE WILL BE AN EQUAL RESULT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE
DIVERSE. EMBRACE DIVERSITY MIKE, DON'T FIGHT THE EXISTENCE OF
DIFFERENCES. If you roll in the muck all the time, you won't get clean.
You are not responsible all the misdeeds of people with light skin.
Everyone has been oppressed at one time or another. Learn of the
oppression of your own people and defend their rights.
Shield Maiden
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
RedWolf
"William Bainbridge" <tysg...@travelin.com> wrote in message
news:38CB451D...@travelin.com...
>
> Orlog isn't an outside factor. Thew is exactly what you are talking
> about when you mention responsibility for our actions. Some of us
> regard the gods as at least in some important ways outside of ourselves,
> but that, too, doesn't affect what you are talking about. Orlog,
> however, does to some extent. Setting aside "responsible" for a second,
> orlog is the momentum of everything that has been done and said. We can
> decide to go in a different direction, or as you seem to be saying,
> coordinate our "plans" in some way, but orlog doesn't just go away. The
> sagas are full of examples of this. The present is the effect of all
> the causes all of us have put into motion, and many of those causes were
> put into motion for real and substantial reasons. I am not saying you
> should not advocate a different course if you feel it is needed, but at
> the same time, Wyrd and her sisters are "outside factors" that most
> certainly can change things, so that failing to take them into account
> is something one does to his/her own peril.
In many ways I can agree with what you are saying concerning Orlog. I still
believe that with a little effort, focus and unity, we will be able to come
together as one people, I am just to optimistic for my own good.
>
> > need to take the next step and start standing together. I will agree
> that
> > my answer may have been different (regarding who makes up the folk) a
couple
> > of years ago, some things can change if you are willing to put the
warhammer
> > down long enough to listen.
>
> I confess to not knowing what it would have been a couple of years ago,
> but am delighted to know that you are not swinging a warhammer now.
>
> > This is where we differ, I do not believe that the rites that all of the
> > various sects practice is that different.
>
> That is hardly something we differ on. Virtually all the rites are
> functionally the same, but I don't think that has ever been much of an
> issue.
Hey, we have agreement. : )
snip
>
> The future will be Skuld's. "Luck" has a fine tradition in Northern
> lore, and was considered an exceedingly valuable thing to have. It is
> one of the things, in fact, one can inherit from one's forebears, if the
> stories have any merit to them. I should think we could all use a bit
> of it here and there. But, as you would have it; have a nice evening,
> then, and let luck take care of itself.
Agreed!
Swain Wodening
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
> Swain: Are you a victim being attacked because I disagreed with you?
> I believe the only insult I threw was regarding the Pope! As I stated
> in my first post, I am new to Asatru, I am here to learn. I don't
> expect to be reemed for little mistakes, such as calling "heathen" a
> biblical word. Right there in that sentence you were attempting to
> discredit the argument by discrediting the person. Now, that's not
> very tribal, is it? YOU do not have the authority to determine that I
> don't know "spit" about tribalism, as you said. You don't even know
me.
Calling a Heathen a Pope and a libral is insulting yes. As for your
post... I would not call those little mistakes either. Instead of
asking questions you made definite statements folks would take offense
to. And yes, I was trying to discredit you by pointing out your lack of
knowledge. You just admited you are new to Asatru, it seems to prove
what I thought. As for having the authority to determine what you
know... yes, I do have that authority, I have the authority to
determine my own opinion whether I know you or not. The same arguement
you just made however could be applied to you asking if i felt a victim,
calling me a liberal, and the Pope. If you dish it out, learn to take
it.
> What, do you expect me to be a good tribal member and just agree with
> you? Is that tribalism? Are you being tribal when you say we should
> throw out those with views you don't care for because you don't like
> the image problem created by racialists?
> My kind of tribalism is individualistic, not authoritarian. Though
> there was always a leadership presence within the tribes, but thier
> folkways were individualistic in nature. Just because they
> collaborated with each other does not mean they were dependent on an
> all-powerful leader. Which brings me to the point that leaders weren't
> necessarily the political police, they had other issues that required
> leadership.
Well, see first off you are not a member of my tribe for one thing. For
another it is not an image problem caused by racialist but the sort of
problems they cause in furthering the gap between Folkish and
Universialists which has been closing. If you recall I also attacked
the "PC Universialists." I hit both extremes.
> You CAN be a tribalist and disagree (heartily) with others. That is
not
> a contradiction. Where, sir, did I "deny" you the right to try to
> "heal" the wounds allegedly caused by others? I disagreed with the
> concept of having Asatru ruled with an iron-fisted leader who keeps
> tabs on the political correctness of the folk. This concern of yours
is
> based on what non-tribal members think. Who cares what they think?
No
> where in your short post was a refutation or even an attempt at
> discussion of the points I brought forth.
> Is this the way a "leader" behaves himself? Perhaps it is you who
> doesn't know "spit" about tribalism. When a member of the tribe
> disagrees, a leader will listen and open the discussion up for debate,
> not try to body slam those with opposing points of views in an effort
> to discredit the person as a way of closing off the discussion.
>
What points???? ALl I saw was a load of propoganda, and I do believe i
did address them and you chose to ignore them. As for discrefiting
people, you seem to be the expert at that. Here, because I repsonded to
your points, and you chose to ignore that, you are accusing me of not
being a good leader. This is esp. silly, when I am not a member of your
tribe. You see part of tribalist thought is that within Heathenry there
are many tribes. You are not a member of mine, so I am not necessarily
requred as a leader to answer your questions. However, usually I do if
you ask nicely and do not call me a liberal nd the Pope for merely
wanting folks to get along, and bashing the extremists for standing in
the way of that. I think most of the folks here will tell you i cna be
very reasonable and open about my views.
Frith!
Swain
--
Asatru and Heathen Deja Community
http://www.deja.com/~asatru
Haedengyldas
http://haedengyldas.webjump.com
Angelseaxisce Ealdriht Webpage
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6909
RagnarS145
>IMHO Swain is not a liberal for tring to heal the wounds in our
>community.
Some wounds are far deeper than can dealt with on group/individual levels, been
that way for years and I don't really foresee a change. Liberal,
CON-servative, "radical" left-right, whatever...most "wounds" heal themselves.
Those that can't generally won't be helped by people or orgs.
>Are your Grandparents Asatru? How about your Great-grandparents or
>Great-great-grandparents. How far do you want me to go back. Or are you
>the type that does not honor your ancestors unless they followed the
>Gods?
Perhaps this is just me, but we went over this years ago (3 or more already?)
on this newsgroup. The relevance of the questions are...? In my case, I was
never confirmed in the (German) Lutheran Church which my mother belonged to.
My grandfather's family came from the highly independant region of
Dittmarschen, Schleswig-Holstein. While there are birth, marriage and death
records at the church on my family, they were never religious in a christian
sense. For landed freemen the land was their place of worship and work of art.
Warrior farmers one and all. Although again, the relevance?
>> traitors some of these universalists are. They are unlikely to defend
>> the folk and more likely to open the gates to the enemy. I consider
>> Steve McNallen's
>
>Steve oh Steve may I kiss your robe
I do know Steve personally, he's not the "kiss my robe"-type of guy. That
aside, your swipe at Steve was meant for what? Spite? Pissed that he actually
founded our religion here in Vinland 30 years ago? Perhaps I fail to see the
sarcasm or relevance of this bit entry.
I would say more, although I'll leave it at that for now. Take care. Hail our
Gods and Folk!
In kinship,
Ragnar
RagnarS145
Chill a bit. She said before that she was here to learn. That's a bit
hard to learn when people are trying to bite your head off. :) Except for a
couple of mistakes I haven't seen anything that wrong about her posts. You
fuel her posts and vice versa so take a step back. Wander back into "teacher"
mode. :) Take it easy... Hail our Gods and Folk!
In kinship,
Ragnar
From: Swain Wodening Date: 3/9/100
>Your LACK of knowledge of our folk leads me to believe you know nothing
>of Heathenry or our ways!
>
>1) Heathen is a GERMANIC word and I wear it with pride. It is not
>Hebrew or Greek or Latin. It is found in Old Norse, Gothic, Old
>English, and all the other ancient Germanic tongues. If you knew
>anything of Asatru, you would know that. I seriously doubt you have
>read the EDDAS or Sagas.
>
>2) There is far more to Heathenry than blood. You need to know the
>lore, worship the gods, and understand the tribal ways/
>
>Explain to me Wyrd, frith, Theod (as in TRIBE). I bet you cannot, You
>are still too caught up in your Xian right wing mentality, as shallow as
>the PCers you rant against.
>
>I am NO liberal, by no means. I am a former Theodsmen and cofounder of
>another Theodish (i.e. tribal) organization. I reject many of the
>modern ideologies as tainted by Chritainity or Humanism, and seek those
>of MY genetic ancestors. I can list my ancestors back 50 generations in
>some cases. I have correnspnded with McNallen and Murray both, and have
>their respect. I do not see blood as required for being Asatru however,
>and I will be damned if I allow a Hitler aplogist like you tell me who I
>can and cannot admit into my family or my tribe.
>
>I reject the rantings of folks like you who may well believe in the
>teachings of the Third Reich. Hitler's Third Reich was meant as a
>descendant in ideology of Charlemange's First Recih, and the Holy Roman
>Empire of the German Nation. Charlemange the Unholy slaughtered Heathen
>Saxons in the name of the Christian god, while the Holy Roman Emoire was
>ordained at the command of the Pope at the expense of pagans everywhere.
>The Third Reich its self was meant to forever destroy Germanic folk ways
>such as democratic assmblies, and replace them with a more Christain
>form of government, totalatrianism. Sorry I give up my freedom for no
>one.
>
>You CANNOT say "I am Asatru" just because you have Germanic blood, you
>have to PROVE it as well. You cannot say "I am Asatru" period
>regardless of who you are, unless you belive and practice it. I am
>descendant of Heathen kings, a legitimate Wodening. But that DOES NOT
>MAKE ME ASATRU. What makes me Asatru is my free willl choice to believe
>in the Gods, and practice our ways.
>
>Your post just proves what my original post was pointed out. Neither
>racialist or PC Universialist understand our religion or give a DAMN
>about Germanic Heathenry or Asatru. They just want to fuel their own
>personal agendas, both stemming from Christian mentalities.
>
>
>Swain Wodening, Ealdor
>Angelseaxisce Ealdriht
>
>--
Swain Wodening
ragna...@aol.com (RagnarS145) wrote:
> Heil dir, Swain!
> Chill a bit. She said before that she was here to learn. That's
a bit
> hard to learn when people are trying to bite your head off. :)
Except for a
> couple of mistakes I haven't seen anything that wrong about her posts.
You
> fuel her posts and vice versa so take a step back. Wander back into
"teacher"
> mode. :) Take it easy... Hail our Gods and Folk!
>
> In kinship,
> Ragnar
Hail Ragnar!
Guess I do need to step back a bit. (-:
Frith!
Swain
Manny Olds
> And a question or two for you: Are the only people welcome to your
> kindred those who have already acquired all of the knowledge relating
> to the faith?
Do you mean to join, or to visit?
Vingolf expect visitors in public outreach events to be respectful and
attentive. We expect visitors at our regular (home-based blots) to be
that, and also be be good guests. One of our missions is education about
the Asatru community and religion, so we don't expect or require any
amount of knowledge.
We have higher standards for membership (including reasonable knowledge
of our lore and practices), but none of them have anything to
do with ancestry, ancestral practices, or anything like that.
--
Manny Olds <old...@clark.net> of Riverdale Park, Maryland, USA
"How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a
naughty world." -- Wm. Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice
Shield Maiden
I understand the word has different meaning to different people. I
went back (after noticing I jumped in too fast) and wrote an
introduction telling a little about myself. I couldn't find the post.
Oh well, I don't like tribal words being used to defame
European-Americans and generally they are. I have to learn to
differentiate between who is using them. It's just an automatic
response of mine.
Shield Maiden
nie...@my-deja.com
"Dirk Bruere" <art...@kbnet.co.uk> wrote:
> It depends on assumptions.
> I had intended to wind up those who jump to conclusions by stating
> that I
> thought it probable that Black Africans, on the whole, were of lower
> intelligence than whites, and Japanese higher than the latter.
>
> The reasoning is simple, and based upon the *average* childhood
> environment.
> In Africa it is one of nutritional and educational deficit. The former
> is
> *known* to affect adult IQ, and so is lack of intellectual stimulation
> in
> children.
>
> The Japanese educational system is also (probably) the most intense
> and
> competitive on Earth. Additionally, the children are required to
> memorise
> thousands of ideograms (kanji), which I assume partially accounts for
> their
> superior performance compared to whites in IQ tests (pattern
> recognition?).
>
> Dirk
Yes but when you generalize and catigorize on these conditions of
enviroment and not make the statement to your generalizations, people
will mis-interpet the point you are tring to make.. And any child will
have the "edge" if raised in Japan in compairison to any child raised in
the US. But the way you said it originally you made it sound like one
was more intelligent due to race. But what you are now stating it is an
enviromental factor not racial factor that forms the basis for ones
greater intellect. And with that said I would concour that the education
system in Japan is better than the education system in America. But I do
not think that people from Japan are any better than Americans.
Mike
Shield Maiden
> Calling a Heathen a Pope and a libral is insulting yes. As for your
> post... I would not call those little mistakes either. Instead of
> asking questions you made definite statements folks would take
> offense
> to.
I realize that, and posted an introduction yesterday explaining a
little about myself. Unfortunately it was not posted.
And yes, I was trying to discredit you by pointing out your
> lack of
> knowledge. You just admited you are new to Asatru, it seems to
> prove
> what I thought.
A person's honor and dedication to folk is not discredited because they
may be a newcomer. It is not as if I contradicted factual information
about dieties, etc.. I do have experience with groups and was trying to
share information about how they break down when the leadership gets
too big.
As for having the authority to determine what you
> know... yes, I do have that authority, I have the authority to
> determine my own opinion whether I know you or not. The same
> arguement
> you just made however could be applied to you asking if i felt a
> victim,
> calling me a liberal, and the Pope.
I didn't call you the Pope. I said you sounded like the Pope in the
context of trying the heal wounds caused by others long ago.
> > You CAN be a tribalist and disagree (heartily) with others. That
> is
Perhaps we have differing opinions of what a tribe is. I have not
gotten to the point where I see groups with a different location as
being apart from a tribe. I consider all fellow Celts to be a member
of the same tribal group, though they may live in different areas, they
are still of the same bloodline (i.e. the English, Scottish, Irish are
all Celts instead of Protestant or Catholic).
requred as a leader to answer your questions. However, usually I
> do if
> you ask nicely and do not call me a liberal nd the Pope for merely
> wanting folks to get along, and bashing the extremists for
> standing in
> the way of that.
I want people to get along too, but not at the expense of throwing out
those who honor their bloodline.
I think most of the folks here will tell you i
> cna be
> very reasonable and open about my views.
I actually have had someone tell me that.I am the type of person where
if I perceive and insult ("You don't know SPIT about tribalism"), I
react. I am combatitive and am used to being a fighter. I am trying
to change gears. I had not sat down and read your posts before I
posted. I read this one and responded immediately. When you mentioned
Asatruar should get rid of those who caused an image problem, I reacted
with the knowledge that the FBI had classified Odinists as a terrorist
group and felt it was not appropriate to blame those with a more
radical ideology, but rather those who would use a few to discriminate
againt all.
Shield Maiden
> --
> Asatru and Heathen Deja Community
> http://www.deja.com/~asatru
> Haedengyldas
> http://haedengyldas.webjump.com
> Angelseaxisce Ealdriht Webpage
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6909
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ajc7h$65q$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <YBTy4.3437$Ar4.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
> "Dirk Bruere" <art...@kbnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > The reasoning is simple, and based upon the *average* childhood
> > environment.
> > In Africa it is one of nutritional and educational deficit. The former
> > is
> > *known* to affect adult IQ, and so is lack of intellectual stimulation
> > in
> > children.
> > The Japanese educational system is also (probably) the most intense
> > and
> > competitive on Earth. Additionally, the children are required to
> > memorise
> > thousands of ideograms (kanji), which I assume partially accounts for
> > their
> > superior performance compared to whites in IQ tests (pattern
> > recognition?).
> the US. But the way you said it originally you made it sound like one
> was more intelligent due to race. But what you are now stating it is an
Well, that may or may not be true. What is beyond doubt is that if so the
effect is of a magnitude such that it is very difficult to seperate from
environmental factors.
> enviromental factor not racial factor that forms the basis for ones
> greater intellect. And with that said I would concour that the education
> system in Japan is better than the education system in America. But I do
> not think that people from Japan are any better than Americans.
And if it turns out that differences are due to genetics, and not
environment, that still stands.
Dirk
Doug Freyburger
>
> Well I guess that dis-proves her theory of
> Universalists being passifists..
The universalist religions are those that wish all
people to become members: Christianity and Islam.
Neither has a reputation for pacifism. I have never
met a universalist heathen, and I don't ever expect
to: Asatru isn't for everyone.
As to pacifism, it is incompatible with heathenry
unless accompanied by the proper courage to be
classed as honorable: the "we shall overcome" stuff.
TT
Shield Maiden wrote in message
> I want people to get along too, but not at the expense of throwing out
> those who honor their bloodline.
> Shield Maiden
Here! Here! A tip of the horn for Shield Maiden. At least, on this point.
Hail the Aesir and Vanir !
nie...@my-deja.com
Well I guess that we will know for sure later in the year when the docs.
finish up with the gene mapping project.
Mike
nie...@my-deja.com
I was tring to make.
Have a nice day
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ajq4h$hfj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > And if it turns out that differences are due to genetics, and not
> > environment, that still stands.
> Well I guess that we will know for sure later in the year when the docs.
> finish up with the gene mapping project.
I doubt it.
This one is going to run and run.
In the end, when 'intelligence genes' get pinned down we can all get a
boost.
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
>
> I doubt it.
> This one is going to run and run.
>
> In the end, when 'intelligence genes' get pinned down we can all get a
> boost.
I think that would do some people good, the only prob I forsee is that
it will be kept to a select group of people. Which could make for a
dangerous condition in the world. All in all a very touchy situation to
be sure.
Lavrans
nie...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <kEcz4.4596$Ar4.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
> "Dirk Bruere" <art...@kbnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > And if it turns out that differences are due to genetics, and not
> > environment, that still stands.
> >
> > Dirk
>
> Well I guess that we will know for sure later in the year when the docs.
> finish up with the gene mapping project.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
I hesitate to mention this because it could easily be misconstrued as racist, but...
I saw an article in a reputable newspaper (NY Times?) a couple of years back in which a scientific
study had been done which attempted to explain why some ethnic groups were better at certain skills
than others. It has to do with genetically encoded heredetary skills acquired through many
generations of selective breeding; basically, the way the brain is "wired" by way of its neural
circuitry.
The article said that Africans are especially good at hunting because they have the ability to spot
and track game, as well as launch spears or arrows more accurately; skills acquired through need.
The Asians are better at processing information and learning skills than other groups, but not as
good at original thinking, which was the strong point for Europeans. And so forth.There were other
examples as well.
It's not to say that one group is overall "superior" to any other in general, but that some groups
are more highly skilled at certain activities than others.
Trepidatiously,
Lavrans
Lavrans
Doug Freyburger wrote:
I have met plenty of "universalist" heathens; the confusion stems from the fact that they don't use
that term to describe themselves. It's a term used by those who disagree with them.
They are not, nor are most of us, evangelical and prosletyzing. I agree: Asatru is not for everyone.
Or as one old-timer once put it to me early on, Asatru is not for the faint of heart...
Lavrans
Simon Kesenci
--S.
saxo...@my-deja.com
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Calling a Heathen a Pope and a libral is insulting yes. As for your
> > post... I would not call those little mistakes either. Instead of
> > asking questions you made definite statements folks would take
> > offense
> > to.
>
> little about myself. Unfortunately it was not posted.
>
> > lack of
> > knowledge. You just admited you are new to Asatru, it seems to
> > prove
> > what I thought.
>
they
> may be a newcomer. It is not as if I contradicted factual information
> about dieties, etc.. I do have experience with groups and was trying
to
> share information about how they break down when the leadership gets
> too big.
>
> > know... yes, I do have that authority, I have the authority to
> > determine my own opinion whether I know you or not. The same
> > arguement
> > you just made however could be applied to you asking if i felt a
> > victim,
> > calling me a liberal, and the Pope.
>
> context of trying the heal wounds caused by others long ago.
>
> > is
>
> gotten to the point where I see groups with a different location as
> being apart from a tribe. I consider all fellow Celts to be a member
> of the same tribal group, though they may live in different areas,
they
> are still of the same bloodline (i.e. the English, Scottish, Irish are
> all Celts instead of Protestant or Catholic).
>
> > do if
> > you ask nicely and do not call me a liberal nd the Pope for merely
> > wanting folks to get along, and bashing the extremists for
> > standing in
> > the way of that.
>
> those who honor their bloodline.
>
> > cna be
> > very reasonable and open about my views.
>
> if I perceive and insult ("You don't know SPIT about tribalism"), I
> react. I am combatitive and am used to being a fighter. I am trying
> to change gears. I had not sat down and read your posts before I
> posted. I read this one and responded immediately. When you mentioned
> Asatruar should get rid of those who caused an image problem, I
reacted
> with the knowledge that the FBI had classified Odinists as a terrorist
> group and felt it was not appropriate to blame those with a more
> radical ideology, but rather those who would use a few to discriminate
> againt all.
>
> Shield Maiden
> > Asatru and Heathen Deja Community
> > http://www.deja.com/~asatru
> > Haedengyldas
> > http://haedengyldas.webjump.com
> > Angelseaxisce Ealdriht Webpage
> > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6909
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
>
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
saxo...@my-deja.com
>I consider all fellow Celts to be a member
> of the same tribal group, though they may live in different areas,
they
> are still of the same bloodline (i.e. the English, Scottish, Irish are
> all Celts instead of Protestant or Catholic).
BTW, English were of Germanic, not Celtic, origin. They kind of, oh,
oppressed the Celts when they cruised Britain for fun and profit.
Shield Maiden
> throwing out
> > those who honor their bloodline.
> Here! Here! A tip of the horn for Shield Maiden. At least, on this
> point.
> Hail the Aesir and Vanir !
I will remember that. Come out and show yo' face.
SM
nie...@my-deja.com
I would be very interested to read that artical na d the research it was
based on does anyone know where this search could be started?
Mike
Shield Maiden
> Well if you read on to the rest of the strand you would know what
> point
> I was tring to make.
> Have a nice day
Well Mike, when laced with insults it's kinda hard to see another point
and if you do get to that point, you are angry, so you take it
differently than intended. I am trying to remember that one because i
do it too.
Shield Maiden
> >I consider all fellow Celts to be a member
> > of the same tribal group, though they may live in different
> areas,
> they
> > are still of the same bloodline (i.e. the English, Scottish,
> Irish are
> > all Celts instead of Protestant or Catholic).
> BTW, English were of Germanic, not Celtic, origin. They kind of,
> oh,
> oppressed the Celts when they cruised Britain for fun and profit.
>
naive to believe such nonesense! I have no boubt they were mixed with
Germanic tribes, but to say they were not Celtic would be like saying
other Atlantic island people were not Celtic. What, did they stop
being Celtic at the border?
Shield Maiden
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
nie...@my-deja.com
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
> #1- I wouldn't tell you if I did belong to a particular kindred
> because
> you seem the type that would use what I said to discredit those you
> disagreed with.
No I think I discredit those I disagree with.IMO. If I don't agree with
what you say I will a.) tell you b.) smile nod and walk away.
> #2- My family were mostly athiests, my great grandfather forced to go
> to Catholic school. He refused to cite the hail Mary and was beaten
> for
> it. Most of my ancestors are from Scotland, and I have no record of
> any
> of them following the ancestral religion. However, I am aware of the
> reason why, and seek out my roots. I will not bow down to foreign
> Gods.
What I was getting at was at some time your ancesters were xian. Yet I
would hope you have pride in those from your past also. What has
happened in the past is the past. No need to expect that one group is
going to apologize for the actions done to another group. I'm not happy
what happened in the past but our ancesters wern't saints either.
>
> And a question or two for you: Are the only people welcome to your
> kindred those who have already acquired all of the knowledge relating
> to the faith? Just curious because of your arrogant question about who
> in my family were followers of the ancestral religion. Is there a
> requirement that newcomers comes from families that kept the old ways
> alive?
Read above post.
> Did you vote Clinton/Gore?
The way I vote is of no concern. But since you asked, no.
> Are you an activist in the SPLC?
No I am not.
> Are you in favor of open borders and the displacement of
> European-Americans?
Open borders where America? Europe? If you are talking America my
reponce is this. America has the policies set and to a degree I believe
they are acceptable. Not inforced but acceptable.BTW I am origionally
from El Paso Tx. Language is another topic.
> Do you feel guilty that wealthy English and Dutch folks owned slaves
> and feel that my children should pay for their deeds?
No why should I Am I wealthy? Dutch? English? well 1/4 of me is that.
Again this is the past get over it and move on. This is why there is
somuch resentment in America today, because people hold on to things
that happened 150 years ago. But on the other hand don't you think that
there is some weirgild to pay for the actions our ancestors did? Or on
the Viking look at things they were dominated and what happened to
groups that were dominated by vikings? placed in to slavery and
eventually absorbed into the tribe. But this is not the case..xians are
the ones who did the salve trade to America. So it is hard to say what
should be done. What is you opinion?
> Are you in favor of preferences?
Well you have to ask my girlfriend about my preferences ;P To be
totally honest I am not sure what you are asking.
Mike
nie...@my-deja.com
ragna...@aol.com (RagnarS145) wrote:
> >From: nie...@my-deja.com
>
> Perhaps this is just me, but we went over this years ago (3 or more
already?)
> on this newsgroup. The relevance of the questions are...? In my case,
I was
> never confirmed in the (German) Lutheran Church which my mother
belonged to.
> My grandfather's family came from the highly independant region of
> Dittmarschen, Schleswig-Holstein. While there are birth, marriage and
death
> records at the church on my family, they were never religious in a
christian
> sense. For landed freemen the land was their place of worship and work
of art.
> Warrior farmers one and all. Although again, the relevance?
The point I was making is to expect a group to apologize for something
that they did to another group can't be done. Any way it is not like
our ancestors were beat up and we never harmed any one..
> >> traitors some of these universalists are. They are unlikely to
defend
> >> the folk and more likely to open the gates to the enemy. I consider
> >> Steve McNallen's
> >
> >Steve oh Steve may I kiss your robe
>
> I do know Steve personally, he's not the "kiss my robe"-type of guy.
That
> aside, your swipe at Steve was meant for what? Spite? Pissed that he
actually
> founded our religion here in Vinland 30 years ago? Perhaps I fail to
see the
> sarcasm or relevance of this bit entry.
>
> I would say more, although I'll leave it at that for now. Take care.
Hail our
> Gods and Folk!
Yes it was ment in spite and I appologize for my shortness in the
matter. I was angry that this preson is attacking someone who IMHO is
doing a very noble thing in tring to atleast create a few bridges in our
community. And she called me a TRAITOR!!! to be honest she would not
know me if I walked up and kicked her in the butt! and she calles me a
traitor and weak minded! These are things that piss me off. How would
you react?
In Frith,
nie...@my-deja.com
This is basically the point I want to make. I don't know were Sheild
Maiden got her information. Maybe if she came to Trothmoot or some other
gathering she will have a different opinion.
nie...@my-deja.com
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
> Mike:
>
> Please, would you specify why you wouldn't go to a gathering I may be
> present at? I have been on this group for a day. How is it that you
> know my heart so well? I don't recall ever making my faith contingent
> on the exclusion of liberals!
> I may not have a man around here to defend my honor, but I am a
m,ember
> of the Asatru Bitch Brigade, and if you ever said that to my face I
> would take you over my knees and whip your scronty little ass right
> where you stood!
Well firstly how can I be across your knees and still standing? Secondly
from the get go all you have done is bash liberal ideals(ie did you vote
clinton/gore). Thirdly careful I might like it. Fourthly I'm not fat but
not scrony either. Come out to Trothmoot some time and you will see what
we are about. From what it seems you have heard alot of "bad" things
about us, and never did any research (ie been face to face with a
"universalist")
Do over?
I'll start it.
Nik
>> > of the same tribal group, though they may live in different areas,
>> they are still of the same bloodline (i.e. the English, Scottish,
>> Irish are all Celts instead of Protestant or Catholic).
Not quite true. Firstly there were people in Ireland before the Celts
ever arrived (between 500-250 BC), secondly Dublin, Limerick,
Waterford, Wexford and Cork were all towns founded largely by Vikings.
Dublin was a slave trading center. The county from where my Irish
ancestry comes from Co. Kerry has a town called Baile na nGall which
means "Town of the Vikings". When the Protestant Reformation occurred
there were wars within Britain that caused a influx of refugees from
Britain to Ireland.They were "Non-conformist" Protestants fleeing the
government of Britain that tried to force them all to be Anglican, (in
American parlance Episcopalian). Some of these people would have been
wholey Germanic, some would have been a mix of Germanic and Celt, some
might have been wholely Celtic but whilst Ireland has the highest
proportion of Celtic blood in its population than any other country it
is simply not true to say that every Irish person is 100% Celtic.
Definitely some would be but not 100%. Scotland, well, the Island of
Lewis which is the largest island of the Hebrides off the west coast
of Scotland has 126 place names, 92 of which are of Scandinavian orgin
i.e. Old Norse names c.f. Thurso, Sutherland etc Scotland was ruled on
and off for close to 500 years from Norway. There is significant
injection of non-Celtic blood into Scotland, not to mention the fact
that people that speak "Scots" or "Lallands" in the South are mostly
Anglo-Saxons.
>> BTW, English were of Germanic, not Celtic, origin. They kind of,
>> oh, oppressed the Celts when they cruised Britain for fun and profit.
>>
>Oh dear, you didn't know the English were also Celtic?
It is true that English people also have Celtic blood but I would not
claim that they are a majority Celtic, far from it. An important clue
can be found in the regional accents of England. For instance the
Cockney and Somerset are stongly Saxon accents, whereas the Scous
accent has definite Celtic influence.
> I am not that naive to believe such nonesense! I have no boubt they were mixed with
>Germanic tribes, but to say they were not Celtic would be like saying
>other Atlantic island people were not Celtic. What, did they stop
>being Celtic at the border?
Of course not, it is not true to claim that the English are purely
Germanic, they do have some Celtic blood in their population.
Nik
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Nik
>> > Universalists being passifists..
>>
>> The universalist religions are those that wish all
>> people to become members: Christianity and Islam.
>> Neither has a reputation for pacifism. I have never
>> met a universalist heathen, and I don't ever expect
>> to: Asatru isn't for everyone.
>>
>> As to pacifism, it is incompatible with heathenry
>> unless accompanied by the proper courage to be
>> classed as honorable: the "we shall overcome" stuff.
>
>I have met plenty of "universalist" heathens; the confusion stems from the fact that they don't use
>that term to describe themselves. It's a term used by those who disagree with them.
>They are not, nor are most of us, evangelical and prosletyzing. I agree: Asatru is not for everyone.
>Or as one old-timer once put it to me early on, Asatru is not for the faint of heart...
It certainly is not for the faint of heart.
I think that the reference "Universalist" means, to my mind, someone
who believes that Asatru can be practiced by anyone regardless of
their ethnic background. Some have taken it further to mean someone
who believes that all SHOULD be Asatru. This last thought ought to be
avoided it is one that eventually leads to strife and division.
Dirk Bruere
<nie...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ak2or$nvb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> > In the end, when 'intelligence genes' get pinned down we can all get a
> > boost.
> I think that would do some people good, the only prob I forsee is that
Like the half of the population that's below average intelligence?
> it will be kept to a select group of people. Which could make for a
> dangerous condition in the world. All in all a very touchy situation to
> be sure.
All new technologies are kept to a select few people initially, but not for
long.
The problem might be that the boost would only work on engineered children.
In which case the problem is going to extend over a generation or more.
However, recent work indicates that 'brain boosting', if it can be done at
all, may well work in adults. In addition, I suspect that there won't be
just one method, but many.
Dirk
Dirk Bruere
Lavrans <lavr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:38CDB7F0...@earthlink.net...
>
> I hesitate to mention this because it could easily be misconstrued as
racist, but...
> I saw an article in a reputable newspaper (NY Times?) a couple of years
back in which a scientific
> study had been done which attempted to explain why some ethnic groups were
better at certain skills
> than others. It has to do with genetically encoded heredetary skills
acquired through many
> generations of selective breeding; basically, the way the brain is "wired"
by way of its neural
I hesitate even less, but...
It doesn't matter how smart you are if you're lazy.
See Mensa for references.
Dirk
nie...@my-deja.com
"Dirk Bruere" <art...@kbnet.co.uk> wrote:
> The problem might be that the boost would only work on engineered
children.
> In which case the problem is going to extend over a generation or
more.
>
> However, recent work indicates that 'brain boosting', if it can be
done at
> all, may well work in adults. In addition, I suspect that there won't
be
> just one method, but many.
Well if the Gods arn't listening I don't know who is
check out this press release
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000314/ts/health_genome_1.html
nie...@my-deja.com
warre...@REMOVETHISxtra.co.nz (Nik) wrote:
> It certainly is not for the faint of heart.
>
> I think that the reference "Universalist" means, to my mind, someone
> who believes that Asatru can be practiced by anyone regardless of
> their ethnic background. Some have taken it further to mean someone
> who believes that all SHOULD be Asatru. This last thought ought to be
> avoided it is one that eventually leads to strife and division.
>
> Nik
Heilsa Nik,
I would have to fall under the first group. And I take that approach
concerning to up bringing of my son. Just because I am Asatru does not
mean that my son has to be Asatru. Myself presonally when I was being
brought up I had no choice. I am raising my son to were he knows that if
he wants to be of any faith or no faith that is fine with me.
Wassail!
Rick A. Riedlinger
Shield Maiden <nehalenni...@mindspring.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> Oh dear, you didn't know the English were also Celtic? I am not that
> naive to believe such nonesense! I have no boubt they were mixed with
> Germanic tribes, but to say they were not Celtic would be like saying
> other Atlantic island people were not Celtic. What, did they stop
> being Celtic at the border?
>
> Shield Maiden> >
> Oh dear, you didn't know the English were also Celtic? I am not that
> naive to believe such nonesense! I have no boubt they were mixed with
> Germanic tribes, but to say they were not Celtic would be like saying
> other Atlantic island people were not Celtic. What, did they stop
> being Celtic at the border?
>
> Shield Maiden
Why my dear, are you not the snippy one? When did they start being
Celtic? I am not saying those that live in England today are all
Germanic. The term English is derived from the name of a Germanic
tribe. Of course there was mixing after they came to Britain, but the
English tribe was, by definition, Germanic. Are you so used to being
attacked that you cannot look at what is written before you proclaim it
wrong? Relax, I enjoyed your posts, was just pointing out a small, non-
racist, verifiable fact. Of what was, not what is. Was not thinking you
are 'naive', but please do not imply stupidity on my part.
Read Tacitus, Strabo, Bede, and a host of other sources.
If you are going to use Her name for something as mundane as an email
address, maybe think on Her generousity to several cultures.
BTW, I would like to exchange info on Nehelannia, if you care to. There
are a few of us corresponding who hold Her dear.
If this post upsets you, well, I can only wish you a real fine day now,
hear. I am here to learn, which implies I may be wrong, but sarcasm
will not change my mind, only reasoned arguements backed up by facts.
Are you here solely for combat?
If so, don't fight with one hand tied behind your back. :)
Rick A. Riedlinger
Nexx
"Simon Kesenci" <tom...@earthlink.net> wrote
> Speaking of tipping horns, anyone know where I can find some mead?
Depends on where you are. I have one bottle left, of the three I bought at
Yule when I was in Denver. I haven't seen it outside of gatherings,
otherwise.
Nexx
> As to pacifism, it is incompatible with heathenry
> unless accompanied by the proper courage to be
> classed as honorable: the "we shall overcome" stuff.
Personally, I practice "conditional pacifism". In other words, I'm not
going to start a fight, and I'm going to avoid those I can, and try to do as
little permanent harm as possible when dragged into them. However, I'm also
going to defend myself as much as it takes... if it takes someone else being
unable to walk for them to leave me alone, then I do that.
Nehalennia
face-to-face with universalists, I used to be a liberal universalist. I
have been reformed. Just like a reformed smoker, I can be a little hard
on my former ideological comrades.
Shield Maiden
nie...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <3150710d...@usw-ex0107-049.remarq.com>,
Doug Freyburger
> Doug Freyburger wrote
>
>
> Personally, I practice "conditional pacifism". In other words, I'm not
> going to start a fight, and I'm going to avoid those I can, and try to do as
> little permanent harm as possible when dragged into them. However, I'm also
> going to defend myself as much as it takes... if it takes someone else being
> unable to walk for them to leave me alone, then I do that.
Your example of "conditional pacifism" carries no resemblence
to any other example of pacifism at I have ever read. Most
people think of pacifism as refusing to do harm to others
even at the cost of harm to yourself. The part about
avoidance is common to both pacificists and true warriors,
and conceptually not a part of pacifism. Pacifism is about
what happens when avoidance has failed, in my opinion.