My joy and pride in observing the rise of the Occupy-99% movement continues to bring a smile to my face. For this unexpected ray of hope in a time of such darkness and despair I do give heartfelt thanks! It has been sometime since I commented on anything distinctly Pagan, as I have been preoccupied with the cruel, brain-dead forces dominating our political life in recent months, but today I want to again speak of things Pagan and attempt to suggest some links to the Occupy movement.
Something I have observed and reflected on with growing concern for many years is a tendency in certain forms of modern-day Paganism to not merely value and seek to revive and revision religious traditions of the pre-Christian past, but to also idealize the social forms and norms of those past times. I am very comfortable with the religious motivation, but quite uncomfortable with the social agenda. Specifically, there is the idea, detectable in some forms of Asatru-Heathenry but also elsewhere, that the best thing for Pagans today is to return, to whatever degree possible, to the kind of tribal society of the medieval past or earlier. This society is romanticized as more heroic and more honorable than that of today, but is also valued, implicitly if not explicitly, for its more narrowly circumscribed ethnic horizons: "the good old days when we could be with people of our own kind." This often ties in with a sense of ethnic or ethno-national identity: "the religion (and society) of the Germans, the Swedes, the Russians, the _____ "(fill in the blank with ethnic or national group identity of your choice.)
What concerns me about this retro-tribalism is how well it lends itself to racial and ethnic exclusiveness, and ultimately, racial animosity. I know a good number of Astruar and other Pagans who do not see themselves as racist, who bear no particular grudge against people of other racial or ethnic backgrounds, who may be kind and warm with people of such backgrounds, but who fail, in my view, to grasp that despite their own good hearts and good intentions, their concern with ethnic identity and the tribal life of times past has a dangerous potential to function as a building block for the most hateful forms of racism, including such ugly developments as Nazism and neo-Nazism.
I have had repeated arguments with people from Asatru and other groups about this, and this posting will undoubtedly generate a few more, but I stand my ground. Anyone who reads late nineteenth century or early twentieth century texts like Vilhelm Gronbech's "Culture of the Teutons" which recount, and often romanticize, the myths and folklore of the Northmen/the Germans/the Scandinavians should be aware that certain lines of ethno-nationalistic thinking contained in such texts ultimately fed into Nazi beliefs about the master race and Nordic superiority. The extreme hatred for Jews, Roma, Slavs and others that fueled the Nazi death machine was predicated upon a sense that people of Germanic descent were fundamentally different from these others, fundamentally superior, and fundamentally in need of "lebensraum" or living space that would be cleansed of these unwanted others.
I have studied Old Norse. I have enjoyed and been inspired by the closest thing to sacred texts for Norse-Germanic Pagan traditions, the Eddas and the Sagas of Iceland. I have spent substantial time in Iceland, in fact, as well as other parts of Northern Europe, all of which are very dear to me. I have no problem with anyone wanting to rework the old religious traditions alluded to in those texts. I have made my own experiments in this area. Thus far I am on the same page as many other enthusiasts for recreating Germanic Paganism.
So what is my problem? It is my acute awareness that in today's multicultural, postcolonial, post-Holocaust, post-Hiroshima society, our heritage can never just be that of some chosen or assumed mono-ethnic identity from the distant past. As much as we may love having ancestors from this or that part of Europe or any other region of the world, our heritage did not stop developing in the year 1200 or whatever convenient cut-off point one may want to use to distinguish the imagined world of his/her Pagan ancestors from the world we live in today. Our heritage as modern people also includes slavery, colonialism, genocide, mass hatred, mass killing, mass ecological destruction, and a mixing of peoples, traditions, races, identities that would have been unimaginable 800 or 1000 years ago. To idealize that past society, to yearn to again be in an ethnically defined, ethnically exclusionary tribe, is at best a kind of escapism from modern social complexity, at worst an implicit, even if unacknowledged and unintentional endorsement of the same kind of ethnic and racial separatism that drove the Nazis.
My problem is I don't want to be a Nazi, nor a neo-Nazi, nor a supporter of nor a participant in anything remotely related or conducive to such hateful ideologies. As a child of the 20th century now living in the 21st, I see it as my heritage and responsibility to seek a positive way forward in the ethnically mixed, socially diverse, globalized world I live in. Retreating into an imagined past of ethnic purity that ignores the current day strikes me as silly at best, repulsive at worst.
Do I deserve then to call myself a Pagan or participate in Paganism? I have pretty much parted ways with American Asatru, because I encountered great hostility and experienced precious little satisfaction in attempting to discuss the above issues. I still struggle with how to take inspiration from religious traditions of the past without falling into the potential racism of retro-tribal agendas. I believe the only solution is through dialogue with a wide variety of religious traditions, in keeping with the ethnically and religiously pluralistic character of our world today. We may prefer the gods, the poems, the folklore of this or that tradition from this or that part of the world, but let us never forget that the world has opened and mixed many times since those traditions were first developed. Let us celebrate whatever god or gods or goddesses we find most meaningful, but also strive to see the meaning others find in theirs. Perhaps in time we can develop shared ritual forms that celebrate more than one tradition, that reach across the ghostly barriers of tribal, ethnic and national identity and animosity to embrace common humanity. I do believe that this is what the highest spirituality of any and all traditions, Pagan or not, calls us to.
I am inspired on this account by the Occupy Wall Street movement, with its coming together of many people from different backgrounds to seek the common good. Perhaps in time the day will come to occupy Paganism with a similar spirit.
Modern-day Paganism or Neo-Paganism means working with traditions remaining from the past. It should not mean being limited by them. A realization of common humanity is something from contemporary human experience, something nicely highlighted by the Occupy protests and encampments, that should be factored into that reworking. I say, make all humanity your tribe, and celebrate the day you did this!
Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts
Opening the Heart to Others
A student's comment from Friday and a film I viewed on DVD today bring me to reflect on the great joy that comes from opening the heart to appreciate others in the world quite different from ourselves, bringing us to discover hidden kinship with them, and the great tragedy that can result from clinging to preconceptions and prejudices that wall us off from others and leave us isolated, bitter and fearful towards the world and its many unknown others.
In a class discussion about the growing numbers of Americans being locked away year by year in our ever-expanding prison system, a student opined that it was easier for other countries to cope with crime and social problems of the sort that result in mass incarceration in the USA because they did not have the ethnic diversity that was, in his view, a great problem in the USA. I was taken aback because this student, a young white fellow transplanted from Brooklyn to the Lower Upstate area, was one who I had previously judged as one of the most intelligent,animated and inquisitive of the new semester's group. Now I feared that he might also be one of the most racist. He helpfully clarified, "I am not a racist," (Whew! great relief! glad that has been taken care of!) "but I just think it's natural that every group prefers to be with its own kind." I was really knocked off-balance by these sentiments, because I might have expected them from others in the class, Lower Upstate having its share of small-town conservative white folks who have been known to support groups like the KKK, but now this fellow, my would-be (in my imagination) Golden Child!I fumbled for a response and then the discussion moved on.
One reason I had some trouble coming up with a snappy and illuminating reply is that I am aware that some very peaceful, progressive, semi-socialist places like the countries of Scandinavia are indeed fairly (though not completely, and less so as time goes on) homogeneous places, ethnically speaking, and it may well be that the absence of ethnic division does make it easier for people to arrive at and maintain a sense of common welfare and human community. However, ethnic homogeneity is much more the exception than the rule in human history, and tends to be a temporary state that inevitably gives way to mixing, moving and intermarrying of people from different ethnic, cultural and religious origins. Think of ancient Rome's barbarian and African emperors; Byzantine rulers marrying daughters of Khazaria, the medieval Jewish state north of the Caucasus; think of Celtic + Roman + Moorish + Jewish Spain; think of the Ottoman Empire, the Russian and now the American. All mixed and mixing, and as a result, better or worse off?
Therein lies the rub. In many places in our present world and also in many times and places in the past, we can certainly find evidence of social conflict related to or even centered on ethnic divisions. Score one for the racist call for ethnic purity, it would seem. But it must also be noted that it is not self-evident that ethnic variety was the original cause of such conflicts; it might rather be argued that ethnic variety provided convenient scapegoats and political targets for those looking for a way to sow fear, division and hatred in their societies, as opposed to those many who did find it quite possible to interact peaceably and happily with their new, slightly or greatly different neighbors. People of different ethnic looks and origins may at times separate into warring groups, but this is no automatic thing; they may just as well come together and enjoy one another's company and see great advantages in joining forces. Or they may war at first and then mix together later.
Put a bunch of three year olds of different ethnic or cultural origins into the same room, and they are not likely to form into opposing military units and start making speeches about ethnic purity and the joys of dying for the fatherland ("Better than ice cream!" cried one hopeful young ethno-patriot, waving his diaper-banner proudly). However, put a group of fifteen or fifty year olds into a room, and they may well divide along racial and ethnic lines and regard each other with suspicion. Somewhere along the way, happy-go-lucky kids become suspicious and even hostile adults. How do you get that way? It seems to me that they are taught to be so by the previous generation: much more nurture than nature.
What I now wish I had had the presence of mind to answer my student with is something along the lines of, "Ethnic diversity is the reality of the human condition. The great tragedy of our world is that this diversity often becomes the convenient target of political opportunists and a mythological monster for those fearful of cultural and physical difference, often due to lack of experience with any such difference. The great hope of the human future is learning to enjoy and share our differences."
Too pollyanna-ish? Maybe so, but for my part, I truly believe there can be no doubt that the future belongs to diversity. I can see this among my students. For every one of my young scholars who might spout the occasional semi-racist sentiment, and then feel the need to apologize for it, I see many others socializing with members of other ethnic and racial groups and forming friendships and love relationships, with much more ease and much less self-consciousness than among those of my generation two or three decades ago when we were of comparable age and interracial dating was still somewhat taboo. I saw the same on the streets of Stockholm and Oslo when I visited those supposed hotbeds of total homogeneity in recent years: lots of mixed couples, with dusky-skinned, mixed-ethnic babies in baby carriages, and lots of Turkish kebab sandwiches the fast food of choice.
This brings me to my film review. What I watched that I found so moving and delightful was "Nobody Knows About Persian Cats" (2010) from the brilliant Iranian director Bahman Ghobadi. The film seemed boring at first, following two twenty-something rock-pop musicians, a man and a woman, driving around Tehran as they attempt to assemble a band and obtain illegal visas and passports to get out of Iran to perform their music in London and possibly elsewhere in Europe. As the story progressed I became hooked by the plight of these young Iranians, possessed of the same urges and instincts as young people in the USA or anywhere else, being stifled by a socially repressive regime for the horrible crime of wanting to sing and play modern pop music. There are increasingly troubling run-ins with the Iranian police, who do not seem to be big music fans, to say the least, and the story does not have a very happy ending. Lots of interesting music along the way,though, which tugs at the heart strings for the glimpses it gives into the longings and sorrows of Iranian youth today.
I was struck by the different picture of Iran and Iranians that one gets from a film like this compared to the one that we get from fear-mongers like Dick Cheney and his minions in the American news media who have been programming Americans to believe that Iran is Enemy #1 almost nonstop for the last four or five years, giving the impression that the only thing worth knowing about Iran is that it is a nation of Islamic fanatics who might be developing nuclear weapons that might be a threat someday, somehow to the USA, and that we might have to go to war against them to crush their maybe conditional someday threat. After seeing this film, I am sickened to think that this is the image Americans have in their minds about Iran. We may have disagreements with the government, but we should think more of the people. The others of Iran may be much more like us than we have been led to believe. It felt good to open my heart to feel a simple but profound human bond with people of Iran.
Though the politics of our times can be so very discouraging, I am willing to bet on human diversity and our capacity to develop empathy with the others of the world to guide us to a better place. The fear-mongers and war-mongers will always be with us, but we can change the station and listen to other tunes if we want to.
The film is very strongly recommended!
In a class discussion about the growing numbers of Americans being locked away year by year in our ever-expanding prison system, a student opined that it was easier for other countries to cope with crime and social problems of the sort that result in mass incarceration in the USA because they did not have the ethnic diversity that was, in his view, a great problem in the USA. I was taken aback because this student, a young white fellow transplanted from Brooklyn to the Lower Upstate area, was one who I had previously judged as one of the most intelligent,animated and inquisitive of the new semester's group. Now I feared that he might also be one of the most racist. He helpfully clarified, "I am not a racist," (Whew! great relief! glad that has been taken care of!) "but I just think it's natural that every group prefers to be with its own kind." I was really knocked off-balance by these sentiments, because I might have expected them from others in the class, Lower Upstate having its share of small-town conservative white folks who have been known to support groups like the KKK, but now this fellow, my would-be (in my imagination) Golden Child!I fumbled for a response and then the discussion moved on.
One reason I had some trouble coming up with a snappy and illuminating reply is that I am aware that some very peaceful, progressive, semi-socialist places like the countries of Scandinavia are indeed fairly (though not completely, and less so as time goes on) homogeneous places, ethnically speaking, and it may well be that the absence of ethnic division does make it easier for people to arrive at and maintain a sense of common welfare and human community. However, ethnic homogeneity is much more the exception than the rule in human history, and tends to be a temporary state that inevitably gives way to mixing, moving and intermarrying of people from different ethnic, cultural and religious origins. Think of ancient Rome's barbarian and African emperors; Byzantine rulers marrying daughters of Khazaria, the medieval Jewish state north of the Caucasus; think of Celtic + Roman + Moorish + Jewish Spain; think of the Ottoman Empire, the Russian and now the American. All mixed and mixing, and as a result, better or worse off?
Therein lies the rub. In many places in our present world and also in many times and places in the past, we can certainly find evidence of social conflict related to or even centered on ethnic divisions. Score one for the racist call for ethnic purity, it would seem. But it must also be noted that it is not self-evident that ethnic variety was the original cause of such conflicts; it might rather be argued that ethnic variety provided convenient scapegoats and political targets for those looking for a way to sow fear, division and hatred in their societies, as opposed to those many who did find it quite possible to interact peaceably and happily with their new, slightly or greatly different neighbors. People of different ethnic looks and origins may at times separate into warring groups, but this is no automatic thing; they may just as well come together and enjoy one another's company and see great advantages in joining forces. Or they may war at first and then mix together later.
Put a bunch of three year olds of different ethnic or cultural origins into the same room, and they are not likely to form into opposing military units and start making speeches about ethnic purity and the joys of dying for the fatherland ("Better than ice cream!" cried one hopeful young ethno-patriot, waving his diaper-banner proudly). However, put a group of fifteen or fifty year olds into a room, and they may well divide along racial and ethnic lines and regard each other with suspicion. Somewhere along the way, happy-go-lucky kids become suspicious and even hostile adults. How do you get that way? It seems to me that they are taught to be so by the previous generation: much more nurture than nature.
What I now wish I had had the presence of mind to answer my student with is something along the lines of, "Ethnic diversity is the reality of the human condition. The great tragedy of our world is that this diversity often becomes the convenient target of political opportunists and a mythological monster for those fearful of cultural and physical difference, often due to lack of experience with any such difference. The great hope of the human future is learning to enjoy and share our differences."
Too pollyanna-ish? Maybe so, but for my part, I truly believe there can be no doubt that the future belongs to diversity. I can see this among my students. For every one of my young scholars who might spout the occasional semi-racist sentiment, and then feel the need to apologize for it, I see many others socializing with members of other ethnic and racial groups and forming friendships and love relationships, with much more ease and much less self-consciousness than among those of my generation two or three decades ago when we were of comparable age and interracial dating was still somewhat taboo. I saw the same on the streets of Stockholm and Oslo when I visited those supposed hotbeds of total homogeneity in recent years: lots of mixed couples, with dusky-skinned, mixed-ethnic babies in baby carriages, and lots of Turkish kebab sandwiches the fast food of choice.
This brings me to my film review. What I watched that I found so moving and delightful was "Nobody Knows About Persian Cats" (2010) from the brilliant Iranian director Bahman Ghobadi. The film seemed boring at first, following two twenty-something rock-pop musicians, a man and a woman, driving around Tehran as they attempt to assemble a band and obtain illegal visas and passports to get out of Iran to perform their music in London and possibly elsewhere in Europe. As the story progressed I became hooked by the plight of these young Iranians, possessed of the same urges and instincts as young people in the USA or anywhere else, being stifled by a socially repressive regime for the horrible crime of wanting to sing and play modern pop music. There are increasingly troubling run-ins with the Iranian police, who do not seem to be big music fans, to say the least, and the story does not have a very happy ending. Lots of interesting music along the way,though, which tugs at the heart strings for the glimpses it gives into the longings and sorrows of Iranian youth today.
I was struck by the different picture of Iran and Iranians that one gets from a film like this compared to the one that we get from fear-mongers like Dick Cheney and his minions in the American news media who have been programming Americans to believe that Iran is Enemy #1 almost nonstop for the last four or five years, giving the impression that the only thing worth knowing about Iran is that it is a nation of Islamic fanatics who might be developing nuclear weapons that might be a threat someday, somehow to the USA, and that we might have to go to war against them to crush their maybe conditional someday threat. After seeing this film, I am sickened to think that this is the image Americans have in their minds about Iran. We may have disagreements with the government, but we should think more of the people. The others of Iran may be much more like us than we have been led to believe. It felt good to open my heart to feel a simple but profound human bond with people of Iran.
Though the politics of our times can be so very discouraging, I am willing to bet on human diversity and our capacity to develop empathy with the others of the world to guide us to a better place. The fear-mongers and war-mongers will always be with us, but we can change the station and listen to other tunes if we want to.
The film is very strongly recommended!
Unthinking America
This Political Pagan has been silent for some time not only because of end-of-semester exhaustion but also due to despair and depression about recent events in the USA. First, the April 5th explosion and 29 deaths in the West Virginia coal mine operated by the Massey Energy Company, which investigators have found to possess a disgusting record of violations of safety practices that practically guaranteed that a disaster like this would come to pass sooner or later.
Then came the fiery collapse of British Petroleum's Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20th, with equally brazen corporate carelessness causing 11 deaths and a hellish future of environmental devastation through the spreading plume of poisonous oil and the equally poisonous chemicals being poured into the Gulf to disperse the oil.
Then came April 23rd, when Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed into law a set of measures empowering state police to interrogate any person suspected of being an undocumented alien or "illegal immigrant," and to arrest any such person found to be without proper identification papers. This controversial law split the country down the middle between those in favor of such harsh treatment of suspected illegal immigrants, and those who oppose this legislation for promoting anti-Hispanic prejudice and whittling away at the Fourth Amendment constitutional protection against "unreasonable search and seizure." The passage of what was widely felt by Hispanics, and others concerned with civil rights and the country's sad legacy of racial prejudice, to be essentially anti-Hispanic legislation echoed Arizona's earlier history of resisting accepting the designation of a holiday for the slain Civil Rights hero Martin Luther King.
Next came the Rachel Maddow interview on May 19th with Republican primary winner and presumed Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul, son of the past libertarian Presidential candidate Ron Paul and named for the libertarian philosopher Ayn Rand. In this interview, Paul expressed reservations about the section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that prohibits private businesses from discriminating against people on the basis of race, creed, national origin and so forth. Though Rand claimed to support the concept of opposing racial discrimination, he felt bound by libertarian principle to reject government intervention in the economic sphere, such as the government requiring restaurants to serve African-America or other minority patrons, as mandated by civil rights legislation. To Rand and his libertarian compatriots, it is more important to allow private businesses total freedom, including the freedom to discriminate, than for government authorities to take action to prevent abuses perpetrated by private businesses.
Finally, just a few days later, Rand applied similar reasoning to the oil spill disaster in the Gulf, arguing that it was "un-American" for President Obama to harshly criticize BP for the ecological holocaust that it had unleashed through its carelessness. Freedom of business trumps government regulation and protection every time, for Rand and his followers. "America" seems to be synonymous with business and corporate interests, not the needs and rights of others in American society.
In my analysis, this depressing sequence of events has a common denominator of cruel and selfish thoughtlessness, which I fear is becoming the default setting for American morality. The corporate masters of Massey Energy and BP clearly were not thinking about the safety of their workers when they pushed for faster production and skirted the limits of legal guidelines and accepted practices within their respective industries, nor were they thinking carefully about the environmental consequences of their extractive procedures. They were only thinking about how to maximize profits in the short term.
According to Rand Paul, this is as it should be. In the old Calvin Coolidge adage, "The business of America is business." Civil rights and environmental concerns may have their place, but their place is not to stand in the way of private business or corporate profits. The question of what kind of America we will have if our civil rights are trampled upon and our environment fouled into toxicity is irrelevant. If the corporations make profit, if quarterly dividends are positive, if the Dow Jones index goes up three hundred points instead of down three hundred points, this is all that matters.
The ruthless nature of the American economy, its tendency to divide society into winners and losers, with many more losers than winners, invites resentment, scapegoating and paranoia. Even as corporate profits for companies like BP swell to mind-boggling proportions, many Americans find themselves out of work, and even those who are employed often enjoy little job security and dwindling job benefits, their debt level rising much faster than their wages, with the interest on their debt swelling the profits of bank and credit card companies. Bankruptcies, foreclosures, millions unemployed, and huge profits for Wall Street.
With such storm clouds on the horizon, what is the solution of political leaders like the governor of Arizona? Direct people's attention elsewhere; find the vulnerable scapegoat; prepare the sacrificial victim. Blame it on the immigrants. Blame it on those dark-skinned, Spanish-speaking Latinos. They did it all. They brought down the economy in 2007-08. They created the financial regulations that give much greater protection to corporate interests than average citizens. It was those damned wetbacks risking their lives to cross the border who caused the stock market to crash. It was the Mexicans who loosened up the regulations on oil drilling that led to the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. That's right, Gulf of MEXICO. The name says it all... It's all their fault....let's arrest them, put them in prison, OK to rough them up a little bit, hey, no one's watching; let's separate fathers from mothers, mothers from children; let's ship them all back to Mexico. With rising budget deficits that make some in Washington reluctant to provide unemployment compensation to the millions unemployed, now is the time to spend millions or billions on a "Fence" between Mexico and the US.
Why is the governor of Arizona supporting this legislation? I can't see inside the workings of her mind, but to me it seems pure political calculation. She is a Republican, dependent mainly on white votes, with Arizona having a large number of retired white senior citizens who form her political base. Latinos are more likely to vote Democratic. Many of the white retirees hate and fear the Hispanics they pay to mow their lawns and perform other physically demanding tasks that they are unable or unwilling to do. For a Republican candidate who is not too concerned about civil rights, morality or basic human decency, there is nothing to lose and everything to gain by beating up on Hispanics and romancing the racists. The same calcuation may apply to Rand Paul as a Republican candidate in Kentucky, though in his case, there does seem to be an actual ideology involved, that of Ayn Rand-style libertarianism. However, as that ideology is totally blind to and disinterested in issues like racial inequality and social injustice, which are irrelevant to the overriding libertarian concern with private property and individualism, that ideology, when applied to real life in ethnically diverse and socially unequal American society, is always borderline racist or potentially racist.
Whether it's the corporate pigs of BP or the politicians happy to cater to racism, I see the same common denominator of utter thoughtlessness and selfishness. No regard for what kind of environment we will have down the road, nor what kind of society. The Gulf of Mexico could become an ecological dead zone, a Gulf of Mordor. What does BP care? Current law limits their liability to $75 billion. They can write that off, pull out of the Gulf region, and set up new operations elsewhere. Note that one thing BP and its associated businesses did with great care and speed following the initial accident was to rush around with liability forms and try to get the traumatized, lucky-to-be-alive workers coming off the Deep Horizon rig to sign away their right to sue for damages. Massey did much the same. These fellows are very thoughtful indeed when it comes to protecting their profits; they just don't waste a lot of brain cells when it comes to thinking about protecting their workers or the world we live in.
This exposes one of the worst dangers of the "privatizing" trend that began with Reagan of turning over more and more functions and responsibilities to corporate control. Corporations and most businesses do not think long term. They think only of short term gain. To trust your environment, your planet, your health or your country's economic future to corporate good will is a horrible mistake, whose ramifications we can begin to see in these recent incidents. This is also true on the local level. To trust your town's landscape and natural resources to the tender mercies of real estate developers is to invite devastation of the land that brings short-term profit but long-term waste. The fact that human beings can be greedy, selfish, and thoughtless about the future is why we have a public sphere, why we have democratic governments instead of corporate government, why our ancestors talked in terms like "commonwealth" and "the common good." This has been forgotten and it needs to be renewed.
To trust your society to the whims of businessmen and corporations is likewise short-sighted. They think only of profit, not justice. The poor interest them only as potential low-cost labor, and they are quick to oppose any effort by poor citizens to improve their lot by community organizing or labor union formation. Their financial DNA is oriented to serving up whatever the most profitable demographic group wants. So if the key market group is white racist, no need to worry about other groups like African Americans or Latinos. If you want a good, safe and humane society where everyone can prosper and thrive, it will not come from giving in to the profit motives of businessmen, because they do not believe in society, only "The Market." Ronald Reagan's soulmate Margaret Thatcher famously declared, "There is no such thing as society...only individuals." The prison and armaments industries in the USA are thriving, and have been since the Reagan era, but few would say that we or the world are safer or fairer as a result. But not to worry: new fears create a profitable market for new forms of repression, called "security," whether it is fear of crime driving people to seek the luxury prisons known as "gated communities," or our endless wars against people who we are afraid might take up arms against us, overlooking the fact that our repeated bombings and invasions of other lands might just be a factor in others wanting to get revenge against the USA.
I am sad that many people I know in the American Asatru-Heathen community seem to subscribe to some version of the libertarian political philosophy. Dan Halloran, Theodish Heathen elected to the City Council in New York, who some Republicans would like to see try for higher office, is of the libertarian stripe, I believe. As I understand it, love of Libertarianism among American Asatruar has come about because they see individualism and tribalism, with no concern for any larger social unity or humanity in general, as values encoded in ancient Germanic lore, and find libertarianism in accord with this. I would dispute this reading, but that is an argument for another day. For today, I would note that the racial composition of American Asatru is nearly 100% white, and the disdain that many conservative Asatru followers seem to hold for government efforts to combat racism and reduce social inequality in the USA does seems to be more in line with the race-baiting of politicians like George Wallace, Jan Brewer, and perhaps Rand Paul, than with the thinking of individuals more commonly understood as intellectual and moral heroes like Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi.
Odin, the god of wisdom in Norse-Germanic mythology, is famed for thinking long-term about the future fate of the world, ALL the world, not just tribe X in region Z or rugged individual Q swinging his ax on a raid on village Y. To me this points the way forward. We must raise not our axes, but our minds up to think about the welfare of ALL, for the long-term future, not just short-term gain and selfish individualism.
If you think I am wrong, go swing your ax at the Gulf of Mordor...I mean Mexico.
Then came the fiery collapse of British Petroleum's Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20th, with equally brazen corporate carelessness causing 11 deaths and a hellish future of environmental devastation through the spreading plume of poisonous oil and the equally poisonous chemicals being poured into the Gulf to disperse the oil.
Then came April 23rd, when Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed into law a set of measures empowering state police to interrogate any person suspected of being an undocumented alien or "illegal immigrant," and to arrest any such person found to be without proper identification papers. This controversial law split the country down the middle between those in favor of such harsh treatment of suspected illegal immigrants, and those who oppose this legislation for promoting anti-Hispanic prejudice and whittling away at the Fourth Amendment constitutional protection against "unreasonable search and seizure." The passage of what was widely felt by Hispanics, and others concerned with civil rights and the country's sad legacy of racial prejudice, to be essentially anti-Hispanic legislation echoed Arizona's earlier history of resisting accepting the designation of a holiday for the slain Civil Rights hero Martin Luther King.
Next came the Rachel Maddow interview on May 19th with Republican primary winner and presumed Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul, son of the past libertarian Presidential candidate Ron Paul and named for the libertarian philosopher Ayn Rand. In this interview, Paul expressed reservations about the section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that prohibits private businesses from discriminating against people on the basis of race, creed, national origin and so forth. Though Rand claimed to support the concept of opposing racial discrimination, he felt bound by libertarian principle to reject government intervention in the economic sphere, such as the government requiring restaurants to serve African-America or other minority patrons, as mandated by civil rights legislation. To Rand and his libertarian compatriots, it is more important to allow private businesses total freedom, including the freedom to discriminate, than for government authorities to take action to prevent abuses perpetrated by private businesses.
Finally, just a few days later, Rand applied similar reasoning to the oil spill disaster in the Gulf, arguing that it was "un-American" for President Obama to harshly criticize BP for the ecological holocaust that it had unleashed through its carelessness. Freedom of business trumps government regulation and protection every time, for Rand and his followers. "America" seems to be synonymous with business and corporate interests, not the needs and rights of others in American society.
In my analysis, this depressing sequence of events has a common denominator of cruel and selfish thoughtlessness, which I fear is becoming the default setting for American morality. The corporate masters of Massey Energy and BP clearly were not thinking about the safety of their workers when they pushed for faster production and skirted the limits of legal guidelines and accepted practices within their respective industries, nor were they thinking carefully about the environmental consequences of their extractive procedures. They were only thinking about how to maximize profits in the short term.
According to Rand Paul, this is as it should be. In the old Calvin Coolidge adage, "The business of America is business." Civil rights and environmental concerns may have their place, but their place is not to stand in the way of private business or corporate profits. The question of what kind of America we will have if our civil rights are trampled upon and our environment fouled into toxicity is irrelevant. If the corporations make profit, if quarterly dividends are positive, if the Dow Jones index goes up three hundred points instead of down three hundred points, this is all that matters.
The ruthless nature of the American economy, its tendency to divide society into winners and losers, with many more losers than winners, invites resentment, scapegoating and paranoia. Even as corporate profits for companies like BP swell to mind-boggling proportions, many Americans find themselves out of work, and even those who are employed often enjoy little job security and dwindling job benefits, their debt level rising much faster than their wages, with the interest on their debt swelling the profits of bank and credit card companies. Bankruptcies, foreclosures, millions unemployed, and huge profits for Wall Street.
With such storm clouds on the horizon, what is the solution of political leaders like the governor of Arizona? Direct people's attention elsewhere; find the vulnerable scapegoat; prepare the sacrificial victim. Blame it on the immigrants. Blame it on those dark-skinned, Spanish-speaking Latinos. They did it all. They brought down the economy in 2007-08. They created the financial regulations that give much greater protection to corporate interests than average citizens. It was those damned wetbacks risking their lives to cross the border who caused the stock market to crash. It was the Mexicans who loosened up the regulations on oil drilling that led to the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. That's right, Gulf of MEXICO. The name says it all... It's all their fault....let's arrest them, put them in prison, OK to rough them up a little bit, hey, no one's watching; let's separate fathers from mothers, mothers from children; let's ship them all back to Mexico. With rising budget deficits that make some in Washington reluctant to provide unemployment compensation to the millions unemployed, now is the time to spend millions or billions on a "Fence" between Mexico and the US.
Why is the governor of Arizona supporting this legislation? I can't see inside the workings of her mind, but to me it seems pure political calculation. She is a Republican, dependent mainly on white votes, with Arizona having a large number of retired white senior citizens who form her political base. Latinos are more likely to vote Democratic. Many of the white retirees hate and fear the Hispanics they pay to mow their lawns and perform other physically demanding tasks that they are unable or unwilling to do. For a Republican candidate who is not too concerned about civil rights, morality or basic human decency, there is nothing to lose and everything to gain by beating up on Hispanics and romancing the racists. The same calcuation may apply to Rand Paul as a Republican candidate in Kentucky, though in his case, there does seem to be an actual ideology involved, that of Ayn Rand-style libertarianism. However, as that ideology is totally blind to and disinterested in issues like racial inequality and social injustice, which are irrelevant to the overriding libertarian concern with private property and individualism, that ideology, when applied to real life in ethnically diverse and socially unequal American society, is always borderline racist or potentially racist.
Whether it's the corporate pigs of BP or the politicians happy to cater to racism, I see the same common denominator of utter thoughtlessness and selfishness. No regard for what kind of environment we will have down the road, nor what kind of society. The Gulf of Mexico could become an ecological dead zone, a Gulf of Mordor. What does BP care? Current law limits their liability to $75 billion. They can write that off, pull out of the Gulf region, and set up new operations elsewhere. Note that one thing BP and its associated businesses did with great care and speed following the initial accident was to rush around with liability forms and try to get the traumatized, lucky-to-be-alive workers coming off the Deep Horizon rig to sign away their right to sue for damages. Massey did much the same. These fellows are very thoughtful indeed when it comes to protecting their profits; they just don't waste a lot of brain cells when it comes to thinking about protecting their workers or the world we live in.
This exposes one of the worst dangers of the "privatizing" trend that began with Reagan of turning over more and more functions and responsibilities to corporate control. Corporations and most businesses do not think long term. They think only of short term gain. To trust your environment, your planet, your health or your country's economic future to corporate good will is a horrible mistake, whose ramifications we can begin to see in these recent incidents. This is also true on the local level. To trust your town's landscape and natural resources to the tender mercies of real estate developers is to invite devastation of the land that brings short-term profit but long-term waste. The fact that human beings can be greedy, selfish, and thoughtless about the future is why we have a public sphere, why we have democratic governments instead of corporate government, why our ancestors talked in terms like "commonwealth" and "the common good." This has been forgotten and it needs to be renewed.
To trust your society to the whims of businessmen and corporations is likewise short-sighted. They think only of profit, not justice. The poor interest them only as potential low-cost labor, and they are quick to oppose any effort by poor citizens to improve their lot by community organizing or labor union formation. Their financial DNA is oriented to serving up whatever the most profitable demographic group wants. So if the key market group is white racist, no need to worry about other groups like African Americans or Latinos. If you want a good, safe and humane society where everyone can prosper and thrive, it will not come from giving in to the profit motives of businessmen, because they do not believe in society, only "The Market." Ronald Reagan's soulmate Margaret Thatcher famously declared, "There is no such thing as society...only individuals." The prison and armaments industries in the USA are thriving, and have been since the Reagan era, but few would say that we or the world are safer or fairer as a result. But not to worry: new fears create a profitable market for new forms of repression, called "security," whether it is fear of crime driving people to seek the luxury prisons known as "gated communities," or our endless wars against people who we are afraid might take up arms against us, overlooking the fact that our repeated bombings and invasions of other lands might just be a factor in others wanting to get revenge against the USA.
I am sad that many people I know in the American Asatru-Heathen community seem to subscribe to some version of the libertarian political philosophy. Dan Halloran, Theodish Heathen elected to the City Council in New York, who some Republicans would like to see try for higher office, is of the libertarian stripe, I believe. As I understand it, love of Libertarianism among American Asatruar has come about because they see individualism and tribalism, with no concern for any larger social unity or humanity in general, as values encoded in ancient Germanic lore, and find libertarianism in accord with this. I would dispute this reading, but that is an argument for another day. For today, I would note that the racial composition of American Asatru is nearly 100% white, and the disdain that many conservative Asatru followers seem to hold for government efforts to combat racism and reduce social inequality in the USA does seems to be more in line with the race-baiting of politicians like George Wallace, Jan Brewer, and perhaps Rand Paul, than with the thinking of individuals more commonly understood as intellectual and moral heroes like Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi.
Odin, the god of wisdom in Norse-Germanic mythology, is famed for thinking long-term about the future fate of the world, ALL the world, not just tribe X in region Z or rugged individual Q swinging his ax on a raid on village Y. To me this points the way forward. We must raise not our axes, but our minds up to think about the welfare of ALL, for the long-term future, not just short-term gain and selfish individualism.
If you think I am wrong, go swing your ax at the Gulf of Mordor...I mean Mexico.
Let Us Worship the Tree
One recent reader suggested that this blog had gotten bogged down in criticizing aspects of Norse Paganism that the author objects to. The suggestion was made that it would be good to devote more space to articulating a positive vision of the kind of Paganism that the author would like to see. This entry is a first step in that direction, building on ideas that have been hinted at and pointed to in earlier portions of the blog.
In Norse Paganism and many other European-derived religious traditions, as well as many traditions from other regions and peoples around the world, one of the most potent symbols of unity and interconnectedness among the many aspects of our existence is a tree often called a "World Tree," a mighty tree which rises from earth to sky, whose roots and branches reach out in all directions. In Norse tradition, this is Yggdrasil. In other traditions it has other names. It is the center of the universe in the Norse cosmos, containing within its expanse nine worlds in all, including ours, the world of mankind.
In Norse myth, the base of Yggdrasil is where the three Norn sisters, supernatural beings who may be more powerful than even the gods, carve runes that shape the past, present and future and determine the fates of all. The Norns also water the tree each day. Yggdrasil is also where the gods meet each day to hold council. It is on the tree that the god Odin hangs himself in a ritual of self-sacrifice, an action which gives him access to magical wisdom. "Ygg" is in fact an alternate name of Odin, and Yggdrasil means "the steed of Odin," as he "rides" the tree in his shamanic quest for knowledge.
The tree suffers from deer that nibble its branches and a serpent, Nidhogg, that snaps at it from below. When the end of the world comes in the poem "Voluspa," one of the indications of the coming doom is that the Tree begins to tremble. It is therefore something of a nerve center for the Norse cosmos.
We also have evidence that the World Tree was of great significance in pre-Christian worship of the Germanic peoples. The Saxons, a Pagan people who would ultimately be forced into Christianization by the armies of Charlemagne at the end of the eighth century, worshipped a great oak pillar symbolizing the world tree, which they called the Irminsul. When the Christian missionary Boniface came and cut down the oak, this act of disrespect and sacrilege likely contributed to the strife between the Saxons and the growing empire of Charlemagne, which would ultimately lead to a bloody war that was in certain respects a Holy War. The Saxons burned Christian churches, and the Christians demolished Pagan temples. On one horrific day in 782, Charlemagne had 4000 Saxons beheaded for reneging on an agreement to embrace Christianity. When the Saxons finally surrendered after 32 years of off-and-on war with Charlemagne, the terms of surrender included the death penalty for any further practice of Saxon Pagan religion.
The holy tree of the Saxons, the Irminsul, therefore bears a special meaning for Pagans today as a historical marker of the past suppression of Paganism by Christianity. Taken together with the Norse myths of Yggdrasil, as well as the similar World Trees of other traditions, we have a very good foundation in past tradition for seeing trees as proper objects of worship.
In our current time, when the world faces the possibility of environmental collapse brought on by unthinking human destructiveness, trees have become symbols of ecological awareness. Planting a tree has become emblematic of concern for the environment, and protecting trees and forests are key objectives of modern environmentalism, a form of "conservatism" that liberals, progressives, and even conservatives can get behind.
The World Tree is therefore a wonderful focus for a Paganism that is concerned with global welfare. It is a greater-than-human reality that suggests interconnection and the need to care and protect our world. It cannot be interpreted to support racism or narrow tribal concerns or self-centered individualism, but brings us out of our selves to a broader vision of human life rooted in the natural environment.
For these overlapping spiritual, historical and political reasons, the Tree is the perfect religious symbol for a progressive-minded Paganism. It also connects us to many other religious traditions in their own moments of reverence for nature.
Therefore, let us worship the Tree.
I invite readers to submit other myths and beliefs concerning sacred trees of other traditions.
In Norse Paganism and many other European-derived religious traditions, as well as many traditions from other regions and peoples around the world, one of the most potent symbols of unity and interconnectedness among the many aspects of our existence is a tree often called a "World Tree," a mighty tree which rises from earth to sky, whose roots and branches reach out in all directions. In Norse tradition, this is Yggdrasil. In other traditions it has other names. It is the center of the universe in the Norse cosmos, containing within its expanse nine worlds in all, including ours, the world of mankind.
In Norse myth, the base of Yggdrasil is where the three Norn sisters, supernatural beings who may be more powerful than even the gods, carve runes that shape the past, present and future and determine the fates of all. The Norns also water the tree each day. Yggdrasil is also where the gods meet each day to hold council. It is on the tree that the god Odin hangs himself in a ritual of self-sacrifice, an action which gives him access to magical wisdom. "Ygg" is in fact an alternate name of Odin, and Yggdrasil means "the steed of Odin," as he "rides" the tree in his shamanic quest for knowledge.
The tree suffers from deer that nibble its branches and a serpent, Nidhogg, that snaps at it from below. When the end of the world comes in the poem "Voluspa," one of the indications of the coming doom is that the Tree begins to tremble. It is therefore something of a nerve center for the Norse cosmos.
We also have evidence that the World Tree was of great significance in pre-Christian worship of the Germanic peoples. The Saxons, a Pagan people who would ultimately be forced into Christianization by the armies of Charlemagne at the end of the eighth century, worshipped a great oak pillar symbolizing the world tree, which they called the Irminsul. When the Christian missionary Boniface came and cut down the oak, this act of disrespect and sacrilege likely contributed to the strife between the Saxons and the growing empire of Charlemagne, which would ultimately lead to a bloody war that was in certain respects a Holy War. The Saxons burned Christian churches, and the Christians demolished Pagan temples. On one horrific day in 782, Charlemagne had 4000 Saxons beheaded for reneging on an agreement to embrace Christianity. When the Saxons finally surrendered after 32 years of off-and-on war with Charlemagne, the terms of surrender included the death penalty for any further practice of Saxon Pagan religion.
The holy tree of the Saxons, the Irminsul, therefore bears a special meaning for Pagans today as a historical marker of the past suppression of Paganism by Christianity. Taken together with the Norse myths of Yggdrasil, as well as the similar World Trees of other traditions, we have a very good foundation in past tradition for seeing trees as proper objects of worship.
In our current time, when the world faces the possibility of environmental collapse brought on by unthinking human destructiveness, trees have become symbols of ecological awareness. Planting a tree has become emblematic of concern for the environment, and protecting trees and forests are key objectives of modern environmentalism, a form of "conservatism" that liberals, progressives, and even conservatives can get behind.
The World Tree is therefore a wonderful focus for a Paganism that is concerned with global welfare. It is a greater-than-human reality that suggests interconnection and the need to care and protect our world. It cannot be interpreted to support racism or narrow tribal concerns or self-centered individualism, but brings us out of our selves to a broader vision of human life rooted in the natural environment.
For these overlapping spiritual, historical and political reasons, the Tree is the perfect religious symbol for a progressive-minded Paganism. It also connects us to many other religious traditions in their own moments of reverence for nature.
Therefore, let us worship the Tree.
I invite readers to submit other myths and beliefs concerning sacred trees of other traditions.
Labels:
Charlemagne,
environmentalism,
Irminsul,
racism,
Saxons,
tree-hugging,
trees,
Yggdrasil
Rejecting Racism and Tribalism
In an interview Tuesday night, 15th September 2009, on NBC news, former President Jimmy Carter gave a courageous political analysis in which he asserted that racism lay at the root of some of the most vociferous opposition to President Obama that has been erupting in recent months in strange,furious and feverish forms, like the notion of some that he is not really an American, has a phony birth certificate, is actually an African, or is actually a Muslim, etc. etc. I have long believed President Carter to be one of the most sincere, intelligent and far-sighted leaders America has ever had, as evidenced by his ability to guide peace negotiations between Israel and Egypt to a successful conclusion back in 1978, and his declaration of the need for America to radically rethink its approach to energy consumption in light of the energy crises of the 1970s. He put in place all manner of programs to promote alternative energy, wind power, solar power, and so forth, charting a course that could have led us to energy independence if such forward-looking programs had not been discontinued by Ronald Reagan and never fully revived by any subsequent president.
To come back to the present time, I think Carter has once again spoken out with characteristic intelligence and insight about a very troubling social problem that continues to plague America: the legacy of racism that never seems to completely disappear, only to go underground and mutate into new forms. Back when many white liberals like myself were jumping for joy that a black American could finally be accepted as a serious candidate for the presidency, many of my African-American friends and colleagues were concerned about what might happen if Obama were to actually succeed in becoming president. Their concerns ranged from fear that he would be assassinated to less clearly defined worries that there would be some kind of backlash against Barack Obama coming from angry white Americans experiencing "fear of a black planet." In the exhilaration of Obama's successful campaign and the afterglow that followed his election, I tended to dismiss their anxieties. Now I understand better what their antennae were picking up on.
As a Pagan, I want no part of this. My anger at these recent eruptions of racism puts steel in my spine to call for any and all Pagans who have an ounce of conscience and any capacity for empathy and self-reflection to take very seriously the dangerous potential for forms of Paganism derived from native European religious traditions to take on racist overtones and become vehicles for racism, even if--ESPECIALLY BECAUSE--this may happen unintentionally and unconsciously.
I am confident that the vast majority of Pagans I have known either in Norse or Baltic Pagan groups or other forms as well are not racists and bear no ill will toward people with non-European ethnic backgrounds. However, the problem of unintentional and unconscious racism arises when Pagan religious groups formally or informally define their religious communities in ways that exclude or discourage people from other ethnic backgrounds from joining in as full and equal members, even if the exclusion is unintentional or unconscious. I would argue that such exclusion includes NOT INVITING people of other backgrounds. In an often racially polarized world, some effort to reach out is necessary if you actually want to form relations across racial barriers and boundaries.
To my thinking, Asatru/Heathenry/Norse Paganism has a special responsibility in this area because the Norse Pagan tradition was--it cannot be denied--used by the Nazis in the past to support their cruel and vicious racial policies. It is true that this was a horrible twisting of Scandinavian and Germanic folklore and mythology, and I am working on a project to specifically denounce this kind of falsification and manipulation, but the fact is, the legacy was established, and now needs to be fully deconstructed and rejected at every opportunity. Assuming the Norse gods have any need at all for anything from humans, I think they would appreciate having their reputation defended more than almost any kind of offering that might be presented to them. This remains an urgent matter today because modern-day far right and neo-Nazi groups continue to make allusions to Norse gods and traditions, and to not fight back against that kind of appropriation could be perceived by the wider public as a tacit or indirect endorsement. I know some Heathens or Asatruar get sick of hearing about this issue, but I think this is truly a sacred duty, which we shirk at our peril.
Furthermore, I would argue that the idea among many Pagans, particularly though not only Heathens, that their project of reconstructing ancient, pre-Christian religious traditions should include some attempt at recreating the tribal society of ancient times, is a misguided and dangerous idea that plays right into the hands of hard right racism and neo-Nazism, like it or not. This passion for tribalism seems to be particularly strong in the USA, and I have been less aware of it in my discussions with Northern European Pagans, but I imagine it exists in other places as well. The argument is, the old religion was followed by people living in tribal communities, so we should do the same. Well, I would say, hold on a minute. The old religion was practiced by people who practiced human sacrifice, by people who had slaves, by people who followed a medieval lifestyle without electricity, without plumbing, without computers, electronic entertainment, or pizza, without any number of things that we take for granted, including the English language, and I do not see that it is necessary for us to completely recreate all of that lifestyle in order to participate in spiritual traditions laid out in ancient myths and other sources.
We no longer live in a closed, tribal world, and I believe that most people, including most Pagans, would agree that we are far the better off for it. Our range of social and cultural opportunities is infinitely rich and stimulating, and why would we want to purposely reject that and seek a more insular and limited way of life? What is the great attraction of tribalism? I fear that in some cases, it is....racism. Perhaps unconscious racism based simply on a discomfort with "different" people, but racism nonetheless. The desire to shut out diversity, to be only with "one's own kind," to conceive of and believe in gods that supposedly only care about people of "our" ethnic background.
As I understand old European myths, they are not racially oriented. They speak of cosmic realities, not tribal boundaries. In the Norse tradition, Yggdrasil is the "world tree," not the Norwegian or German tree. It shelters ALL beings, not just certain fair-skinned people with blond hair, blue eyes and a limitless hunger for herring. Odin is called the "All-father;" what is the "all" about? These are just two examples of how there are strands in Norse tradition, as in other European traditions, that suggest a movement toward very broad thinking and universalism even in ancient times.
However, I will acknowledge that it is certainly possible to interpret the old gods and religious traditions in a narrow, tribal way, with respect to the undeniable fact that these old traditions were often only followed within certain regions, among certain groups of people who shared a common language, who had often lived in the same villages for many generations. My feeling, though, is that an originally tribal, medieval religion transplanted to modern times need not remain tribal and medieval, but can and should be adapted to the conditions of modern society, which are globalized and multiethnic.
I know that some of my old Pagan friends and acquaintances may disagree with my desire for a multiethnic Paganism, and I accept their right to have that point of view, and to be as medieval and tribal as they please, but I hope they will listen to the more basic point that unless they are able to intelligently, convincingly and consistently reject racism and explain why their ethnically exclusive Paganism is not a form of racism, the more will they earn a reputation as either actual or at least unconscious racists. Again, I am NOT saying that these people are racists. I am saying that appearances are important, and that when we are called to account, we all need to be able to explain ourselves, and to act in ways that match our proclamations. Simply saying "We are not racists!" means little if it is not matched by actions that counter racism, or if it is obviously contradicted by actions that suggest racism.
I am however determined to develop a different Pagan path, and I am grateful that on this blog, I am meeting up with people who share a similar perspective. I pledge myself to the effort to move Beyond Tribalism and Toward Universalism. Can this be done with an originally European-based Paganism? Yes, I think so, and future entries will explore this, hopefully with the active input of blog readers.
To come back to the present time, I think Carter has once again spoken out with characteristic intelligence and insight about a very troubling social problem that continues to plague America: the legacy of racism that never seems to completely disappear, only to go underground and mutate into new forms. Back when many white liberals like myself were jumping for joy that a black American could finally be accepted as a serious candidate for the presidency, many of my African-American friends and colleagues were concerned about what might happen if Obama were to actually succeed in becoming president. Their concerns ranged from fear that he would be assassinated to less clearly defined worries that there would be some kind of backlash against Barack Obama coming from angry white Americans experiencing "fear of a black planet." In the exhilaration of Obama's successful campaign and the afterglow that followed his election, I tended to dismiss their anxieties. Now I understand better what their antennae were picking up on.
As a Pagan, I want no part of this. My anger at these recent eruptions of racism puts steel in my spine to call for any and all Pagans who have an ounce of conscience and any capacity for empathy and self-reflection to take very seriously the dangerous potential for forms of Paganism derived from native European religious traditions to take on racist overtones and become vehicles for racism, even if--ESPECIALLY BECAUSE--this may happen unintentionally and unconsciously.
I am confident that the vast majority of Pagans I have known either in Norse or Baltic Pagan groups or other forms as well are not racists and bear no ill will toward people with non-European ethnic backgrounds. However, the problem of unintentional and unconscious racism arises when Pagan religious groups formally or informally define their religious communities in ways that exclude or discourage people from other ethnic backgrounds from joining in as full and equal members, even if the exclusion is unintentional or unconscious. I would argue that such exclusion includes NOT INVITING people of other backgrounds. In an often racially polarized world, some effort to reach out is necessary if you actually want to form relations across racial barriers and boundaries.
To my thinking, Asatru/Heathenry/Norse Paganism has a special responsibility in this area because the Norse Pagan tradition was--it cannot be denied--used by the Nazis in the past to support their cruel and vicious racial policies. It is true that this was a horrible twisting of Scandinavian and Germanic folklore and mythology, and I am working on a project to specifically denounce this kind of falsification and manipulation, but the fact is, the legacy was established, and now needs to be fully deconstructed and rejected at every opportunity. Assuming the Norse gods have any need at all for anything from humans, I think they would appreciate having their reputation defended more than almost any kind of offering that might be presented to them. This remains an urgent matter today because modern-day far right and neo-Nazi groups continue to make allusions to Norse gods and traditions, and to not fight back against that kind of appropriation could be perceived by the wider public as a tacit or indirect endorsement. I know some Heathens or Asatruar get sick of hearing about this issue, but I think this is truly a sacred duty, which we shirk at our peril.
Furthermore, I would argue that the idea among many Pagans, particularly though not only Heathens, that their project of reconstructing ancient, pre-Christian religious traditions should include some attempt at recreating the tribal society of ancient times, is a misguided and dangerous idea that plays right into the hands of hard right racism and neo-Nazism, like it or not. This passion for tribalism seems to be particularly strong in the USA, and I have been less aware of it in my discussions with Northern European Pagans, but I imagine it exists in other places as well. The argument is, the old religion was followed by people living in tribal communities, so we should do the same. Well, I would say, hold on a minute. The old religion was practiced by people who practiced human sacrifice, by people who had slaves, by people who followed a medieval lifestyle without electricity, without plumbing, without computers, electronic entertainment, or pizza, without any number of things that we take for granted, including the English language, and I do not see that it is necessary for us to completely recreate all of that lifestyle in order to participate in spiritual traditions laid out in ancient myths and other sources.
We no longer live in a closed, tribal world, and I believe that most people, including most Pagans, would agree that we are far the better off for it. Our range of social and cultural opportunities is infinitely rich and stimulating, and why would we want to purposely reject that and seek a more insular and limited way of life? What is the great attraction of tribalism? I fear that in some cases, it is....racism. Perhaps unconscious racism based simply on a discomfort with "different" people, but racism nonetheless. The desire to shut out diversity, to be only with "one's own kind," to conceive of and believe in gods that supposedly only care about people of "our" ethnic background.
As I understand old European myths, they are not racially oriented. They speak of cosmic realities, not tribal boundaries. In the Norse tradition, Yggdrasil is the "world tree," not the Norwegian or German tree. It shelters ALL beings, not just certain fair-skinned people with blond hair, blue eyes and a limitless hunger for herring. Odin is called the "All-father;" what is the "all" about? These are just two examples of how there are strands in Norse tradition, as in other European traditions, that suggest a movement toward very broad thinking and universalism even in ancient times.
However, I will acknowledge that it is certainly possible to interpret the old gods and religious traditions in a narrow, tribal way, with respect to the undeniable fact that these old traditions were often only followed within certain regions, among certain groups of people who shared a common language, who had often lived in the same villages for many generations. My feeling, though, is that an originally tribal, medieval religion transplanted to modern times need not remain tribal and medieval, but can and should be adapted to the conditions of modern society, which are globalized and multiethnic.
I know that some of my old Pagan friends and acquaintances may disagree with my desire for a multiethnic Paganism, and I accept their right to have that point of view, and to be as medieval and tribal as they please, but I hope they will listen to the more basic point that unless they are able to intelligently, convincingly and consistently reject racism and explain why their ethnically exclusive Paganism is not a form of racism, the more will they earn a reputation as either actual or at least unconscious racists. Again, I am NOT saying that these people are racists. I am saying that appearances are important, and that when we are called to account, we all need to be able to explain ourselves, and to act in ways that match our proclamations. Simply saying "We are not racists!" means little if it is not matched by actions that counter racism, or if it is obviously contradicted by actions that suggest racism.
I am however determined to develop a different Pagan path, and I am grateful that on this blog, I am meeting up with people who share a similar perspective. I pledge myself to the effort to move Beyond Tribalism and Toward Universalism. Can this be done with an originally European-based Paganism? Yes, I think so, and future entries will explore this, hopefully with the active input of blog readers.
Labels:
Asatru,
Asatru. Heathenry,
Barack Obama,
herring,
Jimmy Carter,
Nazism,
neo-Nazism,
Paganism,
racism,
tribalism
Thinking in terms of heritage, not race
Tonight, let me start by saying I am very gratified by the thoughtful responses my blog entries are receiving. Click on the "comments" button below each blog entry to see these fine contributions. I do have veto power to publish or not publish comments, but it will be my policy to try to publish all comments except those that are vicious and abusive. One respondent queries why I am focusing on the problem of racist or Nazi attitudes within Asatru/Heathenry, as opposed to other Pagan groups with similar issues. This is a valid complaint which I take seriously, and in response I would have to say that first of all, it is beyond my knowledge and abilities to explore this issue in all the different possible varieties of Paganism that are out there. Asatru is what I know best and what most concerns me, but I would hope the author of that complaint understands that I am a supporter of Asatru. I am speaking from "within the family," so to speak, and not concerned with sugarcoating difficult issues to create a more pleasant public image. Future postings will deal with other Pagan groups, I can assure you of that.
As my earlier post explained, in a passage which I fear may have been overlooked, my mind is fixed on the Asatru-Nazi-racism problem these days because I have been working on a scholarly article specifically intended to debunk the association between Asatru/Heathenry and Nazism/neo-Nazism. As my Asatru friends and colleagues are all non-racist and anti-Nazi,to the best of my knowledge, I had started this project expecting it would be EASY to disentangle Asatru from Nazism and racism, but the sticky issue I have run across is that there are indeed a small number of neo-Nazis who purport to be believers in the Norse gods, and that in addition to that, there are many Asatru believers, who are by no means neo-Nazis, who place a high priority on ancestral ethnic identity that in my view is potentially problematic, because it does sometimes seem to walk a line between pride in heritage and a possible unconscious attitude of racism.
This is very personal to me because my first attempt to reach out to an Asatru group
back in the 1980s introduced me to a white supremacist, ultra-racist version of
Asatru based in Florida that so disgusted me that I avoided all contact with
Asatru or Heathen people for many years. It was only when I lived in Iceland in the mid-1990s and got to know people in the Asatru Fellowship there that I felt reassured that Asatru could truly be a spiritual movement and not a racist one. As some of you know, I am an academic and have researched and published on Asatru in scholarly publications, and in my writings, I have always tried to defend Asatru against the charge that it is racist, and this includes my current research project about Asatru groups' efforts to dissociate themselves from any kind of racism, neo-Nazism, etc.
In another forum, I had an exchange with an Asatru believer who spoke about "having pride in one's own race" as a key element of their interest in and faith in Asatru. In approaching Asatru or other forms of Paganism I would like to express an alternate point of view. I don't see Asatru being about pride in the "white race" at all. I see it as a matter of loving and taking pride in the spiritual dimension of the cultural heritage of Scandinavia and/or Germanic Europe, not the "white race" per se. Being white or Caucasian is not any special achievement; it is just an accident of birth. However, learning about Scandinavian/Germanic heritage,
developing a sense of spirituality rooted in that heritage--now THAT is an
achievement, based on an intelligent thought-process and a personal decision.
I take pride in the people I know who have worked hard to cultivate an
Asatru/Heathen spirituality, but it is not because they are white. If I were to
meet a person of African or Latino descent who had similarly dedicated him or
herself to Asatru/Heathen spirituality, I would welcome them, and I hope you
would too, and I would not think any less of them because of which color womb
they fell out of. I don' t think the circumstances of our birth are really so important, as they are quite arbitrary and beyond our control, unless you believe that our birth-situation is determined by karma or something like that. In my thinking, what is far more important is what we make of ourselves after our birth, through our own effort, intelligence and understanding. I know plenty of white people who are cretins and jerks, and aside from our sharing the same pale skin,I don't really feel all that much in common with them. I have lived in Japan and felt much more in common with people I met there who impressed me with their nobility of character than with many ignorant, closed-minded, self-satisfied white people I meet in America. On the religious level, most white Americans are Christians, as I am sure you have also noticed!, so I also don't feel any particular "white" spirituality that bonds us together. This is why I believe Asatru or Heathenry is best defined in terms of a particular spiritual-cultural heritage, not a particular race.
I see the same applying to other forms of Paganism based on the past cultural heritage of a particular region, such as Slavic, Celtic, Baltic, etc. If you relate well to that heritage, and find that it exerts a spiritual pull on you, then it is well and good for you to develop spiritual practices based on that heritage, even if you are of a quite different ancestry. Of course, if you have ancestry related to a particular region and cultural tradition, that might be all the more reason why you would feel attracted to it, and I know many Asatru believers reason thus. Where I part ways with some is that I do not believe ancestry, or race, should be the key criterion of faith or fellowship. It is just one possible path up a very high mountain.
Certainly the gods, whatever they may be or how we may conceive of and connect to them, are beyond race and narrow tribal boundaries, and I cannot believe they mean for us to be narrow and limited in our understanding of the world and approach to life. The Vikings were all about expansion and connection to other parts and peoples of the world, were they not?
All for now.
As my earlier post explained, in a passage which I fear may have been overlooked, my mind is fixed on the Asatru-Nazi-racism problem these days because I have been working on a scholarly article specifically intended to debunk the association between Asatru/Heathenry and Nazism/neo-Nazism. As my Asatru friends and colleagues are all non-racist and anti-Nazi,to the best of my knowledge, I had started this project expecting it would be EASY to disentangle Asatru from Nazism and racism, but the sticky issue I have run across is that there are indeed a small number of neo-Nazis who purport to be believers in the Norse gods, and that in addition to that, there are many Asatru believers, who are by no means neo-Nazis, who place a high priority on ancestral ethnic identity that in my view is potentially problematic, because it does sometimes seem to walk a line between pride in heritage and a possible unconscious attitude of racism.
This is very personal to me because my first attempt to reach out to an Asatru group
back in the 1980s introduced me to a white supremacist, ultra-racist version of
Asatru based in Florida that so disgusted me that I avoided all contact with
Asatru or Heathen people for many years. It was only when I lived in Iceland in the mid-1990s and got to know people in the Asatru Fellowship there that I felt reassured that Asatru could truly be a spiritual movement and not a racist one. As some of you know, I am an academic and have researched and published on Asatru in scholarly publications, and in my writings, I have always tried to defend Asatru against the charge that it is racist, and this includes my current research project about Asatru groups' efforts to dissociate themselves from any kind of racism, neo-Nazism, etc.
In another forum, I had an exchange with an Asatru believer who spoke about "having pride in one's own race" as a key element of their interest in and faith in Asatru. In approaching Asatru or other forms of Paganism I would like to express an alternate point of view. I don't see Asatru being about pride in the "white race" at all. I see it as a matter of loving and taking pride in the spiritual dimension of the cultural heritage of Scandinavia and/or Germanic Europe, not the "white race" per se. Being white or Caucasian is not any special achievement; it is just an accident of birth. However, learning about Scandinavian/Germanic heritage,
developing a sense of spirituality rooted in that heritage--now THAT is an
achievement, based on an intelligent thought-process and a personal decision.
I take pride in the people I know who have worked hard to cultivate an
Asatru/Heathen spirituality, but it is not because they are white. If I were to
meet a person of African or Latino descent who had similarly dedicated him or
herself to Asatru/Heathen spirituality, I would welcome them, and I hope you
would too, and I would not think any less of them because of which color womb
they fell out of. I don' t think the circumstances of our birth are really so important, as they are quite arbitrary and beyond our control, unless you believe that our birth-situation is determined by karma or something like that. In my thinking, what is far more important is what we make of ourselves after our birth, through our own effort, intelligence and understanding. I know plenty of white people who are cretins and jerks, and aside from our sharing the same pale skin,I don't really feel all that much in common with them. I have lived in Japan and felt much more in common with people I met there who impressed me with their nobility of character than with many ignorant, closed-minded, self-satisfied white people I meet in America. On the religious level, most white Americans are Christians, as I am sure you have also noticed!, so I also don't feel any particular "white" spirituality that bonds us together. This is why I believe Asatru or Heathenry is best defined in terms of a particular spiritual-cultural heritage, not a particular race.
I see the same applying to other forms of Paganism based on the past cultural heritage of a particular region, such as Slavic, Celtic, Baltic, etc. If you relate well to that heritage, and find that it exerts a spiritual pull on you, then it is well and good for you to develop spiritual practices based on that heritage, even if you are of a quite different ancestry. Of course, if you have ancestry related to a particular region and cultural tradition, that might be all the more reason why you would feel attracted to it, and I know many Asatru believers reason thus. Where I part ways with some is that I do not believe ancestry, or race, should be the key criterion of faith or fellowship. It is just one possible path up a very high mountain.
Certainly the gods, whatever they may be or how we may conceive of and connect to them, are beyond race and narrow tribal boundaries, and I cannot believe they mean for us to be narrow and limited in our understanding of the world and approach to life. The Vikings were all about expansion and connection to other parts and peoples of the world, were they not?
All for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)