The Monarch and the Anarch

It may seem strange for a self-professed monarchist to endorse the concept of anarchism, since the idea of having no leaders is at odds with unity under a single leader. However, I do think that it is possible for such contradictory concepts to co-exist within a single worldview, but a distinction must be made between anarchism as a political ideology and as a personal philosophy. The promotion of the state of anarchy is an ideological manifestation of the chaotic forces within the human psyche which is, in essence, a state of absolute individualism and the absence of any collective identity.

This is not the same as applying the principles of anarchism to oneself, which is something that does not exclude a collective consciousness. However, this is only possible for those who are capable of becoming fully individuated, and will not be a desirable path for those who require leadership and direction from others. Monarchy is the natural state for a group to exist, since one leader is needed to act as the head of a collective. Unfortunately, this becomes a problem once a monarchy becomes a state, which extends the collective beyond the individual, essentially violating the principle of mutual consent and enveloping all inhabiting a given territory within its net.

Being an ‘anarch’ rather than just an ‘anarchist’ means living an independent life and answering to none but one’s own inner direction. An anarch may be in league with a monarch for mutual benefit, but this is something which can only ever be continued through contractual obligation. Once there is no longer a reason for an anarch to remain allied to a monarch, then he may leave the monarch’s ‘realm’ and exist instead as a freeman. This system of anarcho-monarchism is the ideal mode of human interaction, but unfortunately the mechanism of the state has been imposed upon us from above and makes it impossible for an individual to exist outside of its jurisdiction. Common law is present as a way of making each individual responsible for themselves and to recompense or seek compensation from other individuals for any infraction committed, as defined by common sense.

Criminal law is only ever something which is defined by an external authority, which is usually the state but may also be influenced by wealthy lobbies and even public opinion. It is the assumption that the individual has transgressed against the collective rather than another person, and so the state becomes the arbiter of justice and defines what is and what isn’t a crime. The problem with the application of criminal law is that if the state becomes abusive (and at this point, all are in some form or another), then it means that the law will be used to persecute those who are not truly criminals, only dissidents, even if they are non-violent.

It is for this reason that all over the world we must endure laws enacted against freedom of speech and thought, personal possession of weapons and substances and basic rights to natural utilities. Every aspect of human existence is becoming increasingly regulated and scrutinized, to the point where more and more just can’t handle the unnatural conditions that this fosters and choose to end their lives or those of others. If we are not allowed to exist as individuals, then the human endeavour becomes reduced to what the collective deems to be worthwhile, which becomes impossible to break free from once a state is established. While it is certainly true that there must be some level of social control employed, it must be based on divine principles, which are discovered from within and transcend the ego. An individual who can utilize their talents to direct and employ the service of others is only able to act as an effective monarch if he is aware of his own responsibilities to his kinsmen. It is not about having absolute control over others and interfering in as many aspects of their lives as possible.

In Britain, we used to have elective monarchies, which functioned on the basis of all freemen gathering together to vote for the one who was seen to be the best leader. This was known among the Norsemen as the álthing, and it was through the selection process that the best man from among the nobility, the jarl, was drawn, who was the spiritual leader of the tribe. There were equivalents in all of the various British cultures, and it was only with the Romans that we were subjected to state tyranny. Thankfully, they never managed to conquer Scotland, and so here the old ways continued for longer.

However, after the Normans led by William the Bastard gained a foothold in England, the concept of the state was introduced to Scotland with the reforms of David I, who sought to centralize his authority and established a system of permanent primogeniture and hereditary monarchy. Ever since then, we have undergone the increasing encroachment of the state into our lives, beginning with the so-called ‘divinely appointed’ Medieval monarchs, who later became ‘constitutional monarchs’. The result is that in Modern times, we have had many a weak and ineffective monarch who is subject to the will of a corrupt and decadent parliament which does the bidding of powerful corporations and banks. Now, the British monarch is more of a celebrity and a mere facet of national sentimentality rather than a leader.

I have already discussed the details of tribal monarchy in my article concerning Neo-Monarchism, and so I wish to return to the concept of anarchism, specifically the misinterpretations of it. The most common attribution of anarchism in recent times is to the communist group known as Antifa, who act as redshirt street-thugs against perceived ‘fascists’. However, the sort of anti-statist rhetoric touted by such organizations is based on the writings of Karl Marx, who proposed the implementation of a stateless society where all is held in common. On the face of it, the Marxist doctrine appears to advocate anarchism, since the undesirable state has been removed and resources are available to all.

However, since private property has always existed among human societies (at least with regards to handmade goods as opposed to land which has traditionally been held in common), the complete abolition of private property means that the individual is not recognized as a sovereign entity. This means that all utilities are subject to the will of the collective, which is the difference between the utopia of communism and the ideal of anarchism, that is the freedom to choose who to work with or for. Absolute collective ownership is only possible with the oversight of some external authority, which is why all attempts to implement communism have failed to abolish the state, as the state is necessary to administer redistribution. This is similar to the concept behind fascism, where the individual and the state become subsumed into one entity and essentially leads to the same result, except that private property is still acknowledged.

Aside from these misunderstandings which arise among anti-social adolescents and weak-willed men, there exist many appendages to anarchist thought, each of which focuses on the individual’s perception of an ideal lifestyle. Some may prefer to emphasize reducing reliance on technology, others to pursue private enterprise and there are also those of us who seek to work as individuals for the sake of their nation. The obligation of an individual to any collective should be voluntary, and each should be able to exercise freedom of association based on one’s own personal values.

Without the state, you have less need to feel resentment towards others, because you then become responsible for yourself and therefore have nothing to complain about if you subject yourself to authority, since it is a mutually agreed partnership where both parties must agree to the terms of a contract if one is made. Anarchy is a term used to describe the state of leaderlessness, where every individual is out for themselves and no collective unity is present. It is for this reason that monarchy is necessary to provide guidance for those who need it and for a monarch to fulfil his role as a leader. However, we should still allow for the presence of the anarch, who may remain on the outskirts of the tribal territory or wander from place to place, guided by his own inner light.

Wulf Willelmson

Reducing Consumption in a Technocratic Society

Distractions, distractions, distractions. Our Modern lives are full of them, especially since we have become so immersed in the use of advanced technology on a daily basis. Our ancestors never had to deal with such a high level of stimulation, and so they were able to focus on what needed to be done. It is because we have access to so much stimuli that we have less willpower when it comes to thinking about what our true purpose is and how to go about fulfilling our needs. Though access to the internet has the potential to massively broaden our horizons, the fact that so much information is present also means that it can be difficult to discriminate effectively through what is worth spending time on and what is draining our energy and time. Websites and apps and television and video games are designed to constantly grab our attention and keep us returning to them, keeping us in a state of trance as we become mesmerized by the amount of options available that satiate our brain’s reward system. This is done primarily to gain exposure and revenue, and though it is not harmful to browse or use these things occasionally, habitual usage is leading to a decreased amount of personal time in our lives that could be put to better use.

It is not so much a matter of abstaining from such habits altogether, since depriving ourselves of things we crave as a result of regular use only strengthens our sense of attachment, making it more difficult to succeed in reducing our usage. This will be different depending on what particular website or program is being overused, and some will require simple steps towards gradually reducing our usage, while others will require restriction to occasional use and some must even be abandoned altogether (such as excessive consumption of psychologically harmful material). If there is a website that is addictive but also provides us with useful information, then it is useful to sort through one’s subscriptions or followed newsfeeds to see what is offering us worthwhile content and what is merely taking advantage of what we respond to. By separating the wheat from the chaff and retaining what contributes to our lives and discarding the rubbish, we will find that we have not only more time to spend consuming worthwhile content, but also that we don’t have to spend as much time on our devices as we have been. Additionally, having a vast range of options to choose from has the effect of shortening our attention span, and so it becomes difficult to have the patience to focus our attention on acquiring skills.

We currently live under a technocracy, and so control over online content and consumer products has become a way of manipulating what people think and how they behave. Therefore, it is important that we ourselves determine what we consume rather than having it decided for us. The psychological manipulation that goes into hooking our minds into thinking that we need a product is the result of increasingly sophisticated marketing strategies, and so it is becoming more and more difficult to resist what’s on offer to us. Having the discipline to know when you are being tricked into wasting your time or buying something you don’t need is part of becoming sovereign and autonomous. We are not forced to participate in a destructive society, we are merely persuaded to. Multinational corporations take advantage of our laziness and cravings in order to sell rubbish to us, and this is no different online. It is worth remembering that most companies do not have our best interests at heart, and so it would not be below them to convince us that something is as good as they say it is when it is in fact not, and even that something that is true is false. There is no fair play when it comes to competing for people’s time and money, as the corporatist system succeeds on this basis.

As a consequence of being told or convinced what is worth our time both in our occupations and during our free time, we are left with less options when it comes to personal fulfilment. The feeling of existential emptiness is what drives consumerism and keeps us enthralled to a market economy that has become centralized and corrupt. Therefore, it is necessary to decide as an individual what should be given one’s time and attention and what is detrimental to one’s well-being. Many of us work jobs that involve being in a state of overstimulation as a result of constant exposure to technology, which can cause us to feel like we need to continue this stimulation at home in order to escape boredom. Others may spend most of their day away from this sort of thing, but it is often the case that this makes folk more eager to use their devices in their spare time or during work breaks because of understimulation. Either way, resisting the urge to spend too much time on our devices is needed to make sure that we are able to achieve our potential and be less reliant on technology.

However, I am not necessarily proposing minimalism (though that might suit some), it is more about allocating the correct amount of time and energy into our actions. Regulating our exposure through time limits or treating indulgences as rewards for achievements rather than rewards for very little effort is a good way to reduce the time we spend online even while being able to enjoy it. Reducing online consumption can also combat fatigue and lead to less consumption overall, as spending too much time on our devices can affect our diet and cause overeating or junk food addiction; especially if our life is so cluttered that we don’t feel like we even have time to cook because we are so drained.

Our dependence on advanced technology and convenience is also the cause of excessive waste, because when we become reliant on technology to provide us with our basic needs, we are increasingly depleting the world’s resources in order to meet the high demand for more technology. Though it is a gift to be able to utilize such advanced resources for one’s personal benefit and use, it is also the case that our society cannot sustain itself without it, and so we are being driven by the need to consume more and more rather than make use of what we have already. Having control over our intake of technology requires time allocated to abstaining from it little at a time, and by doing so we can eventually become less dependent on it to fulfil our needs, leading in turn to less demand for more of it.

Wulf Willelmson

Man and Woman: The Masculine and Feminine Polarity

Too often today, the polarity between the masculine and feminine aspects of mankind is misunderstood. Both are frequently disregarded for the sake of achieving ‘equality’ and thereby remove the distinctness of each, resulting in an unhealthy striving toward androgyny, which requires for men to become like women and women to become like men. This is an unfortunate sign of societal decay, because as gender roles are disregarded, so too are the principles upon which men and women govern their lives. By being unable to distinguish between our own inherent strengths and weaknesses and what we are told by society, people attempt to fulfil roles which are unsuited to them, but are expected to uphold them because of a sense of moral obligation to correct perceived injustices. This particular aspect primarily affects our menfolk, as we are often told that we have an inherently abusive nature unless we manage to hold our ‘toxic masculinity’ in check. The fear of seeming too forceful or dominant causes men to adopt a position of submissiveness, in order to ensure that we do not become the monster that we fear may lurk within our souls. However, this has the unfortunate side effect of making women feel like they must be more masculine in order to feel like they are in control.

Unfortunately, when men and women hide their true selves by adopting the habits of the opposite gender, this results in a breakdown of communication between them and in such a situation one is not able to understand the other’s wants and needs. Men do not need to become more like women in order to control their strength, they should instead be able to distinguish when brute force is necessary (for example, in a fight with another man, as men are more likely to engage in physical violence with each other) and when he must curb his urge to dominate. Knowing the difference between dealing with a man and dealing with a woman is vital to acting appropriately, especially since personal interaction between two men is never the same as between a man and a woman. Similarly, while a woman should be able to stand up for herself and not tolerate abuse, she should not need to compete with a man in order to make sure that she remains a free agent. Typically, men have a better grasp of decisiveness and leadership, and so it often happens that a man would take command and pursue a goal. Though he should not ignore a woman’s advice, since women are generally better at managing the finer details and thinking more about how to accomplish a task successfully rather than deciding what should be done.

Thus, men and women naturally balance each other out, and it is through partnership and mutual understanding that they are able to build families and societies together, rather than ensuring that one or the other always comes out on top. However, what must also be considered are the varying degrees to which individual men and women possess masculinity and femininity within themselves. Though for most folk it is a matter of clear and conventional differences between a man and a women, there are some of us who feel more suited to roles which are not as clearly defined, and so the gender dynamic between a man and a woman who naturally possess some characteristics of the opposite gender will be different than between people with a more binary polarity. In this way, gender roles are more of a guide to practice rather than an established set of rules, and should be made to fit the relationship between two individuals rather than insisted upon in every circumstance. It is simply that in most cases, men and women benefit from recognising their own capabilities in relation to the opposite sex and discovering how to compliment the different aspects of each other.

The breakdown of traditional gender roles has been the result of the increasing prevalence of Neo-Marxist ideals, which seek to undermine the basis upon which our civilization is founded:  the partnership between men and women in order to build society. Through the weak egalitarian principles of Liberalism, Neo-Marxists operate under the guise of ‘feminism’ in order to promote antagonism between the sexes through institutions such as schools and the media. Men are constantly shamed for being too dominant, while women are encouraged to become dominant themselves in order to compensate, in order to achieve ‘equality’. However, all that results in is that men and women become equally resentful towards each other and refuse to cooperate in order to build stable families. If women refuse to acknowledge the forthright and forceful nature of men, then men will either submit to them and become passive ‘nice guys’, or else they become embittered and come to despise women for their sometimes fickle nature. If men must acknowledge that they are capable of brutishness and insensitivity, then women must also recognise their capacity to twist the truth and manipulate others. Each of these traits are inherent weaknesses within those who display either masculine or feminine qualities, and should be dealt with when they arise and should not be ignored when pointed out by somebody of the opposite sex.

At this point I should probably clarify the difference between sex and gender, since there are efforts to convince people that such things as gender do not actually exist, or that they are one and the same. Sex is obviously determined by the presence of either male or female reproductive organs, while gender is a result of hormones in the body that determine how the body and the brain operate. However, gender also covers anything which expresses a masculine or feminine quality, and so sometimes feminine physical or psychological features are present in a man and vice versa. Therefore, gender is something which pertains to features that are characteristic of a man or a woman, but may be present in either. This means that it is possible for men or women to engage with that part of themselves which is of the opposite gender in order to understand somebody of the opposite sex better. By expecting certain behaviour from another person based on their gender, it is easier to predict the best way to communicate with them, though one should not expect the other to conform to one’s own perception of how they should act.

The ideals of how man or a woman should behave are for the individual to strive for rather than to be forced upon others or else disregarded altogether. When we act out of accordance with our own nature we begin to act unlike ourselves, and this is often a source of frustration and resentment towards others. It is not fair to expect from someone what is not in their capability to do so, as this leads a man or a woman thinking that they should be more like the other, thereby becoming insecure within their own masculinity or femininity. Suppressing our natural instincts will only lead to a distorted perception of ourselves and cause us to forever feel inadequate in pursuing an ideal towards something which we are not. Let women be women and men be men, it is not for others to decide how much one is allowed to express their masculinity or femininity, though it is also upon the individual to realize which expression is appropriate in a particular circumstance. As personal experience has taught me, things that can be said or done around others of the same gender may not be appropriate or understood in the company of the opposite gender.

When men and women are able to fulfil their own determined gender roles to the best of their abilities, this helps to foster a strong and stable society with solid foundations and clarity with regards to what each person is meant to do. If men are permitted to be heroic and manly, then they will be able to fulfil these ideals the best they can, while women may lay the foundations of a family and homestead and manage these things the way they see fit. If, on the other hand, men are expected to be submissive, then they may become perverted and seek to express their masculinity in ways which are underhanded and passive-aggressive. If women are told to assert themselves above men, then they may become domineering and aggressive. Though there have been some great female leaders throughout history and also men who worked better behind the scenes as women often do, this is the exception rather than the rule, and it is for each person to find out what works best for them.

In the end, we all have aspects of both the masculine and feminine, as we all have both a father and a mother, these principles will always be present within us. It is through having good relationships with our parents and other members of the family that we learn how to behave towards those we meet who are of the opposite sex or gender, and so those who have experienced trauma or have bad relations with their family members are more likely to treat those of the opposite gender poorly because of a lack of understanding of how the other functions. We must also strive to fulfil the role of mother or father if we choose to raise children, as neglecting this in favour of our own personal happiness will only lead to fragmented families and people who do not know how to be good men or women for want of positive role models.  Whether we look to the gods or to our own parents and relatives for inspiration, we can perceive the presence of masculine and feminine in the world every day, and we should learn to appreciate the presence of both in our lives. Without the union between masculine and feminine, there is no creation, and so the interplay between the two is essential to understanding the world and others around us.

Wulf Willelmson

What is ‘Wotanism’?

The Creed of Caledon is based on the doctrine known as ‘Wotanism’, which is a modern-day expression of the people of Europe’s ancient religious and spiritual beliefs. The head of the Teutonic pantheon as far as the lore can tell us was known as ‘Wotan’ to the Germans, ‘Woden’ to the Anglo-Saxons and ‘Oðinn’ to the Norse. Though the names of the deities in Wotanism are based on those of these particular cultures, the path is open to all those of European descent and one may refer to deities from other European pantheons and even figures from Christianity, which has incorporated much of our ancestors’ traditions into its practices. It is a belief based on blood kinship and the bond with our sacred land, and so it is tied to the seasons and features of the landscape such as rivers, springs, hills, mountains and groves. Therefore the functions of many of the deities correspond to things such as the weather, the sea, the sky and even Mother Earth herself. There are others who oversee more human aspects, such as bravery, strength, wisdom and magic, and they are all described in detail in Angels and Demons in Teutonic Mythology.

The most commonly cited figures in Wotanism are David Lane and Ron McVan, who gave birth to the idea of ‘Wotan’s Folk’ in the 1990s. David Lane came up with the name and philosophy, while Ron McVan wrote much of the literature, including The Temple of Wotan, which is the source of the Creed of Caledon’s philosophy and rituals. However, the concept of ‘Wotanism’ goes back much earlier, to an Austrian mystic known as ‘Guido von List’, who was born in the mid-19th Century and died not long after the First World War. He coined the term ‘Wotanism’ to describe the exoteric religion of the Ancient Teutons, which involved invoking the deities in ritual and emulating the gods, particularly Wotan. This was paired with the concept of ‘Armanism’, an esoteric practice that involves working with the runes, particularly the Armanen Futhorkh, which was revealed to List during a period of blindness and is based on the rune poem in the Hávamál, which Wotanists consider to be the most sacred text. The Armamen Futhorkh is explained in his work known as Das Geheimnis der Runen (‘The Secret of the Runes’), published in 1908.

Armanen futhark stem version

Armanen Futhorkh

Wotanism can be described as a ‘pagan’ religion, which primarily involves interaction between oneself, one’s ancestors, ones kin, one’s land and one’s gods. Therefore it is a ‘folkish’ belief system that is dependent on one’s genetic and cultural lineage. It can be observed anywhere in the world, though only by those of European descent and preferably in a temperate climate which suits our kind best in ecological terms. This is different from ‘Armanism’ in that it is based on the external and objective reality, while Armanism is based on one’s own internal and subjective experience and should be seen more on an individual level. Armanism is a mystery religion akin to Gnostic Christianity, Vajrayana Buddhism or Western Hermeticism, though it is still based in Teutonic language and tradition. Therefore, Wotanism is not so much a form of ‘Neopaganism’, but a Wihinei (‘way’, more specifically ‘folk-way’), that incorporates aspects from other Aryan religions.

While Wotanism has been linked to Neo-Nazism and ‘White Supremacy’, it is worth remembering that many Wotanists  were interned in concentration camps under the Third Reich, as they were considered ‘heretics’ or ‘occultists’ that were deemed a thread to the regime. Heinrich Himmler’s spiritual advisor, Karl Maria ‘Weisthor’ Wiligut, declared Wotanism to be a false religion, and was in opposition to his doctrine of ‘Irminism’, which may have been the intended state religion of the Third Reich that was to replace Christianity had Hitler won the Second World War. Therefore, it is not in our best interests to support any totalitarian regime, be it Communist, National Socialist or Corporate Socialist.

As Wotanism is not a centralized religion without any structured organization outside of each kindred, there are many different interpretations and definitions of the doctrine and so the personal opinions of one adherent or kindred may be at odds with another. This, however, is not the case when it comes to the core philosophy, which is that we are to be gaining and spreading awareness of the ways of our forebears and promoting the wellbeing of our descendants. This is done through personal self-improvement, much of which is tied to the particular archetype or’ god’ which we unknowingly impersonate. By assessing one’s own nature and reason for being, you can aspire to achieve your full potential and become a valuable asset to your tribe. The tribe is considered to be a network of family and friends that share with you a common genetic and cultural bond.  It is a ‘nation’ that is not so much centred on what nation state you ‘belong’ to, but on whom you can trust and rely on.

Much of the work done by Wotansvolk, in the 1990s and early 2000s was involved in prison outreach, which is now impossible seeing as Wotanist literature is banned from many prisons because it is seen as such a threat to the establishment. However, the core mission of Wotanism hasn’t changed, and emphasis is placed on rehabilitation of those struggling with addiction, criminality, violent tendencies or simply weakness (with the exception of those who have committed crimes against children, who will never be welcome among the folk). It is true that Wotanism draws many who believe in Neo-Nazism or White Nationalism, but much of our work is designed to divert energy away from negative and destructive ways of thinking towards productive and honourable ideals and behaviour. This is why, despite the fact that I have written about political issues, the Creed of Caledon takes no particular stance in that area and supports no political organization. Our only concern is when such organizations transgress our natural rights or attempt to silence us.

We have much in common with other groups that describe themselves as ‘Odinist’ or ‘Wodenist’, though we call ourselves ‘Wotanists’ to distinguish ourselves from any organizations whose members may refer to themselves by those terms. The main difference being that we have no central authority or hierarchy, aside from those that are present in Nature between gods, men and beasts. Therefore, while each kindred is led by a goði (‘priest’), there is no overarching structure and connection with other kindreds is based on networking. We perform two types of rituals, which are known singularly as blót and sumbel. The former consists of ceremonies that are performed at holy tides (including Yule, Easter and Midsummer) and involve offerings to the gods and celebration of the seasons. The latter refers to folk-binding rituals which are less formal and include pledging oaths and recounting one’s ancestors and past deeds in order to encourage self-improvement. These are not held at fixed dates and are usually observed more frequently than blótar.

We believe that we are undergoing Ragnarök , ‘the doom of the gods’, and so the world is in the process of being destroyed so that it can be remade. The acceleration of Postmodernism has led to the downfall of Western Civilization and left a heap of ruins and lost and spiritually starved people. While the state and corporations seek to replace this need with consumerism and political involvement, some of us have become disillusioned with the established dogmas and decided to follow our own way. As Wotanism is based on self-reliance and intimate trust, we encourage others who feel that this is the way for them to create their own kindreds and endeavour to improve themselves. Rituals and ceremonies help to strengthen kinship, but more important is the need to fulfil one’s own talents and embody your chosen archetype. Remember who you are and where you came from, and honour yourself, your ancestors and descendants.

Wulf Willelmson

Folkish Tribalism VS White Nationalism

We live in a time when the Neoliberal order of the past few decades is beginning to disintegrate, signalling the final collapse of Western civilization; probably within the next decade if not within a few years. The combination of crony capitalism along with ‘social democracy’ (socialism within a Neoliberal framework) has become exhausted because the central banks that fund both of these ideologies are siphoning off the wealth of the West and leaving more and more people destitute. The resulting strain felt by the average human has pushed many of us (particularly in the younger generations) towards more radical ideas about how to replace the current order with something more desirable. The spectres of the past (particularly those that led to Word War II) have appeared in the voices of the Millenial generation in the forms of both Neo-Marxism, commonly referred to as ‘social justice’ (which is based on the plight of perceived ‘oppressed minorities’ in racial, sexual and economic categories) and what is known as the ‘Alt Right’, which is a combination of various nationalist and traditionalist ideologues acting as an effective opposition to the Modern Left. There also exists a more Centrist aspect, consisting of ‘libertarians’ and ‘civic nationalists’ who claim to oppose both movements as extreme and primarily advocate individual liberty, though they refuse to address fundamental truths about the differences between races so as not to seem ‘racist’. These divisions reflect deep fissures within our civilization and are a sign of its fall, which I believe to have occurred between the 1960s and the 1990s. Now, new ideologies are competing for dominance, and there are various factions involved on all sides that I will not discuss in detail here. For now, we shall focus on the ‘Alt-Right’, in particular its relationship to White Nationalism and how this is connected to, but also distinct from Folkish Tribalism.

 

First of all, one thing that unites the two movements is the resurgence of the folk soul of the Aryan race, which has occurred as a result of multiculturalism and the realization among certain Whites that their civilization, and in fact their very existence as a subspecies, is under threat. The fact that we appear to be the only race of people that should feel ashamed of our heritage for the abuses of imperialism and colonialism has awakened many to the hypocrisy that all races have engaged in such behaviour, yet only non-Whites are seen as victims of White oppression in the eyes of the Modern Left. This even extends to the general Liberal consciousness, which maintains that all races are equal and so to make distinctions between them is absurd and leads to racism. A feeling of not being able to express ourselves as a distinct group without either having to apologize for past grievances or denying our own heritage has permeated the consciousness of White men in particular, which has awakened a desire for the prevailing zeitgeist to be challenged and changed. Thus, this impulse expresses itself in the various socio-political ideologies that compose the Alt-Right and others that signify the resurgence of folk consciousness. The rise of the internet in particular has led to the awareness of these issues and made it easier to consume and create content relating to these topics, and to engage in contact with others who have reached the same conclusions. For many of us, this is an exciting time to be alive, as we are fuelled by feelings of destiny and purpose that have come to fill the void left by our decadent and worthless consumer society.

 

However, in many ways this is where the similarities end, and we can now critically examine the relationship between these movements, and how we can not only work together for the sake of our people’s future, but also to avoid the drastic mistakes of the past that led us to the mess that is the post-World War II West. The main distinction between the Alt-Right and Folkish Tribalism is that the former is socio-political in nature, while the latter is not. The Alt-Right relies on the dissemination of information relating to social and political issues and raising awareness of topics such as biological differences between races and the incompatibility of other cultures with our own, particularly those of the Middle East and Africa. This is achieved through spreading ‘memes’ used to highlight or provide humorous commentary on a particular issue, or through various alternative news outlets in the form of podcasts, blogs and YouTube channels (though online censorship is taking its toll). Folkish Tribalism, on the other hand, is primarily spiritual in nature, and is more concerned with the revival of our native traditions and providing the tools necessary to build a future for our folk through musical, literary and environmentalist expressions. This is twain with paganism and the reverence for our ancestors in the form of the gods and heroes of our native lore, although it may also be expressed through a traditionalist interpretation of Christianity. Though both movements spring from the same source of discontentment with post-Modern society and an urge to reconnect with our folk-soul, the means of achieving this are quite different and the focus is oriented in different directions.

 

On one hand, the Alt-Right focuses on biological and cultural differences between races, and acts as a reactionary force against the forces of globalism and multiculturalism. On the other, Folkish Tribalism is geared towards asserting our people’s existence in its own right, and is less concerned with what people of other races do as long as it does not interfere with our own well-being. In this way, both forces act as pillars of our emerging civilization, one defending our people against false accusations and abuse directed towards us for perceived transgressions, while the other provides a focus for how to build and sustain a society based on tradition and natural law. However, one thing which must be kept in mind is that the relationship between the two must be one of relative greater and lesser importance, with maintaining our folk in a cultural and spiritual sense being the priority with the political and social dimensions remaining secondary. The danger that now presents itself in the wake of the ascendancy of the Alt-Right is that the political and material aspects will take priority, and subsequently drive both movements into the ground, thus destroying our race’s chance of survival. This is precisely what happened during World War II, particularly in Germany. The völkisch movement that heralded the rise of Wotanism as a new expression of Aryan heritage and the revival of Teutonic culture was eclipsed by the rise of the Third Reich, which placed its own importance above that of the German folk once the National Socialists gained power, who subsequently interned various ‘occultists’ in concentration camps. In doing this, it doomed itself by removing the spiritual core of what had propelled National Socialism into power in the first place.

 

It is this point in particular which I wish to emphasize; which is that it is not the political or even racial expressions that are the most important in our struggle, but the spiritual foundation on which such movements are built. It is here that I also wish to make a distinction between the two ideologies of White Nationalism and Folkish Tribalism. Since the Alt-Right acts as a political vehicle for spreading the concept of White Nationalism, I wish to emphasize that such an idea is neither desirable nor possible. The concept is flawed in two ways, one of which is the idea of returning the current White nations to their previously homogeneous states. The problem with this idea is that is proposes to work within the framework of the already existing society in order to advance the interests of our folk, which would imply gaining control of the very state as it exists today that works towards its demise. The matrix that binds together the nations of our world through the mechanisms of the ‘deep state’ (which is collusion between the banks, the media and the state to maintain the current trajectory) is designed to facilitate entropy and the destruction of our culture by removing that aspect which is central to maintaining a healthy, functioning society; which is the spiritual essence of our folk and the guiding hand of tradition.

 

The other issue is the question of race, and how this should be reflected in one’s conduct towards not only members of one’s own race, but also towards others. Essentially, the principal problem with a White Nationalist view of race is that it is based strictly in biological terms, where the mere membership of the White race is enough to guarantee one’s interests as far as establishing an ‘ethno-state’ is concerned. Let me be clear in saying that I have no interest in maintaining the White race as it exists today, most of whom are deluded and sheepish creatures who may not even be aware of the importance of blood and soil in the divine order of the universe. I would rather be involved in the creation of a new, invigorated Aryan race, which is able to sustain itself both on a spiritual and material level. This takes us to the distinction that must be made between the concepts of ‘race’ and ‘folk’, which is that the former is material and biological and the latter is spiritual. This is not to say that race is not important in building a new society, as it would only be possible to build a tribe with other members of one’s own race (or else, such a project would devolve into a group based merely on ideology rather than blood kinship, which is essentially what globalism strives to implement worldwide). However, there must also be a shared concept of what is important and that the divine order is more important than both the individual and the collective, thus excluding members of one’s own race that think otherwise. Such connections based on intuition and shared belief can transcend nationality and ethnicity, and there should be a willingness to let go of our more particular regional identities in order to maintain the folk as a whole.

 

Another issue with White Nationalism in this regard is the focus on identity politics, which begins from the collective and ends with the individual. In this sense, since the primary focus is on the preservation of the White race, this acts as the central focus and everything else comes after. This is a backwards way of going about restoring our people’s dignity, as the first point of reference is the individual. The individual must assess his or her personal nature, their skills and purpose within the tribe and work to become a fully functioning component that is indispensable to the tribe, unlike the interchangeable ‘individual’ of Modern society, whose worth is measured quantitatively and is replaceable. From there, the next point of departure is to the individual’s own family, then to the tribe and the folk. As each collective grouping becomes more abstract and removed from the individual, the more importance is placed on the spirit of the folk as a whole and then we can speak of ‘nations’ and ‘races’. The future Aryan race will be at a point between the spiritual and biological aspects based on a shared genetic lineage, but also on shared ideals and values. A society must have both of these in order to survive and thrive, as an example of one that had the former but lacked the latter would be the nations of Western Europe, while the opposite would apply to somewhere like the United States.

 

Both of these societies within Western civilization as a whole have succumbed to the same diseases of multiculturalism and consumerism, which arise from the loss of tradition and the recognition of the folk as an organic entity. The idea of building a society from the ground up and the urge to form tribes to preserve our ancient customs is what drives Folkish Tribalism, not the desire to return to some glorious past where you could be assured that your nation consisted of others like you in a genetic or cultural way. This is not to say that the role played by the Alt-Right is not important, in fact it is what represents the things we advocate within the political realm and can introduce those curious about their own heritage to other sources of information regarding how to go about reclaiming it. Its main advantage lies in its sense of humour, as opposed to the dour and overly sensitive Left, which is unable to laugh at itself and is in a weaker position as a result. However, when one takes these ideas too seriously, it can lead to delusions about the rise of the ‘Fourth Reich’ and even revelling in all of the atrocities which that would entail. In this sense, building a future for our children and exiting multicultural society should take priority over the political arena, which consists of posturing and all of the basest characteristics of man’s animal nature. It is also the fact that one cannot simply shy away from politics that I choose to address these issues, as this would imply a denial of what needs to be done in order to reach those who enter the fight from the political end first before moving on towards more practical and worthwhile endeavours.

 

Despite the bickering and disagreement between individuals online, I am still confident that we are winning the culture war and have a solid basis from which to direct our future endeavours. Such base behaviour is to be expected among those who feel drawn towards the call of their blood but still cling to petty political ideology and racial identity as the core of their personal opinions. There are a much more significant number of us who are finding that we all have particular talents that we are capable of utilizing to advance our people’s interests. This may even take the form of completely apolitical activity, such as promoting awareness about our history, folk customs and musical traditions, which are specific to each geographical region of our lands, but which speak to all of us on a fundamental level. The most important thing to remember is that the political aspect comes last, and that it is essential to have an anchoring in one’s own personal achievements before focusing on the collective effort. This is certainly important, but only if we have energy to spare after our personal relationships and tribal and familial bonds are secured. It is what we do rather than what we think that unites us in camaraderie, and there will indeed be many who may share the same opinions as us, but will not have the will or the courage to go beyond that. Such people are as irrelevant to our cause as those who will perish along with our sick, rotten society because they still cling to ideals deriving from the 18th and 19th Centuries (Liberalism and Marxism respectively). The future looks bright, but only if we know in which direction to go and in the most effective way possible.

 

Hail the folk!

 

Wulf Willelmson

Satan

Having had a good look at Christianity and it’s various positive and negative forms, and also the various pagan myths of Teutonic lore, we will now shift our focus toward a particular feature of mythology that is a recurring theme throughout the history of religion. The being known as ‘Satan’ in Judeo-Christian mythology and as ‘Shaitan‘ in Islam, means ‘adversary’ and features as an antagonist either to God or mankind in different mythologies throughout the world. He is known in one sense as the embodiment of all evil, but also as a tragic or even sympathetic figure who rebelled against God and was cast out of Heaven.

The lore surrounding this dark figure is a mixture of pagan and Christian myths, and his association with the Judeo-Christian ‘God’ is either as the prosecutor of Job, as in the Old Testament, or as tempter of Jesus within the New Testament. However, his appearance as a horned man with goat legs and a trident is a mixture of pagan imagery, in particular the Greek forest god Pan and his Celtic cognate, Cernunnos, as well as the Greek sea god, Poseidon. To mainstream Christians, Muslims and Jews, he is seen as the one who leads you astray from the path of God and towards damnation, but he is perceived as a liberator and a figure of freedom in some pagan traditions; and sometimes is even seen as a god to be feared, rather than the more benevolent Creator deity.

Though ‘Satan’ is the name most commonly known in the West today, he is also known by the titles of ‘the Devil’ (whose name relates to words ‘devious’, ‘deviant’ and ‘devour’), Beelzebub (‘lord of the flies’, thought to derive from the Canaanite deity Ba’al) or even ‘prince of darkness’. He is also associated with Lucifer, although this is a slightly different figure that we will look at in more detail later on. In other cultures, Satan is known in different forms, such as Ahriman in Zoroastrianism, who is seen as the enemy of Ahura Mazda (‘God’) and deceiver of mankind. In Buddhism, he appears as the arch-demon Mara, who represents illusion and is the lord of death.

Within Teutonic mythology, the best fit for a Satanic figure would be Loki; who also represents illusion and deception and is the nemesis of Heimdall, guardian of the Bifrost Bridge to Asgard (the home of the Aesir and a place representing enlightenment). However, in other cultures he was seen as a deity to be worshipped, such as among the natives of Virginia, who called this being Oke, and some even performed human sacrifices of teenage boys to him. In Ancient Egypt, he was known as Seth or Set, and despite being the brother and slayer of the Sun god Osiris, he still had followers among the Ancient Egyptian kings, though his name was later blotted out in religious dedications. Even within the Old Testament, there are references to dual goat sacrifices, one to Yahweh and one to Azazel, lord of the desert, who is very similar to Set in his attributes.

Today, he is often seen as representing a very real force of evil that compels individuals to commit atrocities against others. The so-called ‘Church of Satan’ and its brand of Satanism are simply a pompous form of atheism that promotes mockery of Catholic Mass and very base individualism based off of capitalist ‘philosophy’. However, much more serious stories involving human sacrifice and child abuse have appeared in mass consciousness over the past few decades. This practice of Satanism was once associated with people usually characterized as mentally deranged heavy metal fans, particularly in the United States during the 1980s.

However, this extreme expression of teenage rebellion is not nearly as prevalent nor as disturbing as tales of ritualistic sacrifices of children by plutocratic elites, many of whom are said to be or have connections to world leaders. Due to the nature of such clandestine activities, such practices are difficult to prove. For instance, it is possible that such stories are made up in order to disseminate fear and paranoia and have no basis in truth. Such accusations are similar to those made against witches by the Catholic Church during the Burning Times. However, it would also stand to reason that if these things were happen among the wealthiest members of society, then they would have sufficient resources to cover it up and protect themselves from the wrath of the public. Either way, the idea of offering humans as a sacrifice to an infernal being are nothing new, and it is naïve to assume that such beliefs and practices are not still adhered to within the darkest corners of Man’s heart.

Thus, the nature of ‘Satan’ is multifaceted and not so easy to discern in terms of a singular being. He is a different sort of character depending on the context and how his role relates to other beings portrayed as ‘God’. For example, in the Book of Genesis, Satan is usually associated with the Apple of Eve, which was eaten by the first woman from the Tree of Knowledge. Though not explicitly mentioned as the name of the serpent who tempted Eve to eat the apple, it has been inferred from the theme of temptation to disobey that this figure represents Satan in this context. However, this story could be interpreted in different ways. On one hand, the Judeo-Christian interpretation is that Eve and her mate, Adam (the first man, whose name comes from Atum in Egyptian mythology) were damned by God and cast out of the Garden of Eden (‘paradise’) for their acts of disobedience; and so began the Fall of Man from spiritual grace.

On the other hand, a Gnostic or Luciferian perspective is to see the serpent as the spirit of curiosity, which encouraged Eve to disobey the tyrannical false god ‘Yahweh‘ and reach towards enlightenment. Both versions reflect either a Left-Hand Path or Right-Hand Path interpretation of the story, for which the meaning differs depending on one’s own values. For one on the Right-Hand Path, Satan more often is seen as a dangerous enemy, and one who tries to distract you from achieving your goals through temptation and deception. However, within the Left-Hand Path, any obstruction to liberty is seen as a hindrance and Satan can be a valuable ally in overcoming the bondage of psychological conditioning during one’s lifetime. It is at this point that it is worth distinguishing the figure of ‘Satan’ from that of ‘Lucifer’, who are often conflated but who generally represent two distinct but related beings. Satan is a figure who was originally seen as ‘the accuser’ and acted as God’s dispenser of justice on Earth in Judaic mythology. However, within Christianity he is seen as the ruler of Hell (based on both the Greek and Teutonic underworlds) and as a fallen angel and lord of demons.

lucifer

Lucifer is an angel or demigod known as Phosphoros in Greek and whose name means ‘morning star’, which is the planet Venus. He is a metaphor for the ‘light-bringer’ or seeker of enlightenment, and is associated with both Loki and Prometheus; who is said to have brought the divine gift of fire to Man (‘Loki’ means ‘lightning’ in both a metaphorical and literal sense). Within Judeo-Christian mythology (though not actually in the Bible) Lucifer is portrayed as the angel who led a rebellion against God when asked to bow before Adam, and who was cast down into Hell following his defeat and becoming Satan. In this way, he is similar to the Yazidi deity Melek Taus, though their Creator is said to have praised the archangel for his refusal to bow before any creature lower than he, for this is how he was created. In these terms, Lucifer is the one who chooses to rebel, and Satan is who he becomes in doing so.

This process may also, however, work in reverse. Wotanist mystic, Kalki Weisthor, has suggested that both the figures of Satan and Lucifer can be incorporated into Wotanism by adding Wotan as a third component. The idea is that one begins their journey on the Left-Hand Path by acting as Satan, and so undoing unhelpful social conditioning and false beliefs by refusing to follow what you have perceived to be the rules. The next step is to become Lucifer, which involves pursuing enlightenment and acting as a free agent, having done away with what restricted you before. The last step is to embody Wotan, after mastering the skills of magic and using one’s liberated position to come back into society as a teacher and as a leader.

I personally find this a very helpful concept, though it presumably does not work as well for those on the Right-Hand Path, who will want to stick to their principles and resist the urge to rebel, since it is not in their nature to do so. Satan is not so much to be feared but respected, and he is a figure that will remain as long as human consciousness can conceive of a negative force, pulling us either towards damnation or enlightenment. It is also worth keeping in mind that Satan can mean many different things to many different people, and that misunderstandings about his character have led to persecution and ostracism which arise from ignorance. As a friend or enemy, he is with us always, as a teacher, tempter or that which we despise but know we must embrace as a part of life.

Hail Satan!

Wulf Willelmson

Litha: The Midsummer High Festival

It is the high noon of the year, and as the flowers bloom and the day’s length has reached its peak, it is time to celebrate the glory of Summer and the promise of a fruitful harvest. The Summer Solstice was the second most important to the Ancient Teutons after Yule and continues to be celebrated today, particularly in Sweden. It is intended to be a time of hope and promise that life will carry on, even after the death of Winter at the other half of the year, returning again the following year. It reminds us that, though the generative forces do not always prevail, they consistently return when they are ready and overcome darkness each time. Fresh fruits such as strawberries become available, and the amount of food only increases as other plants begin to produce berries and vegetables ripen and mature. Though the days are long and the work is hard, the knowledge that we still have the rest of the Summer ahead of us can push us to take advantage of each day and enjoy the height of activity.

Litha is the Anglo-Saxon name for Midsummer, and was dedicated to the god Tyr (although some prefer to honour Balder), who rules the sky and serves as an example of bravery to warriors. The lofty virtues of the heavens embolden a sense of justice and righteousness that accompanies clear, sober thought and focus on the task at hand. The only myth featuring Tyr as the most important figure is the Binding of Fenrir, where it is foretold that the wolf shall consume Wotan at Ragnarök (“doom of the gods”). The gods kept Fenrir in Asgard, and Tyr was the one who fed him and whom Fenrir trusted. However, Fenrir became larger and larger, and the gods unsuccessfully tried to bind him by asking if he could break the chains they laid upon him. They then decided to gain help from the dwarves, by collecting the roots of a mountain, the spittle of a bird, the beard of a woman and so on (probably a riddle) and using them to create a light and incredibly strong cord. When Fenrir saw something so innocuous being laid upon him, he suspected enchantment, and refused to be bound unless one of the Aesir would put their hand in his mouth. Only Tyr was brave enough to do so, and Fenrir agreed because he trusted him. After he was bound, Fenrir found that he could not break free, and so Tyr lost his hand.

tyr_fenrir

In this aspect, Tyr is similar to the Gaelic god, Nuada, who also lost his hand. Because of this, he also lost the right to rule the Tuatha de Danaan (Irish equivalent of the Aesir) as he no longer upheld the demand for physical perfection placed upon ancient kings. It is also known that once, Tyr, rather than Wotan, was the head of the Teutonic pantheon and that he was replaced at some point in prehistory. The god was known as Tiw to the Anglo-Saxons and as Tyz to the Goths, who would offer him the intestines of their enemies hung on a tree as a sacrifice. His association with Midsummer is due to the fact that he is the lord of the open sky, as opposed to Thor who governs rain and the clouds that cover the sky. Since we have sunnier days and less rainfall (at least theoretically), we can appreciate the appearance of the heavens in our lives, as they open up into the depths of Space.

Tyr was also associated with law and order, and was a patron of judges. His dual nature of both warlord and arbiter of justice reminds us that we must make sure that we do things based on the understanding that they are right and have a logical outcome. Though giving us the clarity to dream of the future, we cannot be distracted by the illusion of our own ideas for how to fix the world’s problems. It is more important to first, focus on ourselves and our own struggles before reaching out into the world. A mindset more based on positive results than the morally ideal. Though celebrated all throughout the world, the Summer Solstice is not as big of a celebration in Britain as in other parts of Europe. It is still important to some local areas (such as Peebles in the Scottish Borders) and is sometimes referred to as ‘gala day’, where folk dress up and have competitions, which are a Modern version of the ancient festival.

There are also tasteless and tacky interpretations of the pre-Christian Midsummer festival (as today at Stonehenge), but it still survives within the folk memory and would not be difficult to revive. This year, Midsummer fell on the 21st June, though preparations would have begun the previous day as the folk performed a ceremony at sunset and waited for the sunrise. Unfortunately, Modern corporations do not regard celebrations that are not highly commercialized, and getting folk together on a weekday (this year it was on a Wednesday) can be difficult. Though such institutions attempt to crush our spirit and take our heritage from us, we can still honour the gods in our own ways at this time of year. More than anything, Midsummer is the peak of the year energetically, and can make us feel like we can do anything. Spending a lot of time outdoors and embarking on new projects can help us use the fire energy that drives this part of the year and achieve what we want because we know we can do it.

Hail Tyr!

Wulf Willelmson