Thursday, October 17, 2013

Refuting Vikernes on Odalism and European Religion

Why Ôðalism?

Ôðalism is opposed to all forms of internationalism, be it universal faiths such as the Judeo-Christian religions or Marxist ideologies, because internationalism is a threat to the human diversity of our planet. Each religion, culture, customs, traditions and world view stem from the blood and soil of a particular people, and can not be made universal.

Why should Ôðalism then be universal?

Ôðalism is not nationalism in a modern sense: each and every modern nation is a modern construct based on geography (where the borders have been drawn) and ethnicity (i. e. languages spoken) instead of racial – or if you prefer tribal – identities. The Ôðalic nationalism is based on race. E. g. to Europeans today the European race (and different sub-races) is the nation. The language spoken is completely irrelevant in relation to racial identities.

Switzerland is a good example of Ôðalism in practise. And in some places the choice of German or French, of Italian or the language that Dante recognised as Latin and as Langue-d'oc is indeed completely irrelevant to local loyalties.

So are, often enough, the larger "racial loyalties." Russians may be as white as the Swiss, they are not Swiss. A Negro or Korean adopted in a Swiss family is Swiss.

This "universal plan" of Ôðalism is very incomplete about where Jews and where Mixed Races should be living. Maybe he expects North America to be the answer.

If the answer is "nowhere" or "send them into space", Vikernes is alas not honest when saying :

There is not hatred for others in Ôðalism, only love for your own. There is no destruction of others in Ôðalism, only protection and preservation of what is your own.

As a Christian I can say that Odalism is a good thing - within limits and allowing for exceptions. But Vikernes sets Odalism up as the rule of what the religion of each place should be and thus bypasses the limits. And he seems not to give much room for exceptions either, except for North America.

Why the European Religion?

Before citing any piece of text, I would like to show a picture from the essay (click to see in full):

See the Oracle of Delphi doing "arm rise" under some hypnotic influence? Think she is happy? Think again.

She may be under some kind of euphoria or she may be without it, but dragged into it by the lure of euphoria. She is not herself. And I do not say that just because of speculation about the hypnotic state, which can be enjoyed as a pleasure, though I consider it a dangerous one, but there is worse.

Her words are not interpreted as words of herself, but as words of some divinity or demon possessing her. They are not interpreted according to her explanations, but according to explanations of the priests of Apollo beside her - as today the words of a mental patient may be interpreted totally to his discomfort if some psychiatrist is standing behind and explaining them.

She has no freedom to avoid any issue she dislikes, she has no freedom to avoid giving death or misery by bad advice, as the demons did through her when it came to Acrisius and Oedipus, to Iocaste and all their family.

And if you think she is European, also think again. You can find her cousins and colleagues in Haiti and on Cuba, in Voodoo and in Santería. She used to be there in the North, since the Nordic "Theogony with Apocalypse" Voluspá was said by one like her. Thankfully the North was delivered from this. By Christians. By exorcists. By priests. Real priests of the White Christ!

If we go from the Sibyl to the content of Norse Myth, I am not sure I would call it very European either. If giants really existed - I think they did - it is very probable that Genesis, Baruch, Book of Henoch or even what now passes in some circles as Book of Jasher tells us more accurately than Norse myth who and what these were. If we go to the creation account, Odin, Vile and Ve do the work of Marduk. A Babylonian deity not getting around to create earth before killing a monster that he might himself be descended from. European? Not much!

With the re-introduction of the European religion we will start to live like we did before, in harmony with ourselves and our environment, and be able to cultivate our racial peculiarities, known to have brought forth philosophy, mathematics, architecture, beautiful music, sculptures, paintings, poetry, medicine, astronomy and all sorts of technology.

Racial peculiarities, philosophy, mathematics, architecture, beautiful music, sculptures, paintings, poetry, medicine, astronomy and technology are all of them very good things - in their proper places.

They flourished most in Europe when Theology was admitted to be the Queen of the Arts and when Christianity was admitted as the true Theology.

The European religion promotes not some fictional otherworldly “Paradise” as the ultimate goal for each individual man, but instead the eternal life on the soil of the forebears, and immortality through Honour.

Making honour and the fate of posterity the ultimate goal makes for committing heinous crimes for them. Renaissance was into this, and we had things like the Borgias or the Medicis. We had things like the Codottieri and the Landsknechte. We had things culminating in the Thirty Years War, after the Renaissance had launched Protestantism by its disregard for Catholic Tradition.

There is no contempt for the Earth, no description of Earth as something you have to “endure” or “tolerate” until you can move on to something better.

We do not say Earth is these things. We say life on earth or earthly concerns are these things. And anyone who is honest about it and not very lucky would tend to agree. Erga kai hemerai by Hesiod is a pretty long speech of agreement with "in hac lacrymarum valle". So are parts of the Theogony. So are parts of Voluspá. How has Vikernes himself enjoyed prison? As something to cherish or as something to tolerate? And yet prison has been part of his walk on this earth too.

But it seems he is more Christian (of a Modernist kind) than he likes to admit when in a post he links back to he states:

The ettin is not a name for a different race or anything like that. It is a power of a certain type, wild and some times wonderful, untameable and uncontrollable, and this power can be found in nature, but also in us. The opposite of this ettin power when it operates in us is what we would call moderation or temperance. So the Pagan man is a Stoic, with moderation and temperance as supreme ideals against a wild and untameable ettin power. He knows that he must not allow the ettin power to prevail, he knows that he must work hard to keep the ettin power at bay and he knows that he is a God (or a Goddess) and not an ettin!

As far as I know, Northern man was not famous for moderation. Adils bent down over the rings of gold that Rolf Krake spent. Rolf died in an ambush. So did quite a few others. If ettins or thursar were ever meant to scare Northern man from lack of measure, they considerably failed. When one Olof Tretelgja was a measured man, it was because of shame for his father's cruelty and hybris. You know the Odin-descendant (and Adils-descendant) Ingjald who burnt his guests so he could get their kingdoms under his own. And of course, saying ettins never were a race of any kind is not only doing unjustice to the literalism of Northern men, but also to that of Hebrews and Christians - and of one L. A. Marzulli who is digging up evidence for them. And of course Adils who started our first colony in Finland due to his take on honour hardly died a very nice death according to Northern ideals - his slave girl from Finland resented his approaches and he was killed as surely as Sisera or Holophernes. Beowulf was perhaps the noblest, with Rolf Krake, but even he drew Wiglaf to death by his "overmod", even his uncle died in a raid of pure plunder.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Margaret Mary Alacoque

No comments: