The Druid Revival: its Collapse and Future

[causticus]

Not long after I first delved into the magical side of John Michael Greer’s (JMG) work, I began contemplating the idea of getting involved with organized Revival Druidry. Eventually, after about a year of somewhat-steady SOP practice and casual occult study, I joined the Ancient Order of Druids of America (AODA). However, to this day, I have yet to become active there, in terms of starting their curriculum, or getting involved in their online forum and chat group. I joined, thinking they were the last "sane" organization of this type still around. And by sane, I mean not totally overtaken by the woke mind virus that has consumed nearly every alt-spirituality organization. I figured that AODA came to be in its current form largely thanks to the great efforts of JMG in saving the order from near-death and rebuilding it into a robust and active organization. Granted, he rebuilt the order long before the general culture shifted its collective focus to politics away from non-political things. Before this shift (c. 2013), most organized human activities here in the US, be it hobbies, pop-culture fandoms, religious groups, sports clubs, ect. were primarily focused on whatever the actual purpose of their group was. The intrusion of outside politics tended to be minimal. Well, not so today!!

Vibes Do Tell

When I first signed up for AODA, I read over its literature quite meticulously so as to get an overall feel of the organization’s “vibe.” I tend to be very cagey and cautious when it comes to getting involved with any new group. Being already quite familiar with Revival Druidry, what I read in the literature wasn’t all that surprising. But a few things rubbed me the wrong way. I could tell that the overall group culture leaned pretty far to the left. The typical “progressive” and “PC” values were right there, front and center, though not in any kind of aggressive or obnoxious form. There was no obvious “Cultural Marxism” (i.e. “oppressor vs. oppressed” demographic conflict rhetoric) that has become the mainstay of most of the Neopagan scene in recent years. But I saw the seeds of this eventual intrusion lying in wait. It was clear much of the membership base came from the typical middle-class “PMC” university-educated background. People in this cultural bubble are usually dialed into the ubiquitous Neoliberal mass media echo chamber, and thus their political and cultural beliefs on any given day tend to be whatever the mainstream media feeds them; even if last month’s “news” totally contradicts this week’s “news.” Granted, conservatives are dialed into their own media echo chamber, and their own “news” parroting behavior is very little different from that of the left’s. But I don’t have space or patience to further explore the topic of media critique, so I’ll leave that off right here.

Woke Progressivism Consumes All

So even that vibe didn’t deter me from considering to start the curriculum at some point. But life got in the way and various duties and distractions became a barrier to me being able to devote my undivided attention to what would be a very involved grade-advancement process. So that non-active state persisted for many months as I kept weighing the pro’s and con’s of getting involved. And then one day, on one of these Ecosophia-adjacent DW blogs, I read an interesting comment that suggested something I had suspected would eventually happen to AODA. To paraphrase the comment, “AODA is currently imploding from wokeness.” Of course, I must acknowledge that this was an anonymous comment, and taken at face value, is merely a rumor coming from one person who claims to be a member of the group. Since I’m not involved in the group’s discussion spaces, I have no real way of conforming or denying the rumor. But, if there is any truth to the rumor, I have to say I’m not surprised at all. Circling back to the group’s literature, I remember quite clearly being a bit off-put by overall writing style of the contributing authors: the sheer amount of wishy-washy relativism, permissiveness (the seeming urge to be 'inclusive' of everything under the sun that doesn’t oppose progressivism), and general female-orientation to the whole affair. These attributes are quite typical of new age, neopagan, and alt-spirituality groups in this era; all which are cultural offshoots of the 1960’s counterculture. Basically, the Druid Revival in its current form, despite its “Mesopagan” roots, is firmly adjacent to the Neopagan scene; one that happens to be in a state of full-blown collapse right now. Thus I’ve concluded that it's a not good idea to get involved with any of these groups right now, as they've all been infected by the aforementioned woke virus, which itself seems to be merely a symptom of the collapse of the Neoliberal Order, and the Professional-Managerial Class (PMC) which serves as the overseer class of this regime. Because of these monumental cultural forces at play, I’m loathe to blame the leadership of these DR organizations for what’s currently happening. The current Grand Archdruid of AODA seems like a very nice and wise person. But she can’t control the kind of media and other pop-culture influences the broader membership consumes on a daily basis. She can’t control which friends, family, and work colleagues each member fraternizes with. After all, one of the central ethical planks of Revival Druidry is to not employ the methods of mind-control cults!! At the end of the day, people are going to do what they are going to do, and in reality this usually means going along with whatever herdthink prevails among one’s own subculture or social class.

So, HYPOTHETICALLY, if say 65% of AODA's membership goes woke and starts demanding the leadership make woke ideology the organization’s main stated purpose for existing, there’s nothing the leadership can do except, (a) capitulate to the mob’s demands and make the organization officially woke, which is what happened to ADF, (b) resign and walk away, leaving the organization in the hands of a new woke leadership, or (c) immediately purge all the wokesters and brace for impact; (d) quietly disband the organization and wait for all the culture war insanity to die down before re-forming the group. Unless the leadership has an iron cohones, super thick skin (not afraid of hurting people’s feelings), and knack for decisiveness, (c) ain’t going to happen, and probably not (d) either. Option (c) seems rather un-Druidly anyway, since the leader would have to become a Grand Inquisitor and devote their time and energy to engaging in counter-witchhunts. A weak or negligent leader will often go with (a), naively thinking they can appease the mob and comply their way out of mass hysteria. It’s perhaps (b) which would be the most foolish choice of all, as it will result in wokesters taking over and essentially destroying the organization and its brand/symbolism, and possibly contaminating the group’s egregore to the point of no return. Overall, it seems like anything but (d) is the makings of a lose-lose situation.

Without Groves, What's the Point?

On a more personal note, even if AODA wasn't compromised (which may be the case still, as I'm going on just a rumor), I still think that participating probably wouldn't give me much more than I'd get from self-study and self-initiation. The organization itself is rather small and as a result there's very few local groves that actually exist. One of the big advantages I'd see from joining a Druid Order would be the opportunity to be part of a local grove. But, fearing the aforementioned rumor is likely true to some extent, getting involved with a local grove probably wouldn't be all the helpful or desirable for me given the sort of left-progressive culture that permeates these groups. No, I most certainly don't want to be a part of any human activity where I have to constantly walk on eggshells around the other participants, out of fear of saying something "offensive" to whatever The Current Thing deems offensive this week. And if I'm really looking for peer support in this work, I honestly think at this point the Ecosophia/MM commentariat is more than sufficient.

Going Along to Get Along vs. Going Against the Grain

To reiterate something I was getting at above, I think even the best and well-meaning organizations within the Neopagan/Alt-Spirituality fold are essentially defenseless against the woke onslaught. It's not so much these groups get "infiltrated" by wokesters; rather it's the membership base that has been in these groups all along is constantly downloading mental "software updates" via their preferred media echo chamber, and what typically happens is that next week the The Current Thing updates to some new cause-du-jour, and the rank and file start making demands on the leadership to "take a stand" against whatever The Current Thing is raging at the moment. If the leadership is evasive or does nothing, an even bigger stink is made until they capitulate; if still nothing is done, some kind of split or schism with the group happens and the "old faction" which refuses to get with the times is quickly denounced as being complicit or sympathetic with whatever the mob happens to be shrieking about, thus the “brace for impact” quip above. I think in most cases, otherwise-well-meaning leadership is weak or simply afraid of negative publicity or people being offended, thus they fold. And thus another one bites the dust.

Sadly, I believe the Druid Revival (as a group activity) will not survive the cultural collapse we’re going through right now. If it’s to re-form some time in the future after the dust finally settles, it must rise from the ashes in a new form; a form that is as distant as possible from anything reeking of Neopagan, New Age, Boomerism, or Neoliberal “Progressive” aesthetics and values.

Comments

[jprussell]

Thanks much for another thought-provoking post.

Your post reminds me of some thoughts I've had on a comment from this week's Magic Monday about some neopagans invoking Loki as a "gender-bending god who fights oppression and speaks truth" and one anonymous commenter said it sounded like SJW/Woke entryism. I didn't have a chance to post, as the thought didn't take shape until after the post closed, but I figured I'd share here, since it seems fairly on-topic.

First off, if it's unclear to anyone following along "entryism" is a tactic developed and taught by the communist party throughout the 20th century. The idea is to join an organization ostensibly to take part in whatever it is about, but then gradually turn it into an organization helpful to the communist cause.

Okay, with that definition out of the way, I think the real problem for revival druidry is not this kind of intentional tactic (though certain folks of that ideological persuasion absolutely do follow this tactic intentionally, I assume they usually target more influential organizations with wider membership!). Rather, I think that there's a combination of factors here:

1. Your point about mental "software updates"
2. The evolutionary fitness of woke ideology as a means of getting power
3. Small, stubborn groups can wield disproportionate power
4. The lack of natural defenses due to some of the philosophical assumptions of revival druidry

1. Software updates: I think you've covered this one well, so I won't add much, except to point out that the changes in what problems need to be fixed can be pretty incremental and still take you from somewhere like "maybe everybody should be treated equally by the law" to "we should destroy your business if it doesn't contain enough people of [group identity label]" without necessarily having any one step stand out to an otherwise reasonable person as "have I gone too far? is this crazy?"

2. Evolutionary Fitness of Activism: Okay, here, I'm largely borrowing from Curtis Yarvin, and I think this one is the crux of the "entryism" not being a conscious tactic in most cases. Instead, it's more like the folks who are maybe a little woke, but it's not their whole deal, they join and just go about the rituals and sharing gardening tips and so forth. On the other hand, folks for whom wokeness is a crusade, a defining element of their morality and worldview, they are going to make sure it comes up and start agitating to get something done about it. The more concessions they get, the more they can reasonably expect success in the future. Everyone else joined the organization to commune with nature, not to have political fights, so without some clear rules and early interventions (see 4. below), they're not that likely to put up much of fight early on, and by the time things have gone crazy, the folks motivated by their ideology have gotten power in the organization. Add in your observation that most alt-spirituality groups lean pretty left anyway, and so even the non-politically-active members will likely be sympathetic to the smaller demands of the activist folks, and you're left with almost no chance of stopping things without a very clear rule/social norm that people can invoke. I should close, of course, by pointing out that "evolutionarily fit" doesn't mean "good" and doesn't even mean "good for the host" - Covid's pretty evolutionarily fit!

3. Small, Stubborn Groups: In your thought experiment above, you mention "65% of the organization" being sympathetic to woke causes as a hypothetical. Unfortunately, it's likely even worse than this. Nassim Taleb talks about the disproportionate power small groups, well below a majority, can wield over the wider population if they are sufficiently consistent and stubborn (here's an article explaining it, which is also a chapter in his book Skin in the Game: https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15). Simple example: in the US, manufacturers make a lot of food products Kosher even though the vast majority of their customers don't care or even notice - but the small group that do have made it pretty much a requirement. I bring this up, because it makes the below point even more important.

4. Natural Defenses (or the Lack thereof): Most organizations and subcultures that I know of that have successfully avoided becoming battlegrounds of the culture wars are those that have pretty bright-line rules about "we're here to do [thing the organization is about], and any talk about politics not directly related to that will not be allowed". Now, of course, for the activist, this is just evidence that you're part of the problem, so there's tremendous pressure to abandon such rules. One of the best examples I know is in the open source software development world (Eric S. Raymond, who led the charge in popularizing the term "open source", rather than "free software" writes about this here and elsewhere on his blog: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609). Heavily linked with Silicon Valley, but with traditions as old as computer programming itself that focus on what you produce rather than what you believe, there's been a struggle there, but it hasn't succumbed as fast as some other sub-cultures. I think the other thing that helps is having a clear positive goal that is not social reform or politics, or if it must be, is heavily circumscribed.

All of which is to say that I think, unfortunately, you're most likely right that revival druidry, at least as a coherent "scene" made up of organizations with memberships, events, mailing lists, and so forth may be in some serious trouble. On the other hand, as your own experience illustrates, thanks in large part to JMG, it is now easier than ever to find your own way through individual study and practice supported by looser, less formal ties, and it's a spiritual tradition that has survived a lot of ups and downs for the past 300 years or so, so that makes me hopeful.

Cheers,
Jeff

[causticus]

Oh yeah I was reading the "Woke Loki" MM thread yesterday and figured you'd have something substantial to add about this.

Regarding these points, I think they are a brilliant expansion on my OP above! Thanks so much for taking the time to elaborate your thoughts in this much detail.

4. I totally agree this is a crushing weakness for DR groups in this political climate. Being too chill/lax effectively means a lack of defenses against bad actors and those who operate in bad faith. They will always use your good will against you. No fortifications or defenders means an easy plunder for hostile parties.

I think that Druidry in its next incarnation (if it's to be successful) must incorporate Martial and Saturnine energies back into its ethos, aesthetics, practices, and code of conduct. Because it's those two elements that pretty much the entire alt-spirituality and new age paradigm has rejected and done away with. According to moral foundations theory, the only values the left champions tends to be "Fairness" (i.e. egalitarianism) and "Caring" (motherly nurturing); others like Loyalty, Sanctity, Authority, and Liberty get ignored or perverted.

[jprussell]

Hahah, "in this much detail", indeed. My apologies for going on at such length.

For running a group, my personal feeling is that you can accomplish quite a lot if your approach is "totally chill, except for these well-defined areas, where we are utterly hammer fisted." As you mention below, this is perhaps best exercised by a single responsible person.

Hmm, I hadn't considered the lack of Martial & Saturnine energies, but I think you're likely right - not just in the alt spirituality scene, but in our culture generally, those generally don't get a lot of positive depiction.

And thanks for bringing up Moral Foundations theory - I think it's incredibly insightful and helps to explain a lot about how the left and the right talk right past each other and see the other side as incomprehensibly bad and wrong. It might also give some practical guidance on how a group could go about incorporating those Martial and Saturnine elements.

[causticus]

1. More like a compliment from one composer of textwalls to another ;)

2. Your approach is probably the most effective. I think you touch on the reality that a humor and lightheartedness factor must always be present, or else the discussion space starts to take itself too seriously, become increasingly paranoid, and possibly become puritanical to the point where it loses all collective self-awareness. Eventually, purity-spiraling and the circular firing squad ends up consuming whatever is left. Which is precisely what's been happening to almost all leftist/progressian spaces since about 2013. I think Discordian-type humor is the perfect antidote to this sort of self-righteous self-destruction.

3. No problem. I actually think the theory could be improved on a bit via being re-interpreted through an occult lens (I think Jonathan Haidt is an atheist-materialist, though a very astute one). I'm sure there's a corresponding moral value for each of the planets and much of that is likely already present in the current model.

[jprussell]

3. Very interesting! Have you done anything to work this system out, or is it more of an inkling?

Given what you've said, my first stab might go something like this:

Mercury: ???
Venus: Caring
Mars: Loyalty
Jupiter: Fairness
Saturn: Authority
Uranus: Liberty (This could also go to Mercury, especially if sticking with the classical planets)
Neptune: Sanctity (Not sure here, Sanctity was a bit harder to place for me)

[causticus]

Hmm, I'd say that Venus might be appropriate for Fairness, as in the Roman goddess Aequitas balancing the scales a la Libra; and the Moon representing Caring.

Some of the others I could go different ways on. I'm not sure how Mercury would fit into this. Maybe there would have to be a moral dimension called Reason or Rationality.

[randomactsofkarmasc]

For Mercury, perhaps Diplomacy? If not that, something to do with Communication maybe...

[causticus]

One little tidbit re: Yarvin I forgot to add above is that I think the organizational structure of the Ecosophia community is something the affirms one of his key political ideas, which is the supremacy of Monarchy as a type of government.

Functionally, Ecosophia is a Monarchy (in the de-facto sense) and JMG is the Monarch. I think this is one of several reasons why it functions to well! And so well in this age when most groups that are concerned with this same subject matter (occult, paganism, alt-spirituality, ect.) are crumbling before our eyes.

There's no Oligarchy in our treasured community, i.e. a bureaucratic committee, board of directors, or "Mother Grove" to second guess or block/stymie JMG's editorial and moderation decisions. Nope, it's just him and it runs so smoothly and judiciously. IMHO, Oligarchy always ends up being a way for cowards and crooks to exercise power without any of the corresponding responsibility, accountability, or visibility that comes along with the territory of transparent power. The downfall of ADF I think is very illustrative of a Byzantine Oligarchy presiding over an alt-spirituality organization.

Something to consider...

[jprussell]

As JMG might say, hmmmm! I hadn't considered that well-run community discussion forums are almost always monarchies, but now that you mention it, most of the best discussion spaces I know of are organized around a single blogger who runs the comments as their private space, to be controlled as they see fit.

One obvious failure mode that leads to the kind of oligarchy you discuss is that a blogger/writer/other interesting person starts seeing some success, and the comments get to be huge. Said interesting person doesn't want to be a forum moderator, but rather a blogger/writer/whatever, and so recruits one (or more) moderators. Once you've brought someone else in, you introduce the possibility for disagreement and maneuvering, and you've set the precedent that it's not your space, full-stop.

As you say, definitely something interesting to consider.

[(Anonymous)]

I did not join AODA, I carefully read all their publicly available writings (website, forum, newsletter) to see if they would be a good fit and I saw a few too many red flags to suggest the woke rot had infiltrated, with people in charge maybe too concerned with making everyone feel welcome to realize they were dealing with crybullies. There were times I wondered if I was reading too much into it, plenty of sane seeming people in the Ecosophia community still spoke highly of them.

Earlier this year, I happened to check the public forum at just the right time and saw a long thread that put the woke rot on full display. It was very quickly removed from the public side (so somebody there knows what this looks like and it's not a way to attract new members), I don't know if it still exists on the members only sections or if it was deleted altogether. As I remember it, it started with one person uncertain if they can go on with their AODA studies, hadn't been able to practice druidry for a while, because AODA is associated with JMG, who used to be admirable and now is just too problematic to contemplate, I want nothing to do with him or anything he has touched. It quickly turned into a dogpile, yes he's so problematic, it sickens me I ever bought his books so I threw them all away, blah blah. I distinctly remember someone complaining about the fact that he still visits the forum, that she thought that was "creepy." There were a small number of people arguing against this, but mostly it was all in agreement. And why? What was it that brought on this fainting couch, pearl clutching whinefest? JMG doesn't like Greta Thunberg. Yeah. And something something misogyny.

If this is what closed discussions there look like, I have little doubt that other anonymous comment is correct and AODA as a druid organization is not long for this world. Unless someone in the upper ranks is willing to stand their ground and let the wokesters purge themselves.

[causticus]

Whew, I'm glad I wasn't the only one seeing those red flags between the lines.

Not surprised at all about entryist crybullies denouncing the organization's (re)founder as being "problematic" (i.e. insufficiently-woke). This sort of insane purity-spiraling is an all-too-common occurrence these days. Now I'm very certain I have zero interest interacting with anyone in that kind of discussion environment. Where's the leadership stand on this?

[randomactsofkarmasc]

Initially, the complaint against JMG was made in the private forum. There was some discussion between members, with both sides weighing in. Some of those in leadership positions (after letting the private discussion run a while) said that everyone had a chance to say their position, but the position of AODA is basically JMG is an adult and he can say what he wants to on his blog. Some wanted his Archdruid Emeritus status removed; leadership said nope, not doing that.

So then they took the comment to the public forum. (And I think they rallied their trolls, because many of those commenters were not usernames I recognized.) That ticked me off royally, as they were obviously doing it to try to bully the organization to do what they wanted after they had been told no. I submitted the whole thread to the moderators (and I doubt I was the only one) and it was moved to the private area and closed (which means no new comments, so it slowly gets buried deep in the bowels of 'recently posted' threads).

It soured me on pretty much all of the new commentariat on the AODA forum.

I still am in contact with AODA leadership, though, since I am working on my curriculum. If they are woke, it doesn't show in personal correspondence. They are polite and thoughtful and supportive. It is a shame that AODA's reputation has been tarnished by the deliberate bad actions of some of the members. I think AODA's bylaws were written, thinking they were going to be working with members with a little maturity and decency. Unfortunately, the bylaws didn't work as quickly as they needed to (in my opinion) with the 'crybullies'.

[causticus]

Yeah that really is a bad look. I'm guessing no one was banned/expelled for these shenanigans? Weak. Maybe this is just me, but I'd say a member with an outside agenda bringing in a bunch of non-members onto the forum to ratchet up some pet political issue/cause that has nothing to do with the organization is clearly a direct attempt to subvert and undermine the integrity of the organization. It sounds like there isn't really any quality control on who can post in the public areas. Non-members should either be read-only, or if they have posting access, only be able to ask questions to seasoned members about topics directly relevant to the organization. Anything off-topic, especially something that's obviously intended to stir up controversy, drama, or contention should result in immediate thread deletion and an instant ban. I've moderated a number of forums and chats in this past, and this is the approach I've always employed.

I realize all of this fuss just concerns the forums and not the actual inner function of the organization, but still, a poisoned/polluted community space will eventually kill productive social interaction and a common sense of purpose among the serious membership. A compromised community is what makes me consider that investing a lot of my own time and effort into their curriculum to be not worth the potential cons. What if I invested two years and attain a fairy high grade only to have it instantly revoked because I said some seemingly-innocuous thing on a forum or chat that somewhat triggers/offends some woke snowflake member and they make a huge stink about me being a "problematic" individual? All that work for nothing. No thanks! Of course the easy solution is simply to do the curriculum work and only interact with the instructor(s); effectively me staying off the forums and chats. But what's the fun in that? If I'm going to join an organization and get involved, I'd very much like to be a part of the community in the social sense. Otherwise it's just a solo path, and I can do that all on my own. Now you can see this is the bind I've been in regarding this organization.

[randomactsofkarmasc]

I do not know if anyone was banned or expelled. I pretty much dropped off the forums in the midst of all the drama. (I do know that some people threatened to quit if they didn't get their way. Ha.) I like the moderation format you describe and will keep it in mind if I am ever involved (at that level) in a forum.

I completely understand your stance on "why join?" Had I found Ecosophia first, I don't know if I would have joined.

Even though I'm not on the forums at the moment, I do get a forum 'summary' via email (which is automatically sent out when you haven't logged into the forum in a while). Based on the summaries, it seems that the wokeness is not quite as prominent as it was. (AODA has started a Discord server, if that is the right terminology, which seems to appeal to a different demographic... maybe the AODA community is segregating itself?)

[jprussell]

With zero judgment for making this personal choice (I almost certainly would have made the same one), this is why the obnoxious trollpile tactics work:

"I pretty much dropped off the forums in the midst of all the drama."

Normal, sane people who just want to talk about nature-based spirituality don't have the same energy around engaging with the drama as the people who are there for the drama, so they can win a war of attrition.

Unfortunately, without support from moderators (which it sounds like there eventually was), neither "go hammer and tongs at the trolls with the same amount of energy" nor "ignore them and just keep having real discussions" are particularly effective strategies, which makes leaving/disengaging the rational move for the individual, even if that hurts the community.

Again, I bring this up not at all to criticize, just pointing out what a perfect illustration it is of the bind such bad actors put regular folks into.

[causticus]

I'm big on the practice is quietly deleting threads and banning the worst offender(s) without making even the tiniest fuss about it.

[randomactsofkarmasc]

I am not at all offended by your comment about my decision. :-)

It wasn't an easy decision (and I still waffle at times, when the summaries have pretty pictures... one of the on-going threads is "Show us your altar!" and people post pictures of how they have decorated their altar or another space for whatever solstice or equinox or whatever and I enjoy those types of posts.)

Perhaps if I didn't have the Ecosophia community (and Ecosophia off-shoots like the Sane Polytheism page and all the bloggers I've met through Ecosophia), I might have reacted differently. But I would rather surround myself with ideas from people who actually like discussions, not echo chambers. (hat tip to all of you!!!)

[causticus]

It seems like everyone's getting on Discord these days, especially the younger generations. I'd say that by making a Discord server they're more expanding out than segregating itself. So far it looks like only 9 people are on there, which is very tiny for a Discord server. I'm admined/managed small Discords and those are typically 50-300 members large.

[randomactsofkarmasc]

So Discord had to install 14 updates before I could login (guess I haven't been there in a while, either). They have about 30 people online right now, and 212 offline. I have no idea how many of those 212 ever login (cause usually I am one of them and apparently I haven't logged in since February). But at least some of them are active, judging by the "new message" flags I have on many of the threads.

[causticus]

Yeah if it's a server for an organization, like in this case, there will probably be consistent activity from a small group of core members. In general though, in my experience it's usually no more than 10-15% of a Discord server's membership that is consistently active in the chat, if lucky. So on a server of 200-300 people, expect maybe 10-20 people at most to post regularly.

[(Anonymous)]

OP here. Wow. That thread was crazy enough on the surface, but it seems it was way more immature than I'd thought. And all over Greta Thunberg...

I've glanced through the current Archdruid's blog a few times, I've never seen any evidence that she's woke, she seems instead like someone trying to develop her own life rather than fill up the emptiness with politics. It's just a matter of whether or not she is the sort of leader who can enforce laws and suspend/remove bad actors when it is clear they only want to cause trouble. I hope so, but my own experience in alternative spirituality scene is a lot of weak leaders who avoid confrontation at all costs, and very few who have any idea what to do with the tactics of weaponized vulnerability that the woke like to use. Organizations can regain reputation quick enough if they deal with the problem.

[randomactsofkarmasc]

So I just logged into the AODA forum. I was going to look at the section about what their expectations are for behavior in the forums, etc., to see if there were any noticeable changes, so I could respond to your post.

The most recent thread in that section was titled "Using more gender-inclusive language." I couldn't help myself... I read it. I know better. I shouldn't have.

I'm staying off the forums for a good while longer, I think. :-)

[causticus]

The most recent thread in that section was titled "Using more gender-inclusive language."

Hah, this seems to directly contradict their "no politics" policy. Though I doubt they realize this. That part is the kicker. It's what happens when people stay trapped in their own sub-culture bubble. They end up not having the broader awareness needed to realize that PoMo gender politics is indeed partisan politics, in-fact a very polarizing form of partisan politics. More than 50% of the American population likely rejects PoMo gender politics in its entirety. But don't let that fact get in way of myopic delusions that arise from being stuck in an echo chamber. Those implementing such a policy have no idea that what they are actually saying is, "we don't want your kind here" toward at least half of Americans, perhaps more.

[randomactsofkarmasc]

PoMo is a new abbreviation for me. What does it stand for?

(But even without knowing that, I get the gist of your comment. And you are right... one of the comments on that thread was basically 'if this is what AODA is becoming, I am outta here'.)

[causticus]

PoMo = Postmodernist/Postmodernism

[randomactsofkarmasc]

Ah! Thank you!

[causticus]

No problem :)

[randomactsofkarmasc]

I lurked on the public forum of AODA for about a year before I decided to join. When I joined, I was fairly active on the forum. A few years back, things changed. First it was a few newcomers who were not out-right political, but still made it obvious where they were on the political spectrum. I do not know if they recruited their "friends", but more and more people joined, claiming they heard AODA was 'safe' and 'inclusive'. And then political comments got posted (and then removed by the moderators, but not before the comments had been read and responded to). And then people started posting their pronouns and marital status. (And the pronoun thing really confuses me... people use a non-gendered anonymous avatar/username but want me to keep up with their pronoun?) And then someone took offense to a comment JMG made and posted it on the public forum and it just got ugly. About a year before then, Kimberly Steele had posted a comment in the AODA forum about a video she made of doing the SOP and that she was involved in JMG's commentariat on Ecosophia. So I explored Ecosophia and thought, gee, this is way more interesting than the AODA forum.

I am still, though, working my way through the AODA curriculum. Sure, I could just do the same work as a self-study, but I find value in having an external evaluator saying 'yes, you meet the requirements.' It makes me do aspects of the curriculum I might otherwise shirk. And, as I learn about other occult curriculums, I realize that AODA's curriculum (which is still heavily influenced by JMG's writings) does follow many of the same organizing principles as other practices.

(But I am enough of a non-dogmatic Druid to say "But you do you!")

It does make me sad how the AODA forum has changed. (But it is possible that I've changed just as much, too.)

[causticus]

Thank you for this.

It does seem like the pronoun nonsense is perhaps the first sign of trouble. You give these people an inch, they take 50 miles. And as I suspect the leadership is too weak and lax to weed out troublemakers in the early stages. This is how the rot quickly metastasizes and takes over the whole organization.

That's cool though you find the curriculum to be something of value. It doesn't look like it's changed too much since the days JMG was in charge, and is still largely based on the path/grade structure found in the Druidry Handbook. Of course, a new order could easily piggyback off that system.