Open Post on Folkish, Universalist, and Tribal Paganisms

[causticus]

On yesterday's Magic Monday post, there was a rather interesting discussion on the several "feuding" branches of today's Germanic pagan/polytheist community. Particularly the question on the merits of the frequent "racism" allegations flung at Folkish Heathens.

Here's the whole thread:
https://ecosophia.dreamwidth.org/237888.html?thread=41766464#cmt41766464

My lengthily response here, with some follow-up replies:
https://ecosophia.dreamwidth.org/237888.html?thread=41778240#cmt41778240

I figure I'll use this as an open post to continue the discussion, if anyone so desires to do so. I think there's three interesting sub-topics to be expanded on from that thread:

1. Inclusionary vs. Exclusionary approaches to contemporary polytheism/paganism.
2. The third "tribal" (Theodish) option that's an alternative to the Folkist/Universalist binary.
3. The very fascinating (IMHO) concept of a "Holy Guild" being a new way of terming a religious fellowship.

Of course, any other ideas tangentially related to the above thread is more than welcome! Thank you for not using profanity, namecalling/ad-homs, bad faith arguments, or other cheap troll behaviors.

Comments

[k_a_nitz]

Firstly, I like the concept of pluralist folkish polytheism - i.e. we will exclude from our groups those from different folkish backgrounds, but we support your right to form your own groups with essentially the same beliefs that don't exclude others on the basis of folkish background. Just because I don't want you in my group doesn't mean I'm against you forming a group with essentially the same beliefs (less the folkish part).

Secondly, as soon as you call it an organisation you are admitting that it is not an organic form. Such forms should best of all arise from actions that are not driven by an organisational imperative. That is, if you and your mates share beliefs and get together on a regular basis to celebrate things that have a shared meaning for you then that will most likely last a lot longer and be a lot stronger than if you try to call it something and put some structure around it. There will of course be a natural limit to the numbers involved - but that it is a natural limit indicates that that is a good thing. Shades of gift culture versus exchange. So I'm siding with causticus's suggestion that the best thing is to keep things as informal as possible. I am also reminded of that old adage of gangs: if someone used to be in X, then they were never in X.

[causticus]

Shared meaning and reciprocity, yes.

One thing I forgot to mention about formal organizations is that the moment a group incorporates and becomes a legal entity, it becomes the business of some public bureaucrat who may or may not be entirely hostile to what your organization stands for. Secondly, incorporated groups tend to be eventually taken over by people skilled in the bureaucratic arts, i.e. lawyering, bean counting, paper shuffling, and various types of procedural chicanery. These folks may or may not be sympathetic to the original stated purpose of the group. I think there's a very good reason the ancient Druids didn't write anything down.

[jprussell]

That's a very solid point, but I would add that a group can have "organization" without being a legally-recognized entity. Just look at the mafia! Less extreme, but my mom used to play Bunco with the ladies in our neighborhood. They rotated who had responsibility for what (who hosted, who bought drinks, who handled the pot, and so forth), and there were some rules around that, but it was never a legal entity or something that advertised itself. So there're grades of "organization," and some might be more helpful for different purposes or under different circumstances than others.

[causticus]

Yep! That's precisely the sort of informal organization I had in mind (sans the mafia part). No one will ever bat an eye at "John and his buddies who meet up every Sunday afternoon to go on a brief hike, for the mutual enjoyment of hiking." What if it actually happens to be an informal Druid grove? No one will know unless people in the group blab about it to outsiders. And in the eyes of the government, if it doesn't have a tax-ID (or isn't doing anything overtly nefarious), it might as well not exist.

[jprussell]

Hahah, errr, on re-reading, I feel like I should clarify that "the pot" here means the winnings for the game - Bunco is a game of chance with dice, and they wagered small amounts of money to make it interesting.

[jprussell]

I agree with you and causticus that formal organizations bring a lot of trouble with them, and might be wholly pernicious, or at best necessary evils, most of all when it comes to spiritual matters. Also, implicit in your answer, and explicit in Causticus's replies, is the thought that "organizations" carry certain risks and complications in today's world that they might share with the past or the future - specific bureaucratic challenges, contending with certain political ideologies, and so forth. That's worth taking very seriously.

My one quibble, though, is that I can think of at least two (semi) spiritual movements I admire for whom formal organizations have played some part in their persistence and success (I'm leaving aside the elephant in the room of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, which maintained not only Christianity, but much of what we have left of classical culture through the last dark age). Those would be Revival Druidry and Free Masonry. In both cases, groves/lodges, and at some points, wider governing bodies have helped these movements to stick around longer than the lifetimes of those currently interested in them. Not the only way, of course (JMG has likely made more Druids single-handedly than AODA ever has), but I'm sure that it has helped sometimes, and maybe even more than the downsides harmed these movements.

The other strength (and weakness!) of more-or-less formal organizations is that they allow for discovery beyond "folks who know an existing member personally." If I'm a lonely rando Heathen, I can do a search online or look at local bulletin boards or whatever for groups that might welcome me, but it would be much harder for me to run into someone who happens to know that a handful of folks get together on the Holytides and have weekly Edda Study meetings. (This is, of course, a weakness, in so far as it also makes it easier for bad actors, bureaucrats, and so forth to find the group).