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

[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.