|
 In
discussing the meaning of historical facts, Yockey says that
life-facts are the data of History; a Life-fact is defined as
'something which has happened.' It does not matter to its status
as a fact that no one may know it, or that it has vanished without
a trace. -- The development of fact-sense is primarily acceptance
of what is, without any moral judgment or critical preconceptions
of what should or should not have been. -- Obviously, creative
thinking enters into the process of interpreting the data of
History and a moment's reflection shows that the process of
assessing the data of History is a creative one, and it must
not be supposed the sense for facts, the historical sense, dispenses
with creative thinking.
To
this century is left the assembling of lost facts from previous
Ages and previous Cultures. From our knowledge of past Cultures
and their structures we can fill in missing developments in
some from what has survived in others. Most important for us,
we can fill in what remains to the fulfillment of our own Culture.
The
realm of Thought is interested in the missing stages of past
Cultures and the Future of our own, but Action is interested
in the Past only as a key to effective performance. Thus the
higher importance of History-writing and History-thinking is
that they serve effective Action.
Life-facts
are not accessible to a man who has a rigid view of History,
and who "knows" that the purpose of all previous happenings
was only to make his Age possible.
The
fact-sense is only operative when dogma, socio-ethical ideas
and critical trappings are put aside. To the fact-sense is important,
`not the "Truth" of Confucian doctrines but that millions
of people believed them to be true.'
The
19th century experienced the prosaic, drab insistence of the
materialistic outlook that facts have to submit to a "progress"
ideology in order to be recognized as significant. This view
exclude absolutely its victims from any in sight into the importance
and power of the facts of History as well as from any understanding
of their effects.
What
we today believe to be facts will eventually vanish into the
one fact that once upon a time this was the world-picture of
a certain kind of Culture-man.
And
thus facts too have their subjective and objective content.
And again it
[Page 2]
is the relationship between the man and the
phenomenon that determines the form of the fact. Each Culture
has in this way its own facts which arise out of its own problems.
What the facts are, depend on what man is experiencing them;
whether he belongs to a High Culture, to which Culture. and
to which Age thereof, to which nation, to which spiritual stratum,
to which social stratum.
It
is worth noting that whether a man's history outlook. is intellectually
formulated or not is merely a function of his personality; some
men have a greater inner need to think abstractly than others.
* * *
WHY
NOT?
There
I was, sitting comfortably at home, leafing through a book that
described how our early hardy ancestors had survived and thrived
in the primitive wilderness. The primitive wilderness which,
by the way, kept our ancestral stock strong by ensuring a quick
demise of the slow-witted.
Across
from me sat an Odinist friend, who was lost in deep thought.
He looked up at me, a puzzled expression on his face.
"Listen,"
he said, "we're supposed to be Odinists, are we not?"
"Yes,"
I replied.
"And,"
he continued, "we are supposed to reflect the qualities
of our ancestors?" I nodded affirmatively.
He
then painted out that one of the basic tenets of Odinism is
that man accepts and lives in harmony with nature and natural
laws, rather than try to oppose them as so many other religions
do.
Again
I agreed.
An
intense seriousness came into his voice as he described how,
due to our advanced civilization, we are all now removed from
many natural laws, often even from nature herself. A complex,
industrialized society, he stated, would of course result in
the loss of some laws of nature, perhaps for the better; but
the problems arising from the main natural laws that are being
broken, and in turn can break us, can be solved only by concerted
political efforts; the loss of understanding and appreciation
of nature, however, can easily be corrected by individual action.
"How
can we really call ourselves Odinists," he asked, "without
an experience of the unspoiled wilderness? Without a feeling
for our early ancestor's natural environment, how can we totally
relate to them?"
 And,
on an ominous note: "Suppose our present artificial environment
were to be suddenly removed by a natural calamity, or a collapse
of society, or revolution, or foreign invasion, or whatever;
how long would most of us last if we had to flee to the wilderness
for survival? Would the type of environment that was home to
our ancestors be so alien to most of us that it would be our
grave?" -- That was enough for me. The next long weekend
saw two Odinist 'city boys' head for the bush.
It
is hard, if not impossible, to describe your emotions on paper,
but I can say this, that there in the wild forest I found a
new appreciation for, and had never felt closer to, our ancestors.
It is hard to totally measure any kind of progress unless you
know the starting point. In the wilderness you can see, and
feel, the starting point of our culture.
The
first night spent under the stars in the wild forest by a city
person is rather frightening; in the darkness every sound or
shape is a bear or another wild animal coming to devour you.
The second night is better, and the third night is quiet and
beautiful, as though you belonged there. You adjust quicker
to the days. The first day everything seems unsanitary, from
the second day on you feel at home.You just can't get the same
spiritual feeling from a shiny new stove that you can from a
rock covered cooking fire, nor can your kitchen-cooked food
taste as good as a meal cooked in the outdoors.
It
is there; in the bush, that you really get to understand that
you are of your cultural ancestors, - - THAT YOU ARE EXACTLY
THE SAME AS THEY WERE! Freed from the confusion of complex society,
the pure, raw culture Spirit hits your soul with a strength
that is unimaginable. -- You are overcome with a fantastic,
instinctive urge to-build -- to build and master your environment.
And
then you know, YOU REALLY KNOW why your culture advanced far
higher than any other.
Why
not try it yourself, and take this article with you!
Rod
[Page 3]
GENIUS AND THE COMMON
MAN
1.Origin and Meaning
The
meaning of genius has changed as have many other terms in the
course of centuries as mysteries became knowledge.
At
one time it was seen as a spirit in aid of supernatural powers,
good or evil. Today, though we are wont to see it as a natural
phenomenon, many of its mystifying aspects remain. Possessed
of extraordinary grants and apparently as much possessed by
them, with a grasp on men and events utterly beyond the scale
of ordinary men, it generates not only awe but often fear where,
in the general context of a social order, it is not understood
or out of place. Hence, while good and evil pass as relative
and only mildly contradictory terms today, they become totally
black or white in the wake of genius, and generations may stand
divided in assessing a particular genius as either demon or
god and his work as either holocaust or salvation.
This
is especially so in the case of historical genius that may draw
nations and even continents into its vortex. But the most outstanding
mark, singularity of personality, so powerful that ages cannot
obliterate its imprint, is true of all genius. It stands alone,
it treads where no man has walked before. Common men may dwell
by fires built with their hands; genius lives by fires lit by
the gods. Common men are bonded to the earth, their sweat a
fair price for her fruits; genius moves unbound in ethereal
spheres harvesting stars as its just reward, or . . . so it
seems.
For
this poetic version of genius is only its surface appearance.
Who can gaze at the stars today and, while lost in their wander,
forget their astronomic reality, who can marvel at the beauty
of earth's creatures and not at once perceive also their biologic
implication in the ecology?
Today
we know that nothing stands alone. All things are interlinked,
both in time and in space. What is today become so in many yesterdays,
and what man is now he was long in becoming. His body and soul,
his loves and battles, his social orders -- nothing began with
him. All were pre-designed in nature's persistent from unconscious
cosmos to conscious thought. And as birth of life was not an
accident in the course of this development, neither is the birth
of genius an accident in the life of human consciousness.
Today
we are no longer content with knowing that life, as substance,
composed itself around the skeletons of laws and techniques.
We no longer see them as the sole explanation for the movement
of life nor can we accept the Darwinistic view that mutations
were primarily innovations of the competitive struggle for survival
in relation to the environment.
Today
we ask about the intents and motivations underlying the struggle,
no merely for survival, but for ascendancy.
Today
we ask what took place deep within an organism when it decided
to grow roots or wings; to creep underground or live in trees;
to grow feather instead of fur, or any of the countless details
that differentiate the species, though all are subject to a
unified system of laws.
What
then was the in-dwelling impetus that caused the will-to-be
to become a will-to-be-more, finally to build a nervous system
and a brain in an ever greater degree of refinement as the necessary
mechanism for the function of consciousness?
The
answer is geniality*; geniality as the essence of the eternally
self-generating Life-Source seeking fulfillment in an ever wider
range of variety or even higher levels of life-experience; geniality,
as that spark flung from the revolving fires of creation, falling
where it must -- into the furrows of that life-soil wherein
lay waiting the promise of genius. Hence geniality was the indispensable
spearhead in the ascendancy of life of life in both its natural
and cultural development. Riding the current of life, its function
at every new step of creation set a precedent for the phenomenon
of genius at its highest level: consciousness. For as man was
not an instant happening in the program of life, neither was
the method by which his genius was to become reality in the
substance of life.
Today
we can well imagine that in the formative stages of life the
will-to-be,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * *
* Geniality in this context is defined as "of genius"
[Page 4]
surcharged with the will-to-be-more, gained
momentum in certain members of a particular species compelling
them to reach for a higher rung on the ladder. -- A sudden flare-up
of "enlightenment" comparable to what in man we call
inspiration must have taken place in such creatures at such
times. And then -- a burst of freedom, a breakthrough into a
new realization of form. Broken was the old shell and a whole
new genre was swept into being by a singular act of geniality.
But
at no stage during nature's great experiment was the bond broken
to the past. As choices were made in the physical form of a
species, so were they made in the hidden secrets of its soul.
Selectivity had to be practiced in both realms. Experiences
still valid for the new way of life were remembered while new
capacities were evolved to cope with new requirements.
Thus
life, while moving upward as it spread outward, accumulated
new experiences and recorded them as wisdom -- instinct and
intuition -- through genetically devised methods of preservation,
expanding and deepening within the growing chain of life.
Hence
to conceive of geniality coursing through the mechanisms of
life as the agent of creative transmutation intent upon ascendancy,
is no stranger than to finally see man emerge as heir to the
creative powers of the universe and to observe their explosive
operation in genius.
With
the birth of man was completed the vast circle of evolution.
Fulfilled were the intents and motivations of creation. Generated
by the process, now stood released from it, creature become
creator. Posited in his being was the potential for the endless
re-creation of the universe as now confined within himself.
For man was the means by which the universe became that extension
of itself that was more than material phenomena: conscious experience.
Billions
of years of gestation in the womb of nature had brought forth
this child, bound to her, yet free - a stranger among all other
offspring. True, in his framework were components that testified
to his origin in the blind elements; his blood resembled life's
birth-place, the ocean, the cellular composition and the systems
that coordinate the function of his body told the story of every
major move of life toward his coming -- all evolved memories
older than man himself, more ancient even than life maintaining
the laws of their operation.
But it was his newly awakened consciousness that set man apart,
made him an outsider able to look within. His intellect allowed
him to draw the universe into himself, to absorb it as knowledge,
while his soul experienced the miracle of existence, its splendor
and wonder. Thus was the universe transformed into an intellectual
and spiritual reality. While reason abstracted its operations
into physical, chemical and geometric principles, reducing form
to formula, the soul was able to expand beyond whatever was
form or abstraction and, by experiencing infinity and eternity
within itself, learned to transpose the nature of the ALL into
its given forms: time and space.
But
it was through the medium of genius that these potentials found
their highest level of realization in the realm of human existence.
It
is through genius that life as a historical and cultural movement
of the eternal forces of creation constantly renews itself --
or tries to find a new and higher form of existence. Therein
lies the purpose of human genius and its meaning in the destinies
of men.
For
as consciousness was the objective of creation, so genius as
its most perfect vehicle was its ultimate end; the realization
of the Godhood of itself as the Soul of the Universe through
the consciousness being of man and in alliance with the freedom
of his will.
Helgar.
* * *
BEETHOVEN
The mystery of all creation stands
at once intensified and all-revealed
as symbols once recorded by your hands
burst forth, eternal silence unsealed.
And as the storm-tossed soul
upon
your course
is borne beyond the bounds
of
earthly reach
and in the glory of your genial force
the universe with all its stars
finds
speech
It seems in awe God's need
of
Man to lend
voice to eternity, as from the sod
must Genius rise in service of its end
to show to common men the face of God. |
[Page 5]
ICELAND
Iceland
is the large island in the north Atlantic, just touching on
the Arctic Circle. It covers almost 40,000 sq.m. -- about the
size of Virginia - but due to its northern position, the interior
of the island is barren and uninhabitable; in the coast areas,
however, the mild winds of the warm Gulf Stream make the climate
friendly enough for about 200,000 people -- not much more than
half the number living in tiny Luxemburg -- to stay fairly comfortably,
on this island area that has played a very important role in
the history of our ancestors.
The
traditional date for the discovery of this New Land in the Atlantic
is usually put as the year 860, but it surely was known to the
Vikings long before; according to Ari the Wise, some monks were
already at that time living there, having taken to the sea in
attempts to escape Viking raids on Ireland in earlier years.
The
three Vikings often cited as the discoverers of Iceland are
the Swede Gardar and two Norwegians, Naddod and Flokki. But
it is also reported that the Norwegian, Ingolf, first went to
Iceland and gave the island its name, at a time when King Harald
Haarfager (Fairhair) was very young. King Harald became king
over part of Norway on his father's death in 850, later conquering
all of the country; he reigned til the year 933.
The
first settlement of Iceland took place mainly in the last part
of the 9th century. And who were these people who found a home
on the shores of this icy island, removed from the then known
world by about 500 miles?
In
`Landnamabok' -- so called because you named the land
wanted to take -- is told the story of how Viking colonizers
set out, particularly from the western fiords of Norway, with
their families, their livestock, and household articles, to
find new ground. In Norway the conditions in those days were
not too good and workable land was not plentiful; furthermore,
some of these rugged, fiercely individualistic Viking chiefs
were unhappy with the power the kings were arrogating themselves,
so they decided to look for greener pastures where they once
again could become independent. Almost certainly Vikings from
the rest of Scandinavia as well as from Ireland and Scotland
set course for Ireland; thus, although the largest part of the
Icelanders were of Scandinavian stock, Celtic blood was mixed
in their veins.
The
Iceland Vikings were not raiders or voyageurs, but intent on
establishing themselves as farmers. On the plains and in the
valleys along the coast large tracts of grass land were excellent
for raising sheep and cattle; fish were plentiful in rivers,
lakes and in the sea surrounding the island and birds nested
in great numbers. Life was reasonably good and there was plenty
of space in those early days.
One
problem was keeping warm during the long winter months, but
birch woods were growing in sufficient numbers to afford building
material as well as fuel.
It
is reckoned that about 400 families migrated to Iceland in the
first period and by the middle of the 10th century the total
population is considered by some to have been as high as 30,000.
By
that time it became clear that some system of law and order
was necessary in the new country. The settlers of course were
following the code of conduct they knew from their homelands,
but as the population grew, an organized political system became
imperative.
In
the year 930 a great political event therefore took place: The
first General Assembly was formed, called the `Althing (Alting)'
which was the early beginning of the establishment of the Icelandic
Republic.
As
Adam of Bremen once wrote about the Icelanders: They have no
king, only the law. The Republic was considered a democracy,
but in reality was rather an aristo-democracy in which the heads
of each of the original families formed the membership of the
Althing, meeting at a certain place, where they decided all
matters. The country was divided into smaller areas, each with
its own `thing' where the prominent people from the area met
and discussed matters of local concern. Over a period of time
the Icelanders compiled an extraordinary code of law which first
were handed down by word of mouth only; it was the duty of The
Lawspeaker to remember and recite the laws and teach them to
his successor; they were finally put in writing about the year
1118.
The
Althing also functioned as a judicial assembly, holding court
and passing sentences; strangely enough, however, it did not
have powers to enforce its deci-
[Page 6]
sions; this important, function was.left up
to individuals, which soon proved to be a rather untenable situation,
causing instability and mocking the authority of the Law.
The
Althing met for two weeks during the summer and it was an occasion,
not only for the lawmakers to meet and tend to the business
of the country, but the Althing became a time for the young
people to meet, for the women to exchange experiences, for the
merchants to trade their wares and generally, for everybody
to make a little whoopee.
Gradually
a nation was formed out of the diverse groups of people coming
into the country during the last part of the 9th century.
The
Republic of ancient Iceland kept its original form for about
300 years. In the year 1262 Iceland was brought under the domain
of the king of Norway (Haakon Haakonson) and the Icelanders
were once again under the rule of a Norwegian king from whose
hegemony their ancestors had sailed away centuries before.
The
settlers were mostly heathen although many of them had heard
about the New God. The monks already there when the first settlers
came, of course tried to convince the newcomers of the supremacy
of the Christian God compared to the power of the Asir, and
over a period of time some were coaxed into accepting the Christian
faith along with the beliefs in the Gods of Old; it is for example
told that Helgi the Lean called his farm 'Kristness' in honour
of the New God, but whenever he was in a tight spot or was faced
with making a major decision he called on Thor, still believing
the ancient God to be of more help than the foreign Christ he
did not know too well. However, in the year 1000 the Althing
decided to accept Christianity as the formal religion of the
island; of course not everybody was converted to Christianity
all of a sudden, a long transition period followed in which
little by little the old ways were replaced with Christian ideas
and customs, but here as in all other parts of Northern Europe,
the Christian Church had to make concessions and adapt Christianity
so that it did not clash too severely with old time-honoured
traditions.
The
important role Iceland plays in the history of our ancestors
is partly due to the many Sagas of Icelandic origin, left to
us as a valuable part of our cultural heritage. These stories
are splendid literature, exciting, fascinating records of the
life of great men and their families they ought to be read by
all persons who feel bonds of kinship with our racial ancestors
of long ago.
Granted,
in some of the sagas, it is difficult to know which of the related
events are historically true, but they paint an excellent picture
of life and death of our early forefathers, expressing clearly
the emphasis placed upon loyalty, heroism and dignity of the
individual; some of the sagas record the history of one family
through several generations, some are love stories while others
evidently are told about imaginary people, solely for entertainment.
The
Icelandic language was in the early days probably almost identical
to that spoken on the Western coasts of Norway, but already
by the time the sagas were written down, differences were noticeable;
changes have occurred since then, less in Icelandic than in
Norwegian and the language is no longer readily understood by
other Scandinavians. This may be a help to the Icelanders when
reading the old sagas, but it is a pity in the sense that it
renders difficult communication with one section of our people
who has much to offer in the study of our cultural heritage
as well as valuable literary contributions, not just from the
Viking centuries but right up to our present time.
Iceland
has in recent years been overtaken by Marxist socialism and
inflation is today rampant. It is to be hoped that our sturdy
and stout-hearted kinsmen on this northern island once again
will be able to free themselves from foreign control and prove
that the Spirit of Old has not vanished but still is living
in the hearts and minds of noble men, ready -- in due course
-- to reclaim their part of our common cultural heritage.
* * *
Combined subscription for 4 issues of
THE ODINIST & 8 issues of THE SUNWHEEL
----------- $2.00 -----------
Back issues available
Free sample copies on request
PLEASE NOTE:
Canada
now has a new postal code system. Our address is:
P.O. Box 731
Adelaide St. Stn.,
Toronto, Ontario,
Canada M5C 2J8
|
[Page 7]
SUMMER SOLDIERS
It
was back in 1775 Thomas Paine said: "The summer soldier
and the sunshine patriot, in this crisis, shrink from the services
of their country."
Let
us widen this a little to include, not just our respective countries,
but our society, the whole of Western Civilization, with all
its many facets, its magnificent technology, its efficient know-how,
its expertise as well as its gullibility, the ease with which
it can be conned and the naive conviction that in our bonnie
woods there are no wolves.
We
are also in a crisis now, although different to that of the
late 18th century but where are our soldiers and patriots?
On
the technical front, to be sure, we have had, not just summer
soldiers, but hard working, imaginative individuals and groups
of citizens who have accomplished marvels and done what nobody
ever thought were possible. We have indeed had many ingenious
people serving our countries; -- we reached for the moon --
and we reached the moon.
But
when it comes to serving our civilization in order to protect
it against intruders who want to change our way of life, or
against those who want to sponge on our knowledge, perseverance
and industry, then most people turn into summer soldiers and
sunshine patriots. As long as all is well, they are there right
up front, but when they are confronted with unpleasant facts,
when it takes a little clear thinking and honest investigation,
they retreat and refuse to believe that something rotten is
going on, not just in the State of Denmark, but in all countries
of the West -- (and here we are not thinking about Watergate
and the like). -- They hesitate to believe their own eyes, they
are afraid to cry wolf lest somebody should try to tell them
that what they thought was a big bad wolf (or bear) was really
just Little Red Ridinghood's grandmother, even if she looks
like a big bad wolf (or bear) must be harmless.
These
otherwise intelligent and upright people reject the idea that
what happened in countries that once were part of the West,
also can happen here. -- They, like the summer soldier and sunshine
patriot, shrink from the services of their countries; and we
are not talking about the regular armed forces; we are talking
about the army of alert people who are aware that we are in
the middle of an economic and spiritual war with strong forces
who want to dominate the West and change our mode of life, who
want to infringe upon our freedoms, whose aspirations it is
to reform the basic values of our society from individualism
and personal responsibility to collectivism and state control.
So,
kinsmen, wake and change from being summer soldiers and sunshine
patriots into becoming well informed, actively involved, clear-thinking
individuals who are ready to oppose those persons who -- though
living within our borders -- do not have any feelings of kinship
or love for the West; who only guzzle up our material wealth
but do not want to accept our cultural and spiritual values.
We do not want to impose our values upon them, but neither do
we want to have foreign ideas and alien concepts forced upon
us. We are capable of building and maintaining our own spiritual
highways upon which our people will travel, guided -- not by
a star from the East -- but by the new Spirit of the Age.
E.C.
* * *
You
know the expression `when all hell breaks loose,' but did you
ever realize that this is a phrase, originating from the old
saga about Ragnarok?
If
you remember, Loki -- the mischievous stranger who lived in
Asgard with the gods, had three children: The Midgard serpent,
the wolf Fenris and a daughter Hell (Hela), the queen of Helheim.
When
the Fenris wolf had grown so big and ferocious that nobody,
not even the strongest Asir, was able to handle him any longer,
the gods held council and decided he had to be bound.
How
they finally accomplished this feat is another story, but the
saga tells that after several attempts the gods tied him in
such a way that he could not get loose until the Day of Ragnarok,
when he will break his chains and take part in the final battle.
The
phrase therefore should really be `when the Fenris wolf breaks
loose,' but in the course of time he was mixed up with his sister
Hell through a merger of the two mythical figures. The fusion
is understandable, because the sagas also tell that the battle
at Ragnarok will be a fight where gods, men and giants will
die and many will have to go and live in Helheim. -- And this
is how we got the phrase `when all hell breaks loose.'
[Page 8]
AIM
HIGH!
Everybody
has great respect these days for `science' and many people even
believe they know a little about it; the scientist is considered
the most important fellow in our society for, without him, would
we have the material wealth we enjoy? We would still be in the
horse and buggy age -- no fridge, no air conditioning, no jets!
Granted, we have become so accustomed to these conveniences
that life without them seems almost unbearable, and admiration
is certainly in order for the high quality of our technology
and the men who invented and devised, imagined and designed
until we now have a creature comfort that is almost perfect.
When
it, however, comes to the other aspect of life -- the spiritual
principles guiding our intellectual existence -- few people
seem to have much knowledge about the laws of psychology, and
yet the standards of ethnics and morality are the important
rules we follow when determining which direction our emotional
life should take.
As
Plato said many years ago -- `It is no light matter to discuss
the course we must follow'; but there is today such widespread
confusion and misunderstanding about topics touching on ethics
and morality that it is difficult even to find a common starting
point from which to begin a discussion.
It
has in recent years been fashionable to announce that ethics
are becoming obsolete; this is of course nonsense -- the standards
of ethics may decay, but morality itself is part of the human
intellect and can never become antiquated. A common misperception
is that morality is relative, meaning there can be no absolute
moral standards, almost equating morality with taste about which
you are not supposed to argue.
But
what do we really mean when we are talking about ethics and
morality?
Well,
morality has to do with the way human beings act. It is exactly
in the way they act that humans distinguish themselves from
animals; although both have certain behavior patterns , it is
human beings only who are concerned with how they conduct themselves,
conduct being understood as actions dictated by moral ideas
and concepts of `right and wrong'. This is not to say that human
beings always choose to do what is right, only that they are
aware of the distinction between the two.
Anthropologists
have shown in studies of different peoples that all human societies
are directed by some system of moral standards, but they have
also found that these standards are not the same in all societies.
This is not surprising because the actual moral beliefs held
by any group of people are largely dependent upon the physical
and economic conditions under which they live and on their religious
attitudes towards Life and Death, which again are closely related
to intellectual capacities and other racial characteristics.
The
notion that `morality is relative' is therefore understandable
but incorrect. The moral standards within any given
healthy society or group of people are the same and binding
on all members of that society; it is only when the moral beliefs
of one society are compared with those of another group, living
under different conditions and having different thought patterns,
that there can be any talk of relativism in ethics.
Another
fallacy confuses morality with religion, which in our Western
civilization means that adherents to the Christian Church harbour
the amazing notion that only Christians have monopoly on moral
conduct and ethnical motivations. I beg to disagree with this
hypocritical view; there is undoubtedly a relationship between
morality and religion, but they are not identical and morality
is not a Christian specialty.
A
code of conduct is an essential feature of all organized societies;
only if members of the group are prepared to submit a certain
portion of their freedom to regulation by a set of agreed-upon
rules are they able to establish the degree of `law and order'
without which living in a social co-operative looses its advantage.
Abiding
by certain accepted rules and regulations introduced somewhere
along the line is the idea of `duty.' A duty is something you
are expected to do, whether you in that particular moment like
it or not; the reasons behind what is expected of you may vary
with the different conditions your group lives under. In Western
society parents for example are expected to look after their
children to the best of their ability, -- it is their duty,
but it is a duty most parents are
[Page 9]
happy to perform; if you have promised something,
you are expected to keep your promise -- going back on your
word is frowned upon. In other societies men may have other
codes to live by. A duty thus is an action you are expected
to perform according to your position within the group -- it
is what you `ought to do.'
But
when we get into the concept of `ought to,' we are entering
into the realm of moral beliefs. Morality is usually based upon
a moral judgment about actions being `right' or `wrong.'
It
is within this complex of ethics and moral attitudes we find
the basis for a certain outlook -- a religious expression of
beliefs about Life and Death -- a Weltanschauung -- and from
there it is only a short step over to accepting the moral obligation
that is contained in the ethical idea that we ought to act in
accordance with what we, and our society, have judged as right
or wrong.
In
all societies people now and then find themselves in a situation
where their personal interests conflict with what is considered
in the best interest of that social order. When people nevertheless
are fulfilling their moral obligations, they are acknowledging
that the importance of duty to society is of a higher order
than their own personal inclinations. Such is for instance the
case when the homeland is threatened; a man might be afraid
of going to war, but he feels it is his duty to defend his country;
he disregards his own wishes in the belief that he ought to
fulfil the moral obligations he has to the society in which
he lives.
If
I act according to what I believe is my moral obligation and
`do my duty' in a case where it is against my personal advantage,
I do so not necessarily because I am afraid of reprisals, here
or in another world; contrary to the Christian notion that religion
(ie. Christianity) is needed to keep people in line; many Christians
have adopted the `lollipop-theory' that the promise of eternal
bliss in Heaven if you are `good' and eternal punishment in
Hell if you are `bad' is the only way to make people behave
the way they should.
It
is certainly not the motivation for all people. One very important
reason for a man to do what he considers right is that his self-respect
would suffer if he degrades himself and does something unfair,
base or otherwise morally wrong. He is aware that even if other
people did not find out about any wrong-doing, it would not
make much difference; the knowledge that he had failed to follow
his accepted code of conduct would injure his own opinion about
his personal integrity and he would not be very proud of himself.
He therefore puts aside personal comfort or short term wishes,
and does what is expected of him -- he does `his duty' -- because
he know that otherwise he would not be able to live with himself.
I
realize that as soon as words like `duty' and `responsibility'
are mentioned and people get uptight, they think it sounds too
severe and uncompromising; but if you take the trouble to look
further you would find this is not really the case. If you have
a genuine appreciation for the accomplishments of previous generations;
if you understand the close relationship between the Past, the
Present, and the Future; and if you are honestly concerned about
the welfare of your people, it is neither disagreeable nor burdensome
to follow your instinctive tendencies and it will give you great
satisfaction to do what you consider best for your kith and
kin.
I
would suggest that one of the main reasons for the many mental
disorders and strong emotional upsets that many people experience
in our time lies exactly in this, that they have not kept their
moral standards sufficiently high, they have slipped down the
easy road to immediate pleasure, disregarding duty and obligations;
they have forgotten the agreed-upon code of conduct and acted
against their inner feelings of what they in their hearts consider
right or wrong. There may be good explanations and excuses for
this whole picture of decay of our moral code -- indeed I could
launch into a long discourse on these matters -- but whatever
the reason, many people find it impossible to live in peace
with themselves; the reaction to this is a breakdown of mental
stability and personal fulfillment.
How
do we arrive at the moral standards we strive for?
Our philosophers have from early times tried formulate ideals
for Western man and in ages long past certain qualities such
as courage, honesty and trustworthiness were held in high esteem,
and men sought to direct their conduct accordingly, if they
took pride in themselves
[Page 10]
and their clan. That they did not always live
up to these high standards is another matter which has nothing
to do with the ideals themselves.
In
human beings the capacity for moral reflections is innate; the
code of conduct a society follows will however have to be taught
from generation to generation. If man's moral standards are
depending upon education, it follows that his ethics will vary
with the kind of education he receives. It also follows that
if people's actions are not in conformance with our accepted
rules, we must consider what kind of moral education they received.
It is thus conceivable that a man can follow his conscience
-- even with considerable discomfort to himself and still do
something we think is wrong.
Generally,
people get their moral education in the first years of life
from parents, teachers and religious instructors. When we are
young we accept on authority the beliefs we are taught; it is
not until children grow up they begin to ask 'Why?' and 'How
come?' When the child matures he will want to find out for him
self the basis for the moral values he has been taught; a search
for the reasons behind is in itself good, for only when we in
our own mind agree with the foundation for society's ideas about
ethics and morality will we be able to uphold them with any
degree of conviction. Empty rules that have no basis in reality
will therefore during such investigations be discarded and it
is wise of a society from time to time to examine its moral
standards.
Ethical
rules are justifiable when they are to the advantage of the
society as a whole and in the interests of the communal pattern
of life; they must be subservient, to the common good and promote
the way of life the members of the group wish to preserve.
If
conditions change, the code of conduct may, to some degree,
change with them; but it will have to be left up to the best
minds (and hearts) of the group to decide in which direction
and to which degree the moral beliefs may depart from earlier
concepts. A society has responsibilities, not only to the people
comprising the society at any one time, but it also has essential
obligations to future generations; the general attitude that
'everything goes, and to hell with what comes after' is not
good enough.
The
Cultural heritage of a people is only to be considered as a
trusteeship; our present generation has received certain values,
both physical and intellectual, from our ancestors, and it is
our duty to deliver these treasures, if not enhanced, then at
least unimpaired, to our descendents.
One
of the main aims of The Odinist Movement is to take care of
the values that were given to Western Civilization by our forefathers
-- improve if possible -- and give to the next generation our
priceless heritage which is the only lasting values we can leave
behind, so that our descendents will live on and with dignity
and, self-confidence fulfil the destiny of our kind.
E.C.
* * *
THE OLD RELIGION
We
have now and then used the expression 'the old religion,' meaning
the religious attitudes of our ancestors. It has been brought
to our attention that a large group of people also use this
term but mean something quite different.
We
would like to state categorically: here and now that we do not
have any connection with groups who practice witchcraft, gaze
into crystal balls, have occult séances, etc.
We
have no quarrels with any such group, and we agree with them
Western Civilization has become too materialistic, too pragmatic,
and far too impressed by its technological accomplishments.
We
do not believe, however, that the answer lies in the occult,
in astrology, in the Crafts or in any of the religions of the
East. We have no doubt that these people are sincere in their
search for spiritual fulfillment; this is also what we want
for ourselves and our kinsmen; -- but we want to emphasize strongly
that ours is a different road; mysticism is, in our opinion,
not in accord with the intellectual characteristics of Indo-Europeans.
Odinism
has no hallucinations, no superstitions, no ouija boards; instead,
Odinism places great importance upon preservation of our cultural
heritage and traditions, values moral principles and concepts
of the Past, and affirms that the dignity and integrity of the
individual must be the all-pervading theme of all our activities.
E.C.
|
9
at
the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781