Tag Archives: Monotheism

Polemical topics for polytheists (part 6): Indigenism

First view: The indigenous people of the world are faring very well and are part of modern society, therefore they don’t need our help

Second view: The indigenous people of the world are in great misery and they need to be championed by everyone born with privilege (i.e. people descended from European colonists)

Balanced view: If we all think of ourselves as indigenous to a certain part of the world, and act accordingly, the problem will be solved.

Although it was my intention to consider ethnicity and ethnic religion, it is impossible to do so without understanding indigenism and its integral place within the system of polytheism. In ancient times, the various peoples of humankind spread themselves through the Earth gradually and accidentally in the course of many tens of thousands of years. When these journeys ended, and most lands were inhabited, peoples diversified further within distinct territories to form distinct cultures, practices and languages. It is difficult to determine when exactly this permanent or regional settlement occurred, but it seems to have been (in general) hardly later than the past three thousand years ago. However, with the rise of population (mainly because of agriculture), states arose and battled for wealth and power, and before long, the vile spirit of imperialism was born, and its lust for absolute domination, false glory, and unjust expansion began. As shown in the previous series (good and bad polytheists), we see it occurring throughout the world where agriculture was adopted along rivers, even (though to a lesser degree) in South America with the Incan Empire. It is thus easy to understand how indigenism lost to imperialism and its twin colonialism.  After  extended periods of growth (following fall of the Roman Empire) an absolute tragedy occurred in Western Europe: Ethnic groups on the margins of national empires, formerly indigenous Celts, who were now oppressed and disliked by the new dominant cultures based in the capital cities, undertook to colonize actively (as if in escapism) the New World. It is no secret that most settlers in the New World were poor, scorned and therefore hungry for some sort of wealth or acknowledgement— the Spaniards on the fringes, the Northern & Western English, the Welsh, the Irish, the Scots, the Portuguese, the Scots-Irish, the Hugenots of France, the Southern Germans, etc. These people had been oppressed by an inner colonization & imperialism in the form of nationalism, and now they were tempted to help themselves, not knowing that they were also feeding the same oppressive system of nationalism, and this again at the expense of other indigenous people. Thus, by a most unfortunate twist of fate and conspiracy on the part of the theocratic & national forces, the marginal groups of Europe, formerly indigenous, founded their own theocratic & national systems throughout the New World, in order to prove themselves and put an end to their former oppression, as if in defiance of the native countries that had scorned them. The obvious observation here is that imperialism and colonialism cause destructive cycles that expand and diversify themselves—the very definition of a disease. But since this is not a conclusion, we must answer the question, what is to be done nowadays? Although I am somewhat biased to the second view above, it seems to imply (ironically) that people of European descent will be committing only another sort of colonialism by championing and speaking on behalf of indigenous peoples. The solution? Leave. Yes, leave however and whenever you can to rediscover and resettle your indigenous homeland. This is already a time in history during which people are travelling more than ever and changing their residence constantly, because it has never been easier; this is likewise a time when several parts of the world, especially Europe, is declining in its birth-rates. As polytheists, it is furthermore impossible to overlook we are rebels and more or less distant from our families. So, what can be the excuse? Say what you will, but I’ll maintain that the Hellenic Zeus has no place out of the original lands inhabited by Greeks, nor do the Celtic or Germanic Gods belong to America, Canada, Brazil, Australia, or any part of the New World. By worshipping them there, we commit a sort of absurdity, and above all, we disappoint our Gods by alienating them from their original holy areas and at the same time, we anger them by allowing them to encroach on the lands of other Gods. Now, if you ask me, how can Gods own lands? The answer is quite simple: Since every indigenous people has their pantheon, the Gods preside as patrons of the land and all that belongs to what we call nature. What makes us different from monotheists is that we don’t believe there is one supreme, omnipotent, omnipresent (aka imperial) deity ruling over all peoples and all parts of the Earth. Gods and cultures and peoples and lands in polytheism are all connected within distinct groups, which all have the right to remain and continue, with neighborly exchange and sharing, otherwise we commit imperialism and colonialism. Another difference from monotheists (and their descendants the modernists) is that we don’t misuse the universal term “humanity”, as if to show we are all happily united as one people on one earth*. If Zeus can exist within Ireland, it can only mean he is appropriating the thunder of Taranis. If Taranis or Odin can exist within America (with a majority of people as descendants of colonists), it can only mean they have overthrown the realm of the Great Spirit, and therefore they are superior to it because of current supremacy. If this seems wrong, it is because we are too accustomed in our thinking to the transcendent immaterial side of divinity only, as practiced by monotheism, while forgetting of the solid material side. Let us therefore no longer be tokens and playthings in the hands of colonialists and imperialists. Let us do our part to end the problem of immigration by replacing its false economic purpose for a real cultural one. Let us then return to our own ancestors and Gods in the true sense and spirit of the word, by returning to their lands.

 Please visit this website, if you are interested in learning more about an ambitious project & discussion of unsettling America and re-indigenization begun by a fellow polytheist. N.B. The author uses the term “whiteness” in the sense of “westernization”, not in the sense of “race”, and she explains this under the section “heal whiteness”.

*Humanity is a generic term that really bears no significance as a united and universal concept, except when monotheism is applied (or its descendants: atheism and modernism). One god leads to one people, doesn’t it (just as atheism leads to people vs god, ironically)? But this only means that imperialism is in force by one culture over all others. Notice how the language of “humanity” is English nowadays. Surely that has a connection with British and American imperialism? And surely that extends to cultural values also? This is by no means a coincidence.




Polemical topics for polytheists (part 5): Community

First view: There is a growing community of polytheists, who happen to be active individuals online

Second view: There is really no community at all for polytheists, but they pretend there is

Balanced view: We should use our groups and communications online in order to make a transition towards communities on the ground

As things stand, it is a ripe time for the growth of polytheism in many parts of the world. Various freedoms, a quick access to learning, and the decay of monotheism encourage us to go forward and seize the day. But while we are enjoying these fruits while going forward, should we not also look forward and plant the seeds of our fruits? We all know the consequences of a lack of foresight and an attachment to the present only—add to that our individual concerns and comforts, which we often place above all other things. Polytheism is not a fashion that we put on and display, to share with others on social media, or to stand out in a crowd. It is rather an organic and structural entity that is only nourished and managed—no, kept alive—with proper care and collective effort. I wish I were sitting at the moment around a campfire sharing stories with fellow polytheists, rather than writing this piece alone. There is a question to be reflected on seriously: how do we define community and how do we wish to see the future condition of polytheism in the world? Here I recall my thoughts and the discussion I had with my kind readers in the first part of this series, regarding the common vision and mission of polytheists. The necessity of a community on the ground is one that can never be emphasized enough. Planting the seeds of the fruits we enjoy is one good step, but scattered individuals can only serve themselves and a few others by doing so. The next step, which determines whether we will enjoy the fruits for many generations to come, is to come together in order to survey, build, till, sow, irrigate, and harvest.* This is not so much a project, as an extension of a simple notion—that of settling. Why do people tend to marry and settle in a certain place with their children? Because that is what leads to a more convenient life of sharing and caring. Many families of a certain culture and belief make up a community. I am biased towards the second view, from time to time, because I hear the first view too often. But why not combine them rather than make a dualism out of it? We can and should exist in local and distinct communities, while participating in the modern world. There is much room for variation in this, and a pluralism of communal models can be considered and accepted, according to the needs and opinions of each community—which is the case with monotheists today. We can certainly discuss and differ on such models, but we can’t let individual comforts & opinions delay the formation of lasting communal structures for our future generations. I would dare say it is not even acceptable to the Gods that people should worship too much individually, so long as we are able to get together. As much as we seem comfortable, we are actually in a state of survival and self-preservation, if our numbers and the competition is taken into consideration, much less the dangers we could face one day, if monotheism rises up again to a state of fanaticism. There is one community of polytheism I can think of which has undertaken the project (i.e. Asatru), but I have a disagreement with their method—I can’t understand why a northern Germanic tradition would accept all “European” people. This leads to another consideration about “race” and ethnic religion, which I will look into in the next topic, because it is almost inseparable from the same discourse of community or at least inevitably connected to it. Meantime, let us look into community and the necessity of it for our preservation and continuity. Are any of you fellow polytheists comfortable enough with knowing a few people like yourselves, either family or friends online? Surely you must be lonely as I am, more or less, and in need of many more people like you within your life daily and in person. 


*The metaphor of the farm and agriculture is perfectly applicable, although I don’t mean extensive or intensive agriculture, but one that supports a community of a modest number with as little interference with nature as possible.

Polemical topics for polytheists (part 4): Monotheists to learn from?

First view: Since monotheism is opposed to polytheism, we can learn nothing from monotheists

Second view: Since monotheism is another system of belief & culture like our own, we can generally learn as much from monotheists as polytheists

Balanced view: What we can learn from monotheists is limited, but it can be of great importance for our successful competition

If there is no question that monotheism has brought much detriment to the world, there is also no doubt that its adherents exceed our own (at least nowadays) in resolution, unity, and action. The many centuries that separate us from our pious and powerful ancestors should make us far more active and concerned for the welfare of our ancient ways and beliefs than we have been. It is excellent for us to teach or remind ourselves of the good (or indeed bad) examples of famous ancient polytheists—that is a sacred duty. But if this brings us inspiration or admiration, we are still not prompted to action and energy as much as we would be by the example of a monotheist. Be it from shame or jealousy or both, when we see our rival successful or powerful, we seek to do something similar with far more passion and concern than if we see our friend in the same situation. Even the Gods themselves underwent and undergo such emotions. It need not be shown how this is not only natural, but also necessary and useful. And since our world today is still dominated by monotheists, we must act accordingly and beat them at their games. For this purpose, we can learn from several ancient and modern examples. Moses is said to have suffered and sacrificed his high position in order to save his people from bondage in foreign lands by rebellion and then given them laws in their native lands. Although this is largely false propaganda, it remains a powerful story for monotheists and in our own case, it suggests that we need similar leaders who will rise up and inspire us all to action and unity. Paul of Tarsus is regarded as a Christian saint because he traveled and preached zealously throughout the Roman Empire; he wrote letters to existing congregations, established new communities, and is said to have been crucified for it. We polytheists don’t lack ancient martyrs, but where is the one today who can approach such piety when it is needed most? There were many Christian apologists who wrote tracts and engaged in debates with polytheistic authors—the disputation must return in public. Just as Christians attracted new followers because they were a “counter-culture” against Roman hegemony, we can and must do the same against Christian dominance! Next, where is a rich Hindu or capable polytheist who can rival Louis IX’s zeal, give up several years of his or her life, and return victorious after an ideological and cultural campaign, not a military one? Who among us polytheists can do what Loyola accomplished, in establishing a new movement of education and schools for youth that spread very quickly throughout Europe? Give me a polytheist, who like Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, can reinvent and re-establish an ancient language for a new people like the Jews in Israel! Show me the polytheists ready to match with the unyielding zeal of the Jehovah Witnesses or the noble patience of the Amish—Rise polytheists to greatness, while you may!

Restore our families, Ye Gods of Love,
And You of War, our breasts to vengeance move!
Redeem our shame, oh raise our hearts and hands
To worship rightly, and regain our lands!
Condemn’d are they who left our ancient path;
May their invented guiles inspire Your Wrath!

Polemical topics for polytheists (part 3): Systematic “polytheism”

First view: Polytheism is a mode of religion that governs the relations between people and Gods.

Second view: Polytheism is a mode of philosophical thought that governs how the world is viewed.

Balanced view: Polytheism is a religious, cultural, and social system based on tradition that governs our relations with the Gods, our way of life, and the world itself.

Words and terms can sometimes entrap those who think they are served by them; languages are by nature imperfect, especially when a complication arises because of time and tradition. There are also the problems of common usage, connotation, newly coined words, and mixing cultures. One thing is certain, however, within the scope of our discourse: The English language, together with probably most modern languages, does not contain a word that adequately explains “polytheism” as a concept or system. The word “polytheism” in itself is artificially constructed to provide a contrast to “monotheism”, a later system that supplanted its predecessor. Since both are defined through their differences, what we have left amounts only to “religion”, without the necessary considerations that accounts for the greater system that existed surrounding belief and worship. To think of either monotheism or polytheism merely as a religion, as many do, is to fall into the trap of modern language and its tendency to isolate or specialize terms, as well as to pretend it can encompass all ideas, beyond the confines of culture. The first and second views above are also examples of a kind of dualism that is at best unnecessary and at worst factious. Both views are correct, but they are also both partial, leaving out something greater that makes a complete whole. It behooves us in such a case to use larger words, as shown with the balanced view above. The worshipping of Gods existed amidst a cultural and social framework: There was agriculture or pastoralism to support their worldview, there was little pollution or oppression of nature to spoil it, there was oral tradition that passed through generations, there were customs that weren’t questioned or challenged selfishly within the group, there were priests or holy leaders who were revered by all (but not in a theocratic manner), there were elders and matrons who were respected by the young, and certainly there were communities of people that depended on one another. These are examples of a system surrounding the worshipping of Gods; take those all away and you are left with “religion” or “philosophy”, an isolated idea that applies to thinking and to individuals, more proper for books and discourse than as a true way of life. We should all aim at exploring and embracing all the parts within the larger system of polytheism that once existed in the better and more balanced world of our ancestors. In doing so, we will purify our worldview of the remnants of monotheism and its system, and lead a life that is more harmonious with people, nature and the Divine Beings.

Polemical topics for polytheists (part 2): Modernity

First view: “Modernity is a blessing that should be embraced, because it has made us advance”

Second view: “Modernity is a curse that should be shunned, because it has ruined the world and nature”

Balanced view: “Although tradition is by far preferable, part of modernity is important to use for the time being”

The best way to describe modernity would be to consider Western Civilization*, which is in effect a synonym, as well as to look at the world as it stands. The systems of capitalism and globalism prevail; there is excess in everything and everywhere, because everybody tends to imitate the Western way of life. There is comfort to the degree of decadence, and satisfaction (much less true happiness) is hard to find, because society is no longer cohesive and communal. A great deal of imbalance threatens to turn a world, which has seemingly been reformed and improved, into a monster. Meantime, being trapped within this system, we polytheists can only hope and act to the best of our ability. At least modernity, through advancements in archaeology, provides us with the means to rediscover our ancient heritage, and through technology, to connect with one another quickly. It could even be said that the subversive and imbalanced qualities of modernity have allowed us to exist freely again, through the decay of monotheism. In an ideal world, the aforementioned second view would be best, but according to reality, we must carefully make use of some of the advantages of modernity (at least for the time being), if our intention is to rise again and compete successfully with our rivals. But careful we must be: modernity does not distinguish between monotheism and polytheism in its subversions and imbalances. For that reason, we’ll need to treat it like a tool and acquaintance, rather than a master or friend. When it falls to a choice between polytheism and modernity, there should be no hesitation to choose the former. And when modernity is no longer absolutely necessary, we should be the first to lay it aside in favor of an older, happier, and humbler way of life that is more balanced and more traditional, putting nature and culture above money and machine.



*A very suitable acronym would be WC

Polemical topics for polytheists (part 1): Our vision and mission

Between two differing sides or two opposing extremes, there is always a balanced position to be found that mediates and reconciles them harmoniously, for the good of all parties. All sides and extremes exist for a reason and rightly claim our attention; the purpose should be to combine the beneficial points of those sides whiling avoiding the harmful. Seeing how useful this method is, I will endeavor to pursue it on this topic as well as on future ones. Therefore, to the question of “what is the current vision and mission of polytheists in the world?”, these are three possible answers,

First view: “Our mission is to embark on personal spiritual journeys and our vision is to be strongly connected with the Gods.”

Second view: “Our mission is to work together towards undermining monotheism and our vision is to rule the world”.

Balanced view: “Our mission is to work towards strengthening our general standing and our vision is the re-establishment and continuity of our religions & traditions throughout the world.”  

It is evident that none of these views are absolutely right or wrong, for that would depend on the context and circumstances of each. The third, however, appears more reasonable in a reconciliatory sense: Instead of the rather passive, solitary course of the first view, and the hostile expansionism of the second, the third view adopts a path that is both active and agreeable. We do certainly need spiritual journeys and strong connections with the Gods, as we also are required inevitably to compete with monotheism and restore our presence in the world. The true way to balance both is to re-examine our priorities and actions, according to our current situation. Comparisons with other individuals or groups is necessary and beneficial for such a task, since existence and growth depend on outer forces and circumstances. If strength comes both from inner conviction and unity of the group, what is the yardstick to measure this strength? Comparisons are necessary to determine that. So, let’s consider this question: how strongly does polytheism stand at the present time in comparison with monotheism? The answer is rather obvious and unfortunate, but it should make us think and act better, especially when the field for growth and improvement is really ripe and hopeful. Monotheism has already been declining, which is the reason why most of us are actually polytheists at the moment. We are now many individuals, with an opportunity to rise, but do we think of ourselves as a collective entity with a common mission and vision? Solitary worship and personal devotion is what we begin with, because we are forced to do so, and it is certainly good, so long as it does not obstruct unity on the ground. Fighting monotheism, on the other hand, is not really possible or reasonable, if victory is what we aim at. The means should not be confused with the end. Our end and purpose is to secure a strong framework to build our hopes upon, but like all foundations, it will require foresight, action, prudence and skill. Communities must form in order to take up this project successfully, otherwise our little structures will crumble or at least remain small and scattered in the face of powerful competitors. Can we truly have a long-lasting mission and long-sighted vision without strong communities? I think not.

Polemical topics for polytheists (introduction)

Polytheism has been undergoing a gradual revival, particularly within the last decades, while monotheism has declined.  During that time, the world has also experienced many extraordinary changes under modernity, which is still continuous. In many respects, modernism and monotheism affect the quality of our professed polytheism considerably, because we live in a world that is dominated by them. Polytheism is as much a holistic system as modernism and monotheism, extending beyond religion and belief; it is a way of thought, action, and indeed life. In the infancy of our revival, it behooves us to examine and reconsider several important points that constitute what polytheism truly is, if our intention is to bring this polytheism to maturity. Discussion is always essential at this time, and though debate and disagreement are inevitable, our attention should not be drawn away from our common vision, which is, to restore polytheism to what it once was. I hope to see the day when our restoration is fulfilled at the hands of great men and women, but in the meantime, let us advance steadily and surely, improving our capacities for spirit and learning as we go. To that end, I have laid out a plan for a new series, which I have rightly termed “polemical topics for polytheists”. There are many points of controversy and disagreement that we polytheists either avoid or wield, to serve our purposes, whatever they may be. But can the middle course of discussion be taken? I think so, especially if our purpose is to serve polytheism and the Gods. In the course of the series, I will attempt to present my thoughts on as many as 40 topics that need to be resolved, or at least understood, amongst polytheists of the present time. I don’t profess my views will be perfect or exemplary, but they will be candid and balanced, to the best of my ability; in doing so I will also take care to use ancestral tradition and ancestral wisdom as a general reference to guide me throughout my endeavors. Do please share your own thoughts, whenever you wish; I can truly discuss only when you participate, and my views can truly be beneficial only when somebody engages with them. To encourage you, I offer a short sample of the topics: education (of children), moral relativism, separatism, feminism, shamanism, philosophy, and technology. With that, let me say that part one comes out within a few days; watch out for it!