A.N.U.S.

American Nihilist Underground Society

ANUS.COM: American Nihilist Underground Society (A.N.U.S.) at www.anus.com
RSS feed of ANUS.com opinions and news Mailing list:
Search anus.com:

Nihilism, Futurist Traditionalism and Conservationism

Hail the Pagan Gods

31 10 11 - 14:00


Slaney-Davis, who is based in London, isn't preparing the feast for Halloween. Instead, she and pagans around the world are celebrating Samhain, the beginning of the pagan new year, a night when the veil between the worlds of the living and the dead is believed to be the thinnest of any time during the year.

That's why it's a night devoted to ancestors. "We honor them, and we recognize that we don't live in a world of people who are merely dead or alive," says Slaney-Davis, 46. "Ancestors are central to us." - CNN


CMP/Cf.:

(1) "The past is alive" -- Mayhem

(2) "The past isn't dead; it isn't even past." -- Wm. Faulkner

Pagan, Christianity, Greek... they are all doorways into the analysis of the world as it is, that is, they are all descended from Hinduism.

24 comments

evil-pagans-and-black-metal
"For us, the last 2000 years has been the pagan winter." - this guy surely listened to Darkthrone's "A Blaze In The Northern Sky" evil-pagans-and-black-metal - 31-10-’11 15:36
I Want To Believe
It must be nice to make baseless assertions while contradicting yourself from the past with impunity. Whelp, about time to get back to the turnip fields. I Want To Believe - 31-10-’11 20:08
lol
You just made a baseless assertion about baseless assertions, which is contradictory. Awesome joke at the end too. lol - 01-11-’11 14:41
IWTB
how exactly did i make a baseless assertion about baseless assertions? IWTB - 01-11-’11 21:12
Don't be like the proles, dude
@IWTB...he doesn'y know, he's Dave Schuel! Don't be like the proles, dude - 01-11-’11 23:21
not that there is a difference
or JooPe... not that there is a difference - 01-11-’11 23:29
GL
They are all NOT descended from Hinduism. Hinduism is one version of Indo-European belief...which is still a work in progress. You know better ANUS. GL - 01-11-’11 23:50
That's why they failed.
Correct, GL. He wants to claim Hinduism as the birth of all of them because it's the most sophisticated. Greek and Roman and Germanic pagan belief systems really weren't that sophisticated. That's why they failed. - 02-11-’11 00:21
GL
Greek and Roman, no, they were not. Germanic, I would disagree. The Germanic belief system was forcibly destroyed. First victims of Multi-culturalism? As far as Hinduism...the only reason that it's the "most sophisticated" is because they didn't experience any politically/monetarily motivated crusades. Must be nice to have your own state, huh? GL - 02-11-’11 00:44
Multiculturalism is a lot older
The Germanic system was forcibly destroyed, yes, by the Germans themselves. Multiculturalism is a lot older - 02-11-’11 17:54
thats a big topic
That is of course, an oversimplification. thats a big topic - 02-11-’11 18:34
Akkadians and Sumerians - Multiculturalists
More specifically some Germanic groups forced Christianity on others. Although that only goes for the southern/western Germanic people; the Norse men pretty much adapted Christianity on their own.

As for Hinduism, the ideas of both Christianity and Islam reached the Indian subcontinent early on. And of course Islam had some converts. But even Muslim rule (the Moguls) and Christian rule (the Brits) never destroyed the underlying Hindu foundation of society. I think we have to give some credit to the religion itself.

The exception is Goa, where the Portuguese Catholics wore them down. Akkadians and Sumerians - Multiculturalists - 02-11-’11 19:07
Forced/coerced multiculturalism is the problem
You mean the Christian ruling class forced Christianity on them don't you? And we both know that that has more to do with power than anything else. They were simply carrying on a long Roman tradition of expansion at the expense of their neighbors, using bribery, murder, etc. as their weapons. In the middle ages this was usually done with the backing of the Pope. I'm not aware of any Germanic "group" (tribe?) forcing Christianity on another unless it was some powerful individual doing it for personal gain...the same individuals who embraced feudalism at home for the same reason. Germanic pagans didn't fight religiously motivated wars until confronted by Christians.

The Norse, like the continental Saxons, the various Baltic tribes, etc. did NOT adopt Christianity on their own. Look up St. Olav and Olav Tryggvasson, just to name two. Both of them left a lot of corpses in their wake and were not really loved in their time, a sentiment that certainly had a hand in their deaths.

As far as Hinduism goes, I do give it credit, but the attacks that it came under were not under the same circumstances and should be viewed in such a way. The history of these places speaks for itself. I'm also not aware of any concerted effort by an armed aggressor to wipe out/convert Hindus in such a mass way as what happened during the Baltic Crusades or the Saxon Wars. Not that that would have been possible in the geographically larger Indian sub-continent. Forced/coerced multiculturalism is the problem - 02-11-’11 20:05
Forced/coerced anything is a problem.
"You mean the Christian ruling class forced Christianity on them don’t you?"

Yes, but that ruling class was composed of native Germanic peoples. In that time, the ruling class always imposed most of the changes that happened; Christianity was nothing exceptional.

"I’m not aware of any Germanic “group” (tribe?) forcing Christianity on another "

The Franks were responsible for forceably Christianizing most of the Continental Germanic groups; the Anglo Saxons and the Norse men were separately converted by missionaries, again non-forcefully.

"unless it was some powerful individual doing it for personal gain"

It wasn't just one individual. It was generations of Frankish rulers subsequently converting more and more of their neighbors, mostly other Germanic tribles.

"The Norse, like the continental Saxons, the various Baltic tribes, etc. did NOT adopt Christianity on their own. Look up St. Olav and Olav Tryggvasson, just to name two. Both of them left a lot of corpses in their wake and were not really loved in their time, a sentiment that certainly had a hand in their deaths."

But they were native Norse men, right? Who forced *them* to convert?

"I’m also not aware of any concerted effort by an armed aggressor to wipe out/convert Hindus in such a mass way as what happened during the Baltic Crusades or the Saxon Wars."

Well, they were ruled by Muslims for centuries under the Moghuls, and while they may not have killed anyone who wasn't Muslim, they surely encouraged conversion and more rights were afforded those who did. Plus, it wasn't any less force than that used in Scandinavia or England.

"Not that that would have been possible in the geographically larger Indian sub-continent."

True, and it had a more organized society pre-conquest. Forced/coerced anything is a problem. - 02-11-’11 21:07
GL
"Yes, but that ruling class was composed of native Germanic peoples. In that time, the ruling class always imposed most of the changes that happened; Christianity was nothing exceptional."

"The Franks were responsible for forceably Christianizing most of the Continental Germanic groups"

Like I said, a ruling Christian class with it's own motives. NOT the tribe as a whole.

"It wasn’t just one individual. It was generations of Frankish rulers subsequently converting more and more of their neighbors, mostly other Germanic tribes."

That's what I said. Take your pick of which individual, singular or plural, that you wish.

"the Anglo Saxons and the Norse men were separately converted by missionaries, again non-forcefully."

"Plus, it wasn’t any less force than that used in Scandinavia or England."

You just contradicted yourself. The spread of Christianity is full of examples of murder in Europe. The history of Anglo-Saxon England is rather stetchy, so specific examples are more difficult to find, but they do exist. On the conversion of Scandinavia, you're just wrong.

"But they were native Norse men, right? Who forced them to convert?"

They were by and large Vikings turned missionaries. Olav Tryggvasson was Paid off handsomely in Danegeld by the King of England and symbolically baptized in return for an end to his attacks. He then took his ambitions to Norway, with his own motives and at the expense of the communities there...importing another culture and political system. Whether he was a native born Scandinavian is kind of irrelevant given WHY they did it.

"True, and it had a more organized society pre-conquest."

Once again, the historical circumstances were different. Having a "more organized society" is only a part of that, albeit an important one. One has to also take into account geography, the time period, the invaders who are trying to conquer you, population of the area attempting to be conquered...blah, blah. GL - 02-11-’11 22:30
We're getting off the point, which is that Germanic beliefs were stupid.
"Like I said, a ruling Christian class with it’s own motives. NOT the tribe as a whole."

When is change ever enacted any other way? Again, the point is it was native Germanic people who did it; as a whole, Christianity was not forced on the tribe.

"You just contradicted yourself."

No, I really didn't. Force is involved in any societal change; read through the pages of this site and you'll notice it's not generally against the use of this type of force. I just made a relative claim, that the amount of force used in the two situations is comparable.

"Whether he was a native born Scandinavian is kind of irrelevant given WHY they did it."

I don't see why they would need Christanity to gain this kind of power, unless they really believed it. So the point once again is: at least some Scandinavians were converted without force. We're getting off the point, which is that Germanic beliefs were stupid. - 02-11-’11 22:40
Talk about getting off the point...
"I don’t see why they would need Christanity to gain this kind of power, unless they really believed it"

If you were a greedy thug who had the financial and political backing of the church and foreign monarchs, you'd probably believe in a virgin birth too.

Yes, you did. First they were not forced into it, then they were. Which was it, Mr. Generality?

"When is change ever enacted any other way? Again, the point is it was native Germanic people who did it; as a whole, Christianity was not forced on the tribe"

Change has happened many different ways. Not just by force...The point is, a ruling elite did it, by force, in the name of goD, and for purely greed-based motives. They imported a foreign dogma and a foreign political system by force.

"So the point once again is: at least some Scandinavians were converted without force."

Yeah, the greedy ones who had the funding to hire armies. Apparently you feel that this is okay?

"We're getting off the point, which is that Germanic beliefs were stupid"

Mad because you lost? Who started the whole thing anyway? All I said was...

"They are all NOT descended from Hinduism. Hinduism is one version of Indo-European belief…which is still a work in progress. You know better ANUS." Talk about getting off the point... - 02-11-’11 23:10
 I agreed with that, then and now.
"If you were a greedy thug who had the financial and political backing of the church and foreign monarchs, you’d probably believe in a virgin birth too."

No, I'd take the money and pay lip service to the Christians, but then go back home and preach my own do-what-I-say religion, no crap about the meek being blessed.

"Yes, you did. First they were not forced into it, then they were. Which was it, Mr. Generality?"

Once again: the underlings of society were forced, as all underlings are in every society, but the native rulers who decided to change their own society were not forced, at least not in the case of the Franks, or the Vikings, or the Anglo-Saxons. (Others, like the continental Saxons, the Frisians, the Alemanni, WERE forced, even their rulers, because their tribes were conquered by the already Christian Franks.)

"Yeah, the greedy ones who had the funding to hire armies. Apparently you feel that this is okay?"

When did I say anything about what's okay and what's not? My point was simply that the native Pagan belief systems weren't strong enough to resist the forces in question.

"Mad because you lost? Who started the whole thing anyway? All I said was…"

Not mad, just trying to get back on track. You're the one who disagreed about the Germanic version being fairly sophisticated.

"“They are all NOT descended from Hinduism. Hinduism is one version of Indo-European belief…which is still a work in progress. You know better ANUS.”" I agreed with that, then and now. - 02-11-’11 23:24
GL
"No, I’d take the money and pay lip service to the Christians, but then go back home and preach my own do-what-I-say religion, no crap about the meek being blessed"

That is exactly what they did. Look at their actions. you said:

"I don’t see why they would need Christianity to gain this kind of power, unless they really believed it. So the point once again is: at least some Scandinavians were converted without force."

Again, the ones who did untold harm to their own societies in the name of power. Obviously I recognize not all of them were forced. I assumed when I mentioned names that would be a given.
"but the native rulers who decided to change their own society were not forced, at least not in the case of the Franks, or the Vikings, or the Anglo-Saxons"

So if a foreign backed pirate comes home and starts killing people in the name Christ, that means they were not forced?

"Once again: the underlings of society were forced"

Oh wait, they WERE forced!

"My point was simply that the native Pagan belief systems weren’t strong enough to resist the forces in question."

And my point was that it's more complicated than that...

"Once again, the historical circumstances were different. Having a “more organized society” is only a part of that, albeit an important one. One has to also take into account geography, the time period, the invaders who are trying to conquer you, population of the area attempting to be conquered"

"...at least not in the case of the Franks, or the Vikings, or the Anglo-Saxons"

Once again, not true. We seem to agree about the Norse, whether you admit it or not, but there are instances of forcible conversions and massacres in Anglo-Saxon England.

"You’re the one who disagreed about the Germanic version being fairly sophisticated."

Let me clarify. Because Hinduism is still a living religion, and the Germanic belief system was annihilated, it really is kind of hard to make a claim about it's lack of sophistication. Comparative mythology, archaeology, the sagas, etc. give the distinct impression of something that was fairly more sophisticated than it's given credit for. Hindus were very fortunate. But again, it is just on offshoot of Indo-European belief...so was Germanic religion. Put two and two together. GL - 03-11-’11 00:15
Brian
The two situations are too hard to compare. Virtuall the only recorde we have of Norse culture comes from Christians. And the muslims did lead horrobly bloody conflicts/crusades in India trying to convert them. Despite that the situations are still too complex to compare like that. Scandinavian religion and Hinduism are both superior to Christianity which has been imploding since the reformation. Brian - 03-11-’11 05:26
Neo-Pagans are free to try.
"Let me clarify. Because Hinduism is still a living religion, and the Germanic belief system was annihilated, it really is kind of hard to make a claim about it’s lack of sophistication."

Fair enough. Who knows what the Germanic system would have evolved into if given a chance, or for that matter the Greek and Roman systems. It is noteworthy however, that the great Hindu epics had already been composed long before Christianity even existed, let alone the Germanic peoples being converted to it. Neo-Pagans are free to try. - 03-11-’11 10:56
So they knew something.
"The two situations are too hard to compare. Virtuall the only recorde we have of Norse culture comes from Christians."

Yes, although they were Norse Christians, with still some cultural memory of the past belief systems. So they knew something. - 03-11-’11 10:57
GL
An interesting side note:

Odin, a VERY complex deity, is asked why he aids warriors in becoming great, only to allow them to fall. His response is "Because the grey wolf watches the abode of the gods", a reference to the coming Ragnarok. In other words, there are things about the universe that mortal man cannot see, but the gods themselves are aware of...i.e., the universe is big and scary and you are only a tiny part of it. Sounds like an abridged version of that famous little talk in the Bhagavad Gita, minus the Christian writing it down two centuries after the disappearance of the faith it was attached to.

Also:

Some think that the Kali Yuga, our current age, apparently, will last 432,000 years ( I know, I know, not everyone agrees on this). In Norse belief, Valhalla is said to have 540 doors, and from each one 800 champions shall issue forth at Ragnarok. 540 x 800 = 432,000.

Don't know what it means, but I thought it was an interesting coincidence. Any thoughts? GL - 03-11-’11 16:12
gw2 gold
Good V I should definitely pronounce, impressed with your web site. I had no trouble navigating through all the tabs as well as related information ended up being truly simple to do to access. I recently found what I hoped for before you know it in the least. Quite unusual. Is likely to appreciate it for those who add forums or anything, site theme . a tones way for your client to communicate. Excellent task.. gw2 gold (URL) - 25-01-’13 21:31


(optional field)
(optional field)

Remember personal info?
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.