Folk Culture is fundamentally pagan: that is, based upon a respect for and reverence of Nature, and asserts that all living beings have a "soul" (that is, they possess acausal energy). Furthermore, Folk Culture believes that our foremost duty is to Nature and the Cosmos, revealed as this duty is via reason and reason alone.

The Important Distinction:

The fundamental reason why Christianity is opposed to the Way of Folk Culture is that Christianity - like Islam, Judaism and even Buddhism - is based upon what may be termed an homocentric morality whereas the ethos of Folk Culture is based upon a different ethics, a different morality.

In essence, the morality of Folk Culture  derives from folk idealism: that is, from placing the interests of the folk, the community, and thence Nature, before the individual. Thus, the individual is not seen or understood or comprehended in isolation, but as an integral, necessary and important part of the folk, of an organic community which dwells in a homeland with a particular way of living, with this community, this homeland, being a manifestation of Nature: a place where people can live in harmony in Nature; where Nature is respected, and indeed, considered sacred.

The ethics of Folk Culture derive from the understanding that we, as individuals,  are a living nexus, a living link, between the past of our folk and its future, with what we do, or do not do, affecting our folk which is understood as a manifestation of Nature herself. According to our Folk way of thinking and living, we affect our folk, and Nature, in a good way when we are honourable and when we do our duty to our folk and to Nature; that is, personal honour and duty to the folk are the foundation of the personal ethics of the Folk way. Thus, what is good is what is honourable and what aids the folk and Nature; what is bad is what is dishonourable and is harmful to our folk and to Nature.  

There is thus a real understanding, a real feeling, of belonging: of being part of a folk, and part of Nature.

This understanding - mostly instinctive in the past but more rationally comprehended now - of the living matrix which is Nature, with us as individuals, as a folk, depending upon Nature, and being Nature made manifest, is the true essence of the pagan view of the world: the very basis of the pagan way of life.

Often, in the past when this understanding was instinctive, the aspects of this organic matrix were personified, as gods and goddesses, and as "nature spirits". There was a real sense of how inter-connected all living things were: how they all were beings, possessed of a life-force, a "soul", and how important and necessary it was to strive to maintain a balance between all living things. To overstep the mark, to commit what the Greeks called hubris, was regarded as wrong, as unwise. Thus there was a real respect for Nature, for the manifestations of Nature, and even a feeling, an understanding, of aspects of Nature, of some manifestations of Nature, being sacred. In brief, the individual was understood in the context of the folk, the ancestors, of Nature herself.

The persecutive was supra-personal: of the folk, the ancestors, the world of Nature, and the cosmos beyond even Nature, and such a perspective as this was, and is, the essence of true paganism.  

In contrast, Christian morality, and living, emphasised human beings, and in particular the individual in isolation, and posited a God-given hierarchy of living beings, with many so-called "lesser beings" being regarded as put on Earth, or created, for our benefit, for our use.

This is very different from true paganism, and derives from monotheism: from the belief that what is most important is the after-life with this after-life being attainable if the individual behaves, and lives, in a certain way, in accordance with the teachings, the revelations, the laws, of prophets and religious leaders. This, in bare terms, is moral blackmail: do what our laws, our holy books, our revelations, say or you (note "you" ) will be cast into hell-fire and forever forfeit blissful eternal life. The perspective here is not of the folk, or of Nature, but of an "after-life".

In some ways, this kind of personal morality has served the world well: for such moral blackmail has indeed made millions of people over thousands of years into better people, and caused them to do noble things. But the vast majority have done what they have done because they expected some kind of personal reward.

This is selfish, and indeed rather primitive. The persecptive is still that of the individual, in isolation, and while there have been some, mostly recent, attempts to see the individual as part of Nature, and even as part of some "national culture" these themselves still belong to that way of living, that way of being, which looks toward an "after-life" and not toward the evolution, the enhancement, of our life, of Nature, and of the cosmos itself.  

The Prophetic Way of Thinking:

Furthermore, in the Christian way of life there is still a dependence upon divine revelation, upon some holy book, upon some prophet or prophets who are said to be, or who are believed to have been, chosen by God to reveal the word/way of God to human beings. Moreover these always ambiguous revelations can be interpreted in various ways, which leads to schism, and different "churches" and eventually to quite different ways of living within the confines of the Christian way of thinking, of being.

There thus has developed a whole ethos, a whole way of life, a way of thinking, deriving from looking to those holy books for inspiration, for truth, for guidance, and the ultimately meaningless (in terms of Nature and the cosmos) squabbles about doctrine and God-sanctioned "authority".

This way of thinking pagans believe to be wrong. Some go even further and believe it to be un-natural and indeed repugnant. It is most certainly contrary to reason, honour and liberty: to rational, free, enquiry; to the quest for knowledge, understanding, insight and wisdom. This prophetic way of thinking, of being, is also contrary to that free pagan warrior spirit which marked most if not all of the pagan societies of our own Viking, our Anglo-Saxon, our Celtic, our Germanic, ancestors.  That is, such a way of thinking, of being, is contrary to the folk culture of those of North European descent.

And it is not a question of one or more religious Institutions, or some religious teacher, propounding irrational, intolerant, views. Rather, it is question of this prophetic way of thinking being intrinsic to Christianity: part of its ethos, its essence.  

Christianity, In Summation:

If we consider just one realm - the realm of Justice - we shall easily understand the fundamental difference between the Folk way, and the way of Christianity.  

For any way of life - religion or philosophy - the notion, the concept, of Justice depends upon the morality of that way of life. That is, its derives from the ethics of that way.

For the Way of Folk Culture, Justice derives from, and depends upon, personal honour. That is, Justice is living, dependent upon honourable, noble, individuals and existing in those honourable, noble, individuals. Hence the great importance which the way of the Folk places upon individual character: upon building and maintaining individual character; with accepting and allowing for individual difference and respecting the honour, the rights, of other individuals. Hence the importance of allowing individuals to defend their own honour in a practical way, through such things as duels, and trial by combat.  

And this respect for the honour, the character, of the individual is the basis, the beginning, of true freedom, as evident for example in the folk-communities of Ancient Greece.

In essence, this way of personal honour, this respect for individual character, this desire to create noble, honourable, character through practical tests such as combat and war, is the way of the noble warrior.

For Christianity, Justice is abstract, ultimately deriving from God. This led to the concept of Justice which still underlies all Western nations: the idea that Justice can exist in some law, some statute, in some judgement given by some individual (a "Judge") or some "Court of Law", for all these impersonal, Institutional things, derive their ultimate authority either from God, some appointed representative of God, such as a monarch, or some Institution which relies and has relied upon Christian ethics.

Thus, one had the disastrous monarchies of Europe imposing their ruthless dictatorships upon the people for century after century due to the Christian notion of divine right: that is, justifying their rule (which was often assumed by force of arms) through Christian ethics. This gave them an absolute power so that Justice was said to be the Justice of the monarch, with officials appointed by the monarch to enforce this "justice". Thus the individual became more and more powerless and had to rely on the King, or his appointees, for "Justice". Justice was transfered from the people, from individuals, to the Crown.

In later times in Europe, these abstract concepts were merely transferred to the State, with Governments, and elected officials (such as the Police) appropriating to themselves the right to decide what is lawful and what is unlawful.

That is, the power of Justice is taken away from the individual, and resided and resides in some abstract law, or some "Court of Law". Thus we have Governments, and their appointees such as the Police, saying unjust and dishonourable things like "No one can take the law into their own hands" whereas according to the Folk way a noble, honourable, individual is Justice, is the law. That is, according to the ethics of Folk Culture, a man who lives by honour, who is known by the folk to be honourable, whose honour has been proved through his deeds, his life, is an example of Justice: and is Justice. There is thus no need for legislation, for a multitude of laws and for "Courts of Law" where so-called "experts" are needed to argue for and against the accused. Justice, for a true folk community, is a question of honour.  

In the Folk way, Justice is human, and flexible. In the Christian way, Justice is abstract, and unbending, and in fact inhuman.  

The two ways of viewing the world, of understanding our relation to other human beings, to Nature, to the cosmos - the Christian and the Way of the Folk - are not only different, but irreconcilable.  

Christianity is a prophetic way of thinking, based upon a primitive homocentric (and thus anti-Nature) view of the world, whereas the Folk way is the way of reason, of experiment, of discovery, based as this Folk way is upon a natural, a cosmic, view of the world.  

We now have, due to the civilizations of the past few thousand years, the ability, the knowledge, the opportunity, of consciously and rationally understanding the purpose of our lives, and of deciding whether we wish to follow this way of Nature, of the Folk.  

To return to Christianity - in whatever form - is quite simply wrong: the negation of thousands of years of conscious understanding; the negation of thousands of years of culture and civilization.   For to choose Christianity - or indeed any conventional religion - in whatever form and for whatever reason, is to choose the old, primitive, homocentric ethics with its inhuman, abstract "justice".  

To choose the Folk way of life is to choose the new ethics of the cosmos, of the folk community, of the nexus, with its human and civilizing concept of honour, and with its evolutionary idealism of duty to the folk, duty to Nature, and duty to the cosmos itself.  

David Myatt
JD2451879.454