Post by Boojum on Nov 19, 2007 17:57:38 GMT
Many of you will already be familar with this case. For those who aren't, find a summary here- www.secularism.org.uk/theextraordinarycaseofthepaganan.html Now, despite what I'm about to say, I think that the Tribunal made the right decision. I don't think there were grounds for dismissal.
But the seemingly uncritical support from much of the Pagan community worried me at the time. Because something just didn't feel 'right' about the case. And the more I looked into it, the less 'right' it felt.
To start with, there's the fact that the Odinist Fellowship- http://www .odinistfellowship.co.uk/ specifically describes itself as "Odinist" rather then "Ásatrú". That's a loaded term. While this isn't universally true, it is the case that those calling themselves "Odinist" are far more likely to be folkish then the Ásatrú community as a whole.
There's also the question of why the leaflets were left in the prayer room in the first place. Heathenism isn't a religion that generally sees the need to proselytise.
So this led me to look into it a bit more. Firstly, the Odinist Fellowship are undoubtably a folkish group, though their propaganda tends to the milder side of that spectrum. That's still a problem though, as this quote (from a more general article on this subject by a Tribalist Ásatrú) explains:
That's an extract, but I highly recommend the full article- dgould.org/jessica/Research/practiceasatru.htm It's a very good introduction to the subject.
So that it itself was enough to make me feel some Pagans could do with being a bit more cautious when making public statements. And then I came across this gem:
http://www. stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/odinist-wins-maximum-award-290440.html
It would seem Don Holden, the man at the centre of the case, is a BNP member.
This doesn't necessarily mean that the Odinist Fellowship are sympathetic to the BNP as such. (Although their folkish position seems compatible with BNP politics to me). But Ralph Harrison, the Director of the Odinist Fellowship did widely distribute a round robin email after the case that contained the following comment:
There's two main explanations for this I can think of.
Either the OF didn't know of Holden's political affiliations. If so, fair enough. But I find that hard to believe. Particuarly with a religion that puts so much emphasis on kinship.
Or they were fully aware. Which makes Harrison's defence of Holden on charges of Islamophobia disengenous, to say the least. And not really in line with the principle of 'honour' the OF claim to follow.
But the seemingly uncritical support from much of the Pagan community worried me at the time. Because something just didn't feel 'right' about the case. And the more I looked into it, the less 'right' it felt.
To start with, there's the fact that the Odinist Fellowship- http://www .odinistfellowship.co.uk/ specifically describes itself as "Odinist" rather then "Ásatrú". That's a loaded term. While this isn't universally true, it is the case that those calling themselves "Odinist" are far more likely to be folkish then the Ásatrú community as a whole.
There's also the question of why the leaflets were left in the prayer room in the first place. Heathenism isn't a religion that generally sees the need to proselytise.
So this led me to look into it a bit more. Firstly, the Odinist Fellowship are undoubtably a folkish group, though their propaganda tends to the milder side of that spectrum. That's still a problem though, as this quote (from a more general article on this subject by a Tribalist Ásatrú) explains:
This particular denomination of Ásatrú claims to be the one "true" Ásatrú, descended from the ancient Northern European religion. They claim that the only ones who can be Ásatrú are those with Norse or Germanic blood. They claim that other bloodlines had other gods and that people of other bloodlines should stick to those gods. These Folkists claim that the only people who can properly worship the Aesir and the Vanir are people with such blood as the ancient Norse and Germans had. For example, the Odinist Fellowship states on its website that:
the Odinist form of paganism is ethnospecific. Indeed, were we to receive a request to administer the Odinist Pledge of Faith to, say, a Japanese or a Nigerian, we would encourage that person to embrace his indigenous form of heathenism, because heathens of all nations believe in being true to oneself and to one's ancestors.
Although they claim not to be racist, their fundamental practices are based upon race. Folkish Ásatrú tend to be intolerant of other heathen practices and of people of non-Nordic/Germanic descent practicing Ásatrú.
the Odinist form of paganism is ethnospecific. Indeed, were we to receive a request to administer the Odinist Pledge of Faith to, say, a Japanese or a Nigerian, we would encourage that person to embrace his indigenous form of heathenism, because heathens of all nations believe in being true to oneself and to one's ancestors.
Although they claim not to be racist, their fundamental practices are based upon race. Folkish Ásatrú tend to be intolerant of other heathen practices and of people of non-Nordic/Germanic descent practicing Ásatrú.
That's an extract, but I highly recommend the full article- dgould.org/jessica/Research/practiceasatru.htm It's a very good introduction to the subject.
So that it itself was enough to make me feel some Pagans could do with being a bit more cautious when making public statements. And then I came across this gem:
http://www. stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/odinist-wins-maximum-award-290440.html
It would seem Don Holden, the man at the centre of the case, is a BNP member.
This doesn't necessarily mean that the Odinist Fellowship are sympathetic to the BNP as such. (Although their folkish position seems compatible with BNP politics to me). But Ralph Harrison, the Director of the Odinist Fellowship did widely distribute a round robin email after the case that contained the following comment:
The man was obviously threatening the cosy arrangement between management, unions and Muslim leaders, that prevailed at the Mail Centre – and so he had to be stopped! An anonymous complaint was made – this goes back to October 2004 – to the effect that a muddy footprint had been left on the carpet of the Multicultural Room. What could this mean? There could only be one possible interpretation: quite clearly, the culprit had intended it as an attack on the Muslim religion. And not only was it, self-evidently, an anti-Muslim footprint, but on closer examination it became obvious that it must have been made by an anti-Islamic boot; and, no doubt, that anti-Islamic boot had been wielded by an Islamophobic foot. And who else could that Islamophobic foot belong to? The principal suspect had to be Donald Holden, of course!
There's two main explanations for this I can think of.
Either the OF didn't know of Holden's political affiliations. If so, fair enough. But I find that hard to believe. Particuarly with a religion that puts so much emphasis on kinship.
Or they were fully aware. Which makes Harrison's defence of Holden on charges of Islamophobia disengenous, to say the least. And not really in line with the principle of 'honour' the OF claim to follow.
