Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Else Christensen Archive

September 1973


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.


* * *



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!


[Page 3]



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.



* * *



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 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
----------- $2.00 -----------
Back issues available
Free sample copies on request

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]



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.



* * *

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]




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.



* * *



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.




Reenactment at the Centennial Pageant, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1925,
photo taken from The Promise of America

The America First Institute

Please visit our donation page
and support our cause.

Short URL for this web page:

Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.