Talk:Asatru Folk Assembly

Germanic Mysticism /Nazism Template

I knee-jerk yanked this template from the entry because I misunderstood the motives of the project. However, I still think there needs to be some consensus on whether this template (in it's current form) is appropriate for this entry, so I have not replaced it. WeniWidiWiki 05:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

it is problematic to associate AFA with Nazi mysticism at this point. They do appear to be staunchly right and somewhat racist, but so far the article body does not address this. There is a book on paganism and white separatism listed under "References", but the article does not refer to it, and thus it is not clear what this book is doing here, and if it classifies AFA as white supremacist. dab (𒁳) 16:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Refering to the AFA as "white supremecist" goes against the outspoken goals of the group. The best way of explaining it would be to say that they are attempting to preserve the practices and religion of the germanic/skandinavian people, not attempting to show a superior stint to one ethnic group over another. Most groups similar to AFA (Asatru) feel that segregating themselves to one ethnic group is not condusive to a proper religous practice, though admitedly a few feel it is imperitive. For a very loose (and somewhat admitedly crass) way of looking at it, its like a person of african descent saying "its a black thing". Such as the celebrations of quanza(for lack of a better example). While many are happy for other ethnic groups to enjoy the celebration/practices, some feel it should be ethnicaly based/centered. Personaly while i understand this draw, i do dissagree with the people who want to keep it "folkish" with just people of northern european descent. Sono hito (talk) 17:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone think the article should spend a little more time on what the AFA is actually about? You know, instead of consisting of a couple of paragraphs dealing with whether or not they're "racist"? Which, of course, just makes it seem like they're in fact racist, since nobody has anything else to say about them. --ElkanahTingley (talk) 17:17, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Why are some so obsessed with singling out Ásatru as the "world's only racist religious tradition"? Racism is everywhere. It crosses all cultural, ethnic, political, and religious lines. To single out Ásatru is to project one's own bigotry upon an easy target identified by intellectually-lazy morons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.122.151 (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. And Judaism comes to mind. On the other hand. This article reads like a heat piece. Shouldn't it be more on issues of what they actually believe? And not about the comments of others. 105.4.2.224 (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@105.4.2.224 The problem is the AFA is very closeted about their activities, so the only widespread information is commentary by others.

As for what they believe, it is generally pretty racist. FarHarBard (talk) 14:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Asatru Free Assembly Continues to Exist as a House of Worship

According to the Internal Revenue Service Business Master File which is updated monthly, it has EIN 237158690. It is located at 1766 East Ave., Turlock, CA 95380. It bears an "06" filing requirement which means that it has church status with the IRS and is not required to file an annual report. Stephen A. McNallen is listed as the ICO.

Given that churches are relieved of filing requirements, their status as tax-exempt entities could exist in perpetuity. The California charity registration became inactive on September 29, 2017. David Cary Hart (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Explanation of advertisement tag

As written today, the "Goals" section of this article begins "The AFA's Declaration of Purpose is:" That sounds like an advertisement to me, or a mission statement. Either way I think it needs to be reworded as something more than a mere verbatim quotation. Plinth molecular gathered 21:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Why does "metagenetics" redirect here?

And what does it mean? Equinox (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_McNallen#Asatru — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.188.112.2 (talk) 02:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

McNallen coined the term Metagenetics in 1980 to refer to the link between spirituality and heredity, and later, 2006, published the 25 page booklet, The Philosophy of Metagenetics, Folkism and Beyond, revised and updated from articles appearing over a span of years in Runestone magazine, to elaborate on this issue. This 2006 publication is billed as an essential resource for all interested in the Folkish viewpoint, which also includes a suggested reading list. Amongst others, this booklet features the article, Metagenetics - revised from an original article published in the Winter, 1980 issue of The Runestone, and the article, Genetic and Beyond: The Ultimate Connection, which further elaborates on the concept of Metagenetics - adapted from an article appearing in the Summer, 1999 issue of The Runestone. He has also been interviewed on this topic.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Asatru Folk Assembly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071007203008/http://www.runestone.org/declaration.htm to http://www.runestone.org/declaration.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://realestate.nevadacounty4sale.com/idx/details/listing/a276/20151469/8408-La-Porte-Road-Brownsville-California

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

mistake of fact, or poorly put?

the article states, "McNallen was one of the earliest advocates of reconstructing Germanic Paganism in modern times."

Didn't some of the original Nazis advocate and try to practice exactly this in Germany and Austria?

I just want to say that I'm not one of these people.

Jewish Americans, African-Americans, Hispanics, Muslim-Americans, etc., are Americans.

As well, I know very little about this subject.

But surely some of Hitler's followers, and I believe Himmler in particular, advocated this nonsense, before McNallen was born. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18A:8301:A3C0:69AF:25A2:B4D1:3115 (talk) 07:12, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for the suggestion. I added the phrase "in the United States" to the sentence. Smallchief (talk) 09:47, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

White supremacy & racism

@Dram222, Asartea, Ealdgyth, and Isabelle Belato:: Opening this discussion off the back of the game of ping pong that is happening over whether this organisation should be described as white supremacist and/or racist. In the interim, I have restored the article to the last stable version (and have also requested semi-protection).

Dram222 - please propose any changes here, with clear reference to the sources present in the article and with any others that are pertinent.

Best, Darren-M talk 17:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Darren-M: for requesting the semi-protection. I don't have the books cited in the article but have requested them from my local library. Viewing limited passages from them in Google Books does seem to confirm what is cited. However, there also does appear to be many mainstream notable news sources that confirm the statement that the Asatru Folk Assembly is a white supremest organization, practicing white supremacy. It appears they are homophobic as well.

Sacramento Bee:

• The racists next door: Inside a California church that preaches a whites-only gospel
  

"Asatru’s 700 members also are taught that mixed-race families “are contrary to the values” of the church and transgender people have “a tragic mental illness.” Homosexuals are banned from the church “for the safety and health of our children,” according to Matthew Flavel, Asatru’s “Alsherjargothi,” the equivalent of the church’s high priest."

The article talks about the founder, Stephen McNallen's white replacement views

"McNallen has been warning about white people being replaced for decades"

Also in the article:

"The Asatru Folk Assembly is the largest of several so-called “Neo-Völkisch” organizations that, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “attempt to cloak their ethnic exclusivity in claims centering on the victimization of white people, while other groups overtly promote racial supremacy.”

Pine Journal (Duluth MN)

• Leader claims whites-only Asatru church in Minnesota not a hate group, but extremist trackers say otherwise

Brandy Callahan, a witan or top advisor within the Asatru Folk Assembly answered when with this asked directly if the hof will accept members of ethnic backgrounds other than white:

"No, we don’t allow Black people. Does that mean a Black person can’t come into our church or to our events? Of course not. Our religion is based on our shared ancestry"

So...while the term "White Supremest" may not be in the organizational by-laws or its title, statements and actions by church leaders and founders as well as practices by the organization demonstrate an active belief in white supremacy regardless how they choose to rationalise it. Myotus (talk) 19:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Related to the topic, how did this tiny organization with a handful of followers become listed as a "vital article?" Let's delete it from the list of vital articles.Smallchief (talk)

I think this "vital article" issue would fit better under its own heading. My other thoughts about it, not having looked into what else is classified "vital article, level 5" in different subjects, is that the level is the lowest one and that the phenomenon this organisation represents is not insignificant. 151.177.58.208 (talk) 15:34, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

The doctrines projected by the Asatru Folk Assembly come as a shock to many people of mixed or other racial backgrounds other than Northern European, being half Mongol it makes perfect sense at first glance to make the assumption that this is white supremacism, but in reality this is definitely more akin to white nationalism. White Supremacy is characterized by a fervent belief that whites are superior to all races, which is not a belief displayed by the AFA, and is in fact able to be verified by watching Stephen McNallen's introductory videos to this folkish sect of Germano-Nordic Paganism. White nationalism on the other hand seems to define the group better. According to Stephen McNallen, he wants native Europeans to "return to their pre-Christian roots" and reclaim an ethnic identity, similarly to how the people of Africa in the United States went through a cultural renaissance throughout the late 20th century. In conclusion I believe that the AFA is not white supremacist but is not exempt from such allegations, as it has been proven that at least a couple of their members sympathize with the extreme right and racist organizations. Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 03:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

"but in reality this is definitely more akin to white nationalism." Plausible, but are there sources explicitly making this connection? Dimadick (talk) 12:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't the burden of proof lie on those making the more severe claim? We can see that the AFA is on the spectrum of being pro-white, but specific evidence is needed to justify a "white-supremacist" claim.

The tag "White-Separatist" is relatively easy to claim based on their clear and admitted stance of religious separation. "White-Nationalist" would require them to express aspirations of nationhood, and "White-Supremacist" would require them to claim superiority over the other races, not just a desire for a separate religion.

It is important for us to not confuse these terms, and I haven't seen any evidence of them making any "white-nationalist" or "white-supremacist" statements. If anyone else has any first-hand evidence of this, please provide it. All of the justifications I've seen for these claims so far has been second-hand. Mr.Editor 12322 (talk) 10:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree with everything you said. 65.186.34.34 (talk) 10:26, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Section on beliefs of the Asatru Folk Assembly

Recently I attempted to add a section to this article on the beliefs of the AFA, as I felt that, given that the article was listed as a "vital article" in philosophy, it would be worthwhile to have a separate section in which their beliefs were set out in detail. I added a brief description of the AFA's general ethos, and a list of key beliefs, both of which come from the AFA's website. For these, I cited the AFA's website, Runestone. However, this edit has been removed, and I was asked to cite a "reliable source". This is somewhat confusing, as it strikes me that the official website of an organisation should be classed as a reliable source for its views. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esotericist1933 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, you actually did a copyright violation ... you copied verbatim the wording from the AFA's site, over into the article, without quoting it, making it appear that it was your paraphrasing of the beliefs. Also - note that we should not be setting out the doctrines of a religious organization in full, even if properly quoted. It's undue. We should be using secondary sources to give a condensed version of the beliefs, otherwise we look like we're providing propaganda platforms for a religious organization. Given the controversial nature of the AFA's beliefs and standing in the wider heathen community, we need to be especially careful not to "gloss over" the beliefs that are controversial.

And you didn't just set out the beliefs as stated by the AFA, but you also attempted (twice) to remove the sourced information on it being a white supremacist organization from the first sentence. -- Ealdgyth (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

White supremacy or white nationalism?

Something inconsistent I see on pages like this is that the terms white nationalism and white supremacy seem to have overlapping meanings, though the two are very different. White Nationalism is more akin to Black Nationalism in which the people following are invested in what they call "cultural reclamation" whilst setting up usually cultural institutions, while White Supremacy is the belief that white people are the superior race, something that isn't inherently tied to White Nationalism.

I attempted to make an edit to this today by rephrasing a couple blurry sentences, removing an unverified claim, and also replacing "white supremacy" with the more correct term "white nationalism" but was quickly shut down by individuals. I created this section to settle the debate: White supremacy or white nationalism?

(P.S. no glorification is intended and I am just trying to make the article as factually correct as possible. The Asatru Folk Assembly is still a homophobic organization and should not be exempt from criticism.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk • contribs) 02:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for taking your argument to the talk page instead of continuing an edit war. I will direct you to the White nationalism page's section on Criticism in your comparison of white nationalism to black nationalism:

"Numerous individuals and organizations have argued that ideas such as white pride and white nationalism exist merely to provide a sanitized public face for white supremacy. Kofi Buenor Hadjor argues that black nationalism is a response to racial discrimination, while white nationalism is the expression of white supremacy. Other critics have described white nationalism as a "... somewhat paranoid ideology" based upon the publication of pseudo-academic studies."

Calling something white nationalism is a way of softballing racism. Through proclamations of love for members of their own race, rather than hatred for others is a thinly veiled nod to white, racial superiority. White nationalists often disguise their politics as a way to convert the disaffected to their cause by compromise on extreme positions - at least in rhetoric. You cannot be a white nationalist without being a white supremacist. Myotus (talk) 03:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with you to a certain degree. There were definitely different upbringings to black and white nationalism, though whether the AFA is utilizing it in good faith or not is up for debate. The claim that white nationalism provides a sanitized public face for white supremacy is definitely true in some cases, but not all. I'll provide you with the definitions for nationalism and supremacism:

Nationalism is "The belief that a particular cultural or ethnic group constitutes a distinct people deserving of political self-determination."

Supremacism is "Supremacism is the belief that a certain group of people is superior to all others"

Potentially a bad comparison, but similarly to how Brenton Tarrant is not a representation of all of PewDiePie's viewer base, bad actors within the Asatru Folk Assembly are not a representation of the entire faith and community. Until there is indisputable proof that the AFA is explicitly white supremacist, I believe the term "White Nationalism" is a very effective compromise which still delivers a similar message. Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 03:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

The Brenton Tarrant comparison is a bad comparison, and not even remotely accurate to the issue. It is not simply a few bad actors, it is the leadership that has espoused racist views. I believe white nationalism is not a good compromise for white supremacist as the later does accurately depicts them. However, I would be willing to compromise and change the phrase "Its racist doctrines are based on ethnicity, an approach it calls "folkish" to "Its white nationalist doctrines are based on ethnicity, an approach it calls "folkish". Myotus (talk) 04:21, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Myotus@Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov I disagree. I've looked at Gardell and decided it's too old to use as a source. But what we do need to do is move some more details into the lead so that it meets WP:LEAD. Move the SPLC into the lead, Declaration 27. Quote that in the body of the article where it is mentioned now. "The Asatru Folk Assembly (hereinafter referred to as the AFA) has a long and well-documented history of discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, sexuality, and gender identity. In a recent statement, the AFA declared point blank that non-white and LGBT Heathens were not welcome in their tradition. While the undersigned organizations listed here fully recognize the AFA’s right to govern themselves as they see fit, and with full autonomy, we hereby exercise the same right." Maybe we don't even need to mention white nationalism, which I see as just a euphemism used by white supremacists to make them sound less frightening. Doug Weller talk 11:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

And thinking a bit more, it seems very important to have Declaration 27 in the lead to make it clear to readers that this isn't typical of Asatru. Doug Weller talk 12:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Could potentially work. Though I find the term white nationalism to be particularly important in this article as this isn't the only group with ties to the ideology. Nevertheless I think this article should probably have a better opposition section that will describe it's alleged white supremacism. Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I have uncovered new evidence that supports my argument on the Stephen McNallen page, which states that he has been critical of neo-nazism and that he has faced backlash from white supremacists for these beliefs. As founder of the AFA, it would make sense that this would mean that he is a white nationalist, not a white supremacist. Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 19:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

(therefore making the AFA white nationalist as the current leader of the AFA espouses to Stephen McNallen's views in an almost identical fashion) Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov This is fallacious. Stephen McNallen has also called for a violent purging of Europe to restore a white continent. He, himself, is a Nazi.

Being criticized by Nazis doesn't cease to make you one. Similarly, being criticized by white supremacists does not cease to make you one. The points remain that he exhibits many qualities one would expect of a white supremacist and no qualities that would directly counter them. As a founding member of the AFA, it is reasonable to consider the organization might follow suit.

Which is corroborated by members and their families actively identifying as white supremacists within the context of the organization.

https://www.vox.com/22785686/father-white-supremacist-asatru-folk-assembly-neo-nazi FarHarBard (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I believe it is more important what other sources say about a radical or controversial organization that what it says about itself. Smallchief (talk)

"often disguise their politics as a way to convert the disaffected to their cause" To be honest, your average cult leader and demagogue can start recruiting people disgruntled or disillusioned with the status quo, regardless of what ideals or causes each recruiter propagates. There may be a distinction in the beliefs of a cult's leadership and the ideas or aspirations of the rank and file. Dimadick (talk) 13:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Has this source from the SPLC been mentioned? It's not used in the article as a source.[1]. Doug Weller talk 13:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

"Metagenetics"

@Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov: I'm not sure that there is any point in mentioning this fringe idea, and certainly not in a way that will just puzzle the reader. How is it significant enough for the lead? Doug Weller talk 07:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

It's redirected towards the Stephen McNallen page so I thought it was likely noteworthy enough to be included in the article. It's some theory about cultural and spiritual inheritance through genes which definitely sets it apart from other groups. Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 07:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

(Also replaced the term Racist with Racialist due to the context of the organization's "whites-only" situation, I will instead use both terms because they can both be applied.) Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov (talk) 07:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Removal of the term "white supremacist" and replacing a source with a cn tag is not just adding a term.

I don't know how to interpret this. I have to struggle to offer good faith towards this type of editing. Edit summaries and explanations on the talk page need to be explicit and not omit important details. Doug Weller talk 09:31, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted it. The information about the members being fired is supported by the source that was removed. And the insertion of the "based primarily upon disdain for the group's racialist and racist doctrines" is NOT supported by the source it was being inserted into. And anything in the lead should be discussed in the body of the article - so adding "metagenics" into the lead without any mention in the body is also wrong. Frankly, I'm having a hard time assuming good faith here... Ealdgyth (talk) 11:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree about AGF, WP:NOTSUICIDE. Doug Weller talk 13:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 September 2023

Remove the term "White supremacist." There is no evidence for this claim, and the sources cited are unreliable. Voxpiratica (talk) 21:39, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: The Hill at least is considered reliable per WP:RSP. — Czello ^(music) 21:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

The Hill article cited does not make the claim that they are white supremacist. In fact, neither source does: The ABC news article claims they have white supremacist ties.

I understand that reliability is a Wikipedia adminstration policy and not up to you but it seems sort of absurd that a single journalist who works for The Hill can decide whether an entire religious faith is "white supremacist" or not. Smefs (talk) 05:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)