Several people have asked me why I shared a post supporting the AFA (Helson’s post from yesterday). Well, I want to briefly address that because it isn’t a post supporting the AFA. It’s a post criticizing a double standard that’s being applied to our communities.
We have people telling us that we have no right to restore our traditions *because* they were destroyed a thousand years ago (and we can’t claim direct descent).
Think about that. Think really, really hard and take all the time you need.
We have people condemning the restoration of our tribes and traditions on the basis that we are in a position to restore them. On top of that, they’re doing so for their own political — not spiritual but political–ends.
We need a true liberation movement, one that gives the individual the liberty to honor the Gods and spirits and work within their traditional ways, not a false substitute that only enslaves further. I stand by *everyone* who is actively engaged in the restoration and preservation of their ancestral folkways and sacred traditions regardless of what I think of them personally.*
Think long and hard about where you stand on this issue because if you’re not actively supporting the restoration and preservation of tradition, then you’re on the side of those who want to dismantle them. If that’s the case, maybe you need to think about exactly what it is you’re prioritizing and why.
- there’s plenty of times when I do agree with Helson but check out his latest. I could not disagree more with his lumping animal sacrifice into a list of deplorables. Sacrifice is essential to our traditions, and it is good and holy. It’s a hell of a lot more humane than factory farming that is standard here in our culture. This is a trick employed by monotheists and secularists and all those employed in trying to dismantle our traditions: they want to make this most sacred of sacraments appear primitive, vile, etc. etc. because that is the foundation of our connection with the Gods. We should be very careful not to play into that and give them ammunition. So even though I may agree with some of the broad points of that particular post, I cannot support it because of the inclusion of that. This doesn’t mean I don’t support him on other issues and I think it’s really absurd that people expect because we may sometimes agree, that we will inevitably and necessarily agree on every single point. He is a colleague and i have no problem calling him out when I think he’s wrong, as he would me. We don’t all have to think exactly alike in order to work toward the same sacred goal.