Could this be the greatest book ever written?

This is how Anrcho-primitivist looks like

I stand tall

>I didn't want to have to use this, but you've forced my hand. Take this!

i liked it but the fact that he wrote in the prologue that it wasn't backed up by any case studies or really any evidence at all condemns it to the realm of the anecdotal, bit of a joke really even though i like varg.

I like Varg too and think his analysis of pre-christian european paganism is compelling but a lot of times when people ask him where he learned a particular thing he just says it was some old book in the prison library he doesn't remember the name of.

One more step...

You disgust me...

At least he had the decency to admit it in the prologue.

That's cause in reality none of these faggots know what they're talking about.

Hey what's going on in this thread?

Is this the neopagan Talmud?

reminder that Varg has the same political views as Pol Pot when you think about it

>god I fucking hate capitalism, its literally the worst thing ever. Also, be sure to go to amazon.com and buy my baord game, my books, and my wifes books

what did Varg mean by this?

>Anyone serious about Scandinavian religion should buy, read, and reread this work. If you truly desire to understand your ancestors and the mysteries they left us in our lore, fairy tales, and the runes this book is for you. My hat is off to Varg Vikernes. I only wish I could find the words to adequately express my gratitude for his and his wifes work in the study of ancient Europeans. Definitely a must read book.

I don't see neopagans talking about Varg outside of /pol/ and associated circles.

He's a neoliberal, just like everybody else who thinks they have a special snowflake political ideology.

That he's a hypicrtical nordcuck.

>the fact that he wrote in the prologue that it wasn't backed up by any case studies or really any evidence at all
That's just alpha as fuck though, picking something you think is rad and feel in your heart is correct and then just believing that and trying to will it into reality is what cool guys do. Only low testosterone beta nerds from reddit care about le evidence

>He's a neoliberal, just like everybody else who thinks they have a special snowflake political ideology.

Do you even know what that means?

>picking something you think is rad and feel in your heart is correct and then just believing that and trying to will it into reality is what cool guys do. Only low testosterone beta nerds from reddit care about le evidence
~t. Veeky Forums

>I don't see neopagans talking about Varg outside of /pol/ and associated circles.

to be fair, "neopagans" are mostly meme tier fat mall goth white trash wiccans who are jut weirdos and dont actually know or even give a shit about ancient religions or their history. These same people are into furry and gay tumblr tier shit, so they would obviously be immediatly turned off by Vargs politics. Varg may be a nut, but at least he knows a bit about ancient germanic religions

Only a cuck would think that attempting to shape reality according to your will is a bad thing

>Neoliberalism (neo-liberalism) refers primarily to the 20th century resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism. These include extensive economic liberalization policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy.

"Neopagan" is usually just a meme for 'that thing I don't like'.

So in what way is Varg a neo pagan? Also stop being tripfag

no book by a church burning murderer is worthy of my time

I don't think he is because I largely feel it's a meaningless descriptor unless we specify exactly what we're referring to.

If we're talking about rank amateurs I don't see Varg referenced. If we're talking about grimoire reconstructionists through the Scandinavian and Germanic transmissions I don't see Varg referenced.

I only see him passed off as an authority in certain circles of ideologues.

Neopagans are self professed pagans born out of the Romantic movement and the influx of eastern religions into the Western world following the imperialism of GB in India. I'd say they include modern druids, wiccans, Asatru, romuva and similar ilk. Its not that complicated to figure out tbph. I feel its more a deflection to say "what is a neopagan" or "Varg isn't a neopagan because he has beliefs I don't like."

>Only low testosterone beta nerds from reddit care about le evidence
He thinks infographics from /pol/ aren't essential to any sophisticated online discussion.

>"Varg isn't a neopagan because he has beliefs I don't like."
?

My point is I've heard it used to describe literally everything and nothing in terms of esoterica.

>Romantic
So what about all of the non-Romantic entailed reconstruction movements?

>influx of Eastern thought
That tends to be a rather more traditional definition of 'pagan' than I usually hear, hearkening back to simply 'non-christian' as opposed to the modern(ish) connotation of Euro polytheistic systems.

>modern druids
Sure.
>wicca
Depends on the group.
>asatru
See above.
>Romuva
...really?

I mean, if it moves the conversation forward, sure, Varg's a neopagan.

Now what?

>That tends to be a rather more traditional definition of 'pagan' than I usually hear, hearkening back to simply 'non-christian' as opposed to the modern(ish) connotation of Euro polytheistic systems.

To elaborate, how people like guido von list or the founder of romuva used knowledge from Buddhism, etc in their reconstructed religions.

>So what about all of the non-Romantic entailed reconstruction movements?
My point is neopaganism as we know it began during the romantic era, and ultimately those neopagan movements have inherent romantic themes whether they are right wing or left wing.

>romuva
I'd forgotten entirely about Storost, etc., I've been crawling handfuls of academic material (archaeology, etc.) on that sort of thing.

>neopaganism as we know it began during the romantic era
It certainly didn't stay there. It's not like the hunt for, discovery of, and integration of more accurate historical sources hasn't been a project that's continued as certain materials and analyses turn up.

>ultimately those neopagan movements have inherent romantic themes whether they are right wing or left wing.
What do we make of dudes like Levi? What do we make of mostly apoliticalized modern academic reconstruction focused on source detail rather than the capture of an ideal? If we cast the net too wide, we run the risk of dismissing otherwise fine work as "tumblr tier furry gay shit".

...

Your right in that its broad brush that doesn't encompass every single situation. I acknowledge as such but think its as value that such a criteria exist and feel its reasonable.

For example, based on historic, cultural and social reasons we can say with certainty (memes aside) that Protestantism, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy are Christian. Sects like Mormonism and Jehovah's witness are on the nose, and Gnosticism is considered something different entirely.

Now, does this cover every single intricacy like Ethiopic Christians using canon no one else does? No. Is it arbitrary? Sure. But its helpful and appropriate giving the reality of our situation. With Neopaganism we can deduce something similar.

>With Neopaganism we can deduce something similar.
It's a worthwhile project.