![]() | A fact from Neo-völkisch movements appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 6 December 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on June 9, 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
could perhaps be merged into the larger Nazi occultism, but this article concerns post-1960s fringe movements, not Nazi Germany or Theosophy. It should be considered a sub-article of the wider topic of Nazi occultism. dab (𒁳) 11:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
we can move it. As you can see, lots of terms are in boldface, and lots of redirects point here. The article could reside at any of them. I started out with an article on OJB. Then I decided the group wasn't notable enough for a standalone article and collected more context. I have no problem with moving this to fascist satanism, fascist paganism, fascism and neopaganism, or anything similar. I am not aware of any ongoing edit-war btw, so I am not sure I understand what you mean. dab (𒁳) 22:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
" Occultism and the far right" would be a huge umbrella article, also including in its scope all of (pre-WWII) Nazi occultism. I would prefer to restrict our focus to current (1970s to present) neopagan and 'para-neopagan' movements (which very much includes both the Nouvelle Droite and Norwegian Black Metal). dab (𒁳) 14:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
let's see -- this is a difficult topic already for reasons of terminology (occultists, unsurprisingly, aren't very fond of crystal clear "calling a spade a spade"). So perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to aim at a broad sweeping uber-article like " Occultism and the far right" in summary style. It will need to address the following sub-topics:
the interesting thing is how extremes touch. The "neo-tribalism" advocated by "fascist pagans" is only shades away from the neo-paganism of Anarcho-primitivism, and the völkisch Islamophobia of Koenraad Logghe is informed by the same ideology as the endorsement of Islamic terrorism by David Myatt. A difficult topic, and we should take it slow and carefully (there is no deadline). dab (𒁳) 17:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Dbachmann on this issue. I would prefer to have an umbrella page and then pages on specific sub-topics with a more precise focus. There is no reason an umbrella page needs to be lengthy, but I am concerned that some of this material just does not belong under the title " Esoteric Nazism."-- Cberlet 13:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's go with option 2 for now. Then see what it looks like. I would like to hold open a discussion on the possibility of making Esoteric Nazism a disambiguation page linking to Nazi occultism and a renamed page holding the current contents of Esoteric Nazism, but what to call it has me stumped. Thanks for a thoughtful discussion, you both are bery well read on these subjects. It is a delight to work with you.-- Cberlet ( talk) 14:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I've added references re Myatt's denial of involvement to give a NPOV, and corrected the mistakes re his middle name and his DoB. This brings it into line with the ONA article here and the article on Myatt. Coolmoon ( talk) 10:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Paganism and Satanism are two COMPLETELY different entities. One being a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses (Paganism), and the other being either atheistic (ie. LaVeyanism), or based upon Judeo-Christian concepts (ie. Luciferianism). The fact that there are "Pagan" Nazi groups out there is a bunch of crap, but thats just POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JanderVK ( talk • contribs) 05:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I concur fully. I don't know who wrote this, i suspect it was some confused christian or something. It's like this article is trying to collect as many negatively-ladden buzzwords as possible into one place without actually knowing their meaning or real context. This needs to be renamed as soon as possible. It doesn't make any sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.187.23.12 ( talk) 10:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
"countercultural fascism" or "avant-garde fascism" appears to be the US term for this complex.
dab (𒁳) 12:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I strongly object to bloodofox ( talk · contribs)'s persistent attempts at sanitization, consistently removing one side of the argument based on "dubious sources" but not the other. See also Talk:Germanic Neopaganism, Talk:Michael Moynihan (journalist), Talk:Tyr (journal). With this article, we finally have a central location to address these questions up front and on-topic. By all means, we should report on both (or all) sides of the divide, and apply reasonable and balanced criteria for the "reliability" of a source. I obviously agree that there is much room for debate, and I would welcome third opinions on bloodofox's approach. I argue that Michael J. Murray's and Michael Moynihan's double membership in Asatru and Nazi and/or Satanist organizations makes them patently on-topic if not textbook examples for this article. Neither Moynihan's nor Murray's involvement with Asatru, Nazism and Satanism are at all disputed. To discount the source given as "dubious" is clearly disingenious. We clearly cannot expect the various groups and "think tanks" associated with these people to be listed on the pages of Nature or Physics Today: WP:RS calls for sources with sufficient notability relative to the topic under discussion. An article by Kevin Coogan in Hitlist can hardly be dismissed as "dubious" in this context. dab (𒁳) 13:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't appreciate that you describe my requests for sources on controversial and potentially libelous matters as "sanitization". While I am most definitely no fan of movements advocating fascism, totalitarianism or censorship, I am no fan of misinformation either, especially when living people are involved. I've looked up some of these claims and this summary essentially equates to some previously mentioned fact mixed with some very funny wives tales in it. I'd like to point some out:
These are examples of a poorly written and researched source; it has very questionable claims and it fails the reliable source test for living people, which requires extreme carefulness. Related, where is Moynihan involved in a "Nazi" organization that you claim above? I don't see this anyway. Are you talking about the Asatru Alliance? Is this your opinion, some else's opinion or do they self-label as Nazis or Fascists? Are you saying Nazi organization because of former associations due to Valgard Murray apparently once having some involvement with a Nazi organization? These are all important basic questions to anything we're dealing with, no matter if we're talking about a television shower or suspected fascists. :bloodofox: ( talk) 05:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
..at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Reliable_sources. With this very important policy in mind, I suggest we look at Coogan's sources, which are basically all interviews with Moynihan as it's obvious by Coogan's fact checking that we are not dealing with a reputable source on a living person and these claims are potentially libelous. We must compare them to contradicting sources. Coogan is also contradicted later by other source I've supplied above. Dab seems set on re-inserting "Nazi skinhead" and "White power" skinhead before the word skinhead here despite the fact that Coogan's source for this is an interview where Moynihan doesn't state this at all, instead stating that he was simply a "skinhead" and, really, that is all we know. Someone is making their own judgment here and we can't pass it along as fact, as Dab is attempting to to do. If we are going to use the terms "Nazi Skinhead" or "white power skinhead," we are going to need to state that Coogan stated this as this in itself is libelous.Editors should avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to an encyclopedia article about the subject. When less-than-reliable publications print material they suspect is untrue, they often include weasel phrases. Look out for these.
In the United States, there are several proponents of combining "folkish" Asatru with neo-fascism or neo-Nazism. These include Michael J. Murray of Ásatrú Alliance (and former American Nazi Party member)[16] and musician/journalist Michael Moynihan (who has turned to "metagenetic"[17] Asatru in the mid-1990s,[18] former member of the Abraxas Foundation).[19] Moynihan and his former associate Boyd Rice were adherents of Anton LaVey's Church of Satan.
[5] -- I would be interested in one such reliable source: if it says "Murray left Nazism 30+ years ago", we can certainly repeat that, but just striking all mention of Murray or the AA won't do. "Folkish Asatru" is the very topic of the "paganism" section of this article, and the AA epitomizes folkish Asatru in the US -- even the (self-designation!) "folkish" imitates the völkisch of pre-WWII fascism. (if Murray is "working to keep out of Asatru" neo-völkisch ideology, I am afraid he must not have been very successful. Anyway, our source that Murray was a member of the American Nazi Party is J. Kaplan (1997) [6], and as far as I can see, this isn't even disputed, so I fail to see anything "defamatory" in the statement. dab (𒁳) 18:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The key successor organization was the Asatrú Alliance, started after the Free Assembly's demise by Arizonan Michael J. Murray (whose "magical" Asatrú name is "Valgard Murray").
As a teenager, Kaplan writes, Murray had been involved in the American Nazi Party, signing his letters "Heil Hitler!" into the late 1960s. In the 1970s, Murray became vice president of Christensen's Odinist Fellowship.
But by 1988, a year after he started the Asatrú Alliance, Murray found himself facing the same political pressures that McNallen had earlier. When a California neo-Nazi published a list of Murray's followers, implying that they agreed with the Californian's racial views, Murray wrote him an open letter saying the Alliance "does not advocate any type of political or racial extremist views or affiliations."
We also need to track down the SPLC's source to see exactly what they said. Obviously, rumors fly largely unchallenged and freely in this territory and they must not be propagated here. Love the SPLC's fixation on boar hunting and lack of disclaimer regarding Germanic Neopagan groups that have no links to Neo-Nazism. :bloodofox: ( talk) 18:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Berger (2005, p. 45) has more:
all of this is perfectly undisputed, and spot-on-topic in this article. Berger goes on to quote Murray (1999) "vilify ... outright lies ... what next, will we be fed to lions" --- I cannot but wonder if the AA couldn't have found another member without a personal past as an ardent Neo-Nazi to submit their outrage over being associated with Neo-Nazis... dab (𒁳) 19:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Out nation's founders felt so strongly about our government's inalienable right to religious freedom without fear of government harassment that they placed it first in the Bill of Rights at the top of the First Amendment. . . . Americans who support the Bill of Rights must question their government's efforts to vilify, demonize and even destroy a law aiding religious minority through what amounts to a smear campaign based on gross misrepresentation and outright lies . . . What next, will we be fed to the lions"
The Jeffrey Kaplan book clearly states that Mike Murray left Neo-Nazism in the late 1970s and also points out that he later took a stand against Nazi attempts to link themselves to the Asatru Alliance when confronted by a group called "New Dawn", and again during the Edred Thorrsson/Temple of Set controversy. He was clearly a member of the American Nazi Party 40 years ago. It is misleading to imply, as the current wording does, that he is an advocate of mixing Nazism and Asatru today. 70.108.114.120 ( talk) 21:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree the precise wording can be improved. Nevertheless, it is entirely inappropriate to speak of "unsourced or poorly sourced material". The material is fully sourced. If you feel it isn't presented neutrally, try to put it into perspective by adding more sourced material. You cannot invoke WP:BIO to prevent the discussion of fully sourced criticism of a person, living or dead. At present, I find I have to do all the actual work, while bloodofox keeps sabotaging progress by disingenous one-sided appeals to "policy". boo, I don't have a problem if you are an adherent of neo-völkisch paganism. Really, it's fine. You are also free to work towards exposing the virtues or benefits of these ideologies, I don't doubt that subjectively, they are being embraced with best intentions by adherents. What you will not do, however, is obfuscate coverage of their history and associations. I also object to your continuous allegations of "smearing" in the context of the "fascism" label. I fail to see how "fascism" is any more inherently "libelous" than "folkish". Both are terms for identical or near-identical ideologies, self-applied by adherents in the early and late 20th century, respectively. To imply that association of one with the other is "libelous" one way or the other would need attribution to a reliable source. dab (𒁳) 08:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
To have the more complete and more honest picture, you should quote what they say about their beliefs, and not only what some scholars (with all due respect) say about them. In that sense, folkism is -- using the language of
Asatru Folk Assembly, even presented on the Wikipedia's page about this organization - "a belief, that
I've continued the discussion with Cberlet on what would be the most appropriate name for Esoteric Nazism and have suggested that the title is so poorly-defined that it would be better redirected to this article. An explanation of the term could be inserted into the lead section here, and the present content of Esoteric Nazism (or most of it) could be moved to Esoteric Hitlerism. Cberlet hasn't replied yet and it also looks like we will need an admin to perform the move on account of the edit histories, so now might be a good time to come to a decision about whether, alternatively, we want to simply go with my original Plan A and merge the stuff into N.v.m. after all.
I have no strong inclination either way. In favour of merger, I would observe that we do seem, on the face of it, to have half an article there and half of one here; that the account of Esoteric Hitlerism there is of quite a modest length, and we will at some point have to write a summary of the subject for the present article anyway; and that the Satanism and neopaganism sections of that article overlap this one. Against, I would observe that N.v.m. has already demonstrated its potential for attracting imbroglios, and my experience has been that coherent articles are often best worked up in the quiet and sheltered backwaters of Wikipedia!
Anyway, guys, I'm putting the merge tags back on so people will notice. A happy Christmas to some of you, and a happy Yule to the rest. Gnostrat ( talk) 23:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
The folkish movement has made itself distinct from the Nazi influence neo-volkish movement.
Folkish movement has absolutely no relation to fascism or Nazis. Neo-Paganism has nothing to do at all with Fascism and in fact opposes it! Odinist are against central authority. The folkish movement does not teach hate or racial conflict or Nazi concepts. What it does teach is that the white race should be treated equally to any other race and offers an outlet for those struggling with white identity. Just as any other race has a culture and history that is exclusively theirs the neo-pagan movement seeks to restore that status to whites by offering them something from their own heritage that is not tainted by multicultural undertones of Christianity or other populist culture. It is no different than a Native American embracing his indigenous tribal philosophies or a person of African descent connecting with his heritage based philosophy or an Asian etc. etc.
Only if a black man says he is proud of his race and his heritage or an Asian or any non white and states that he wants to connect with his heritage and people then he is considered a great person if a white man says the same thing he is a fascist and neo-nazi and all this. Most folkist oppose the Nazis and are strongly against any central authority much more so fascism.
Hitler himself locked folkish Asatruar (wotanist) in death camps! Really get your facts straight and do a little research before you write an article on something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.218.107.126 ( talk) 19:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
"Fascist paganism" in & of itself does not denote "völkisch" folk/culture or race concepts at all. People like Jack Grimes who propagate an Italian-Fascist Roman-paganism and Neo-völkisch movements have little if anything in common. 67.5.157.138 ( talk) 23:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Folkism, as understood and defined in Asatru and Odinist community doesn't belong to the "neo-fascism" series AT ALL. Few points:
1. folkism in this meaning is a RELIGIOUS, not a political attitude; in fact, one may be folkish in religion AND libertarian, liberal, or leftist (anyway: anti-fascist) in politics and there' no contradiction in it. One could NOT, however, be fascist and anti-fascist at the same time. Or to claim superiority of his/her ethnic group and equality of all groups in the meantime. Or could ey, dab? How do you think?
2. folkism in this meaning represents the point of view that each nation/ethnic group/race has its own traditions and by their birthplace, family relations and genetic heritage should follow them.
3. folkism in this meaning doesn't have anything to do with the notion of "superiority", hatred or degrading of any culture; only of uniqueness and preciousness of each element of human mosaic; that all people are equal and should be equally proud of their traditions - Germanic person of Germanic ones, Slavic one of Slavic Ones, Black African of their ones, Hindu of Hindu ones, Jew of Jewish ones, etc.; look at the Asatru Folk Assembly bylaws for example. Or Canadian Asatru Portal ( http://www.asatru.ca/faq.html). I don't know if the latter organization is folkish, universalist, both or none (??), but they DO present this debate in a clear, comprehensive way. Or take a look at the site of Odinist Fellowship UK ( http://www.odinistfellowship.co.uk/ ), certainly a "folkish" organization, though not related to Else Christensen. This is what they say about folkism v. universalism:
4. fascism, neo-fascism and racism IS based on the notion of one's ethnic "superiority", which conflicts with pp. 2 and 3.
5. some non-European ethnic groups, incl. some of the American Indians, here incl. Lakota Nation are sworn defenders of their culture uniqueness and they STRICTLY FORBID anyone that is not of Lakota descent (at least by one parent) to practice their religion and customs, especially the Lakota Sundance. Moreover, they issued the document titled "Lakota War Declaration" on the so-called plastic shamans. Now this would be STRICTLY FOLKISH... And yet you wouldn't call it "fascist" or "nazi", or would you, dab and some others?
6. Similiarly, until recently nobody of Jewish origin would be officially accepted in the community of Judaism religion; it has changed in 2000s, as I remember in 2005 or 2006. It was an old, maybe ancient policy and it was certainly FOLKISH in the strictest sense. But... was it neo-fascist, dab? Especially that it predated fascism for centuries?
7. Exactly the same as p. 6, Persian Zoroastrians didn't -- until recently -- accept ANY converts and in Iran they still don't accept them (for the fear of persecution by the Islamic regime. It is STRICTLY FOLKISH, too.. But is it neo-fascitst, dab? Was it neo-fascist through all centuries, when it was observed??
8. even Matthias Gardell differentiates between three kinds of Asatru kindreds: racist, non-racist ethnocentric and unversalist. And Gardell can't be considered as a fan of ethnic intolerance... Or could he, dab? How do you think?
9. as I said before, NOBODY here claims that there are no neo-fascist or even neo-nazi currents, groups and persons in Germanic neopaganism. Yes, it's a shame, but there ARE some. The question is, however, not the distribution of such ideologies in the Heathen community, but the meaning of the word FOLKISM. This and only this.
Now, I'm not folkish myself... Well, maybe a bit, because while I think that every nation should practice their own tradition by default, I would NEVER deny anybody's right to choose whatever religion he/she chooses, including ethnic one. As I'm pagan ( Slavic reconstructionist), I find it simply unacceptable to deny access to our Gods to anybody. After all, if Gods want to call someone, it's Their right. We, humans, are all equal in relation to Them and we are equal to each other (as humans). Well, am I neo-fascist, dab? Or was I inspired by the nazi currents? If you call me so, I wouldn't have any choice but scream "DAB HEIL!!" :) Critto ( talk) 00:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
The phrase "neo-volkish" is only used four times on google, and not on reliable sites. [8] and who is going to use an umlout in the search bar? I don't know what to, but this isn't a commonly used term as it stands. (People will know what it means, though- well, people who have read about the subject a little or something.) Merkin's mum 21:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Neopaganism seems to have a strong and (among a significant segment) extreme left-wing political leanings, but there does seem to be a growing elements of "Pagan Conservatives" which have begun to become vocal in the form of websites and discussion groups. Some examples are " Pagans For Life" and " Oak Grove Conservatives". These individuals and groups should not be confused with fascists and Nazis. -- 151.201.147.161 ( talk) 06:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted the paragraph about Stephen Cox from the OJB section, as it's unsourced and IMO a vanity blurb. Also Cox doesn't seem to be notable enough for such an extensive mention. If any disagree, feel free to add reliable third-party sources, explain why Cox is notable, and restore. Pointyhat9 ( talk) 18:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
According to Anti-fascistische Actie Nederland, "De Order of the Jarls of Baelder behoorde in de jaren negentig van de vorige, etc., etc.
For those of us who are hard of Dutch, an English translation wouldn't go amiss. Nuttyskin ( talk) 16:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
references 28.^ http://www.heathensagainsthate.org/ 29.^ http://www.angelfire.com/wy/wyrd/antinazi.html 30.^ http://www.angelfire.com/wy/wyrd/odinvsnazi.html are from unreliable sources ἙρμῆςΚυλλήνη ( talk) 17:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
An RfC:
Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the
Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. –
MrX 17:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Words in languages other than english, make unintelligible articles in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.207.187.233 ( talk) 14:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected links on Neo-völkisch movements which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bjoyofsatan\.com\b
on the global blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:56, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
This entry could benefit from a little titbit about some of the people for context. For example Stephen Bernard Cox is mentioned by name but no background is given, Perhaps some info could be supplied from this website http://web.archive.org/web/20051226095558/http://www.arktion.org/main.php?pagnaam=Home&subpagnaam=Our_Founder for example that he is a qualified teacher and has a degree in Art. 31.68.68.188 ( talk) 13:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected links on Neo-völkisch movements which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bjoyofsatan\.com\b
on the global blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
This appears to now have been resurrected
http://www.theblackorder.org/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Incendiaryfire ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Neo-völkisch movements. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
This article has had a tag on it for a long time questioning the heavy use of primary sources. Is there such a thing as Neo-völkisch movements? Why the german word for this? It just seems like it is (as has been suggested before) Nazi-style occult beliefs. To me this article seems like a hodge-podge of original research that makes this stuff seem bigger and more important that it is. I don't think this article subject fails WP:Notability Elmmapleoakpine ( talk) 19:01, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Neo-völkisch movements. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
The article just survived an AfD, but all the issues raised there remain. The article's scope is very unclear, it has shifted several times during its existence, and there is a mismatch between the title and at least some of the content.
The article was originally called "Nazi satanism" and used the book Black Sun by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke as one of its sources. It is now called "Neo-völkisch movements", a term created by Goodrick-Clarke for the disparate movements covered in his book. If this should be an article about Nazi satanism, all the content that isn't Nazi satanism should be removed, and the original title would be a better choice. If it is about Goodrick-Clarke's term (which is problematic in its own ways, more about that below), all movements that aren't covered in his book should be removed, including much of the original Nazi satanist content; that would mean that the article is fully transformed into a different article from what it was intended as when it was created.
There is more confusion created by the inclusion of the SPLC as a source, because the SPLC uses the term "neo-völkisch" in a different way than Goodrick-Clarke. The SPLC content has been added only due to the current title, and is unrelated to both the original topic and Goodrick-Clarke's book.
And finally there is the fundamental problem that Goodrick-Clarke's term hasn't been picked up by other scholars. There are some scholars who have used the same neologism, but in direct references to the historical völkisch movement, i.e. as a descriptive term for post-1945 attempts to revive the older movement. But this is not what Goodrick-Clarke's book covers; it covers his own category which he calls "neo-völkisch", which only appears to include one group (the Landig Group) that uses the völkisch movement as its starting point. "Neo-völkisch movements" is really a term that is used in this way in one single book, and it's never even clearly defined in that book. Having the article under this title should really limit the scope to that one book, but then the subject is non-notable.
What is the scope of the article? Is it Nazi satanism? Is it Goodrick-Clarke's term? Is it the SPLC's term? Is it post-1945 attempts to revive the völkisch movement? Currently, it is all of the above in a case of WP:SYNTH. Ffranc ( talk) 11:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Just as the original völkisch movement arose as a defensive ideology of German identity against modernity in the late nineteenth century, this neovölkisch revival acts as a defensive ideology of white identity against multiculturalism, affirmative action and mass Third World immigration. As these neo-völkisch groups elaborate their concerns with identity and ethnicity, many of them are drawn, as were their German predecessors, toward esoteric themes of Aryan origins, secret knowledge and occult heritage. Like the Ariosophists of 1890–1945, the new white-pride movements represent only the most radical response of Western societies that are now having to confront fundamental challenges to their cultural identity.Alcaios ( talk) 00:05, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Black Sun examines the survival and revival of "Aryan" racial ideas in response to the challenge of the postwar world. More than half a century after the defeat and disgrace of Nazism and fascism, the far right is again challenging the liberal order of the Western democracies for political space. Radical ideologies are feeding on the threats of economic globalization, affirmative action and Third World immigration. The book explores the farther shores of right-wing extremist ideology. Aryan cults, aristocratic paganism, anti-Semitic demonology, Eastern religion and the occult supply underground beliefs to individuals and groups who fear a loss of status, cultural tradition and identity in the emergent multicultural societies of the United States and Europe.
If the article is turned into a disambiguation page, it could look something like this:
There was a concern raised at the AfD about losing the article history. A disambiguation page could then be a better option than deletion or redirection, if more people end up with the same conclusion as I, that the article is unsalvageable. (There is also the existing disambiguation page Occultism and the far right, which covers some of the various scopes this articles has gone through). Ffranc ( talk) 11:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
OK, I made an attempt at turning it into a disambiguation page. We'll see if someone reverts it. The "Including" part is not optimal, and can be made obsolete if the article about Goodrick-Clarke's book gets a full summary. But at least now all substantial information from the previous article should be possible to find in an article linked from the disambiguation page. Ffranc ( talk) 10:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from Neo-völkisch movements appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 6 December 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on June 9, 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
could perhaps be merged into the larger Nazi occultism, but this article concerns post-1960s fringe movements, not Nazi Germany or Theosophy. It should be considered a sub-article of the wider topic of Nazi occultism. dab (𒁳) 11:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
we can move it. As you can see, lots of terms are in boldface, and lots of redirects point here. The article could reside at any of them. I started out with an article on OJB. Then I decided the group wasn't notable enough for a standalone article and collected more context. I have no problem with moving this to fascist satanism, fascist paganism, fascism and neopaganism, or anything similar. I am not aware of any ongoing edit-war btw, so I am not sure I understand what you mean. dab (𒁳) 22:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
" Occultism and the far right" would be a huge umbrella article, also including in its scope all of (pre-WWII) Nazi occultism. I would prefer to restrict our focus to current (1970s to present) neopagan and 'para-neopagan' movements (which very much includes both the Nouvelle Droite and Norwegian Black Metal). dab (𒁳) 14:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
let's see -- this is a difficult topic already for reasons of terminology (occultists, unsurprisingly, aren't very fond of crystal clear "calling a spade a spade"). So perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to aim at a broad sweeping uber-article like " Occultism and the far right" in summary style. It will need to address the following sub-topics:
the interesting thing is how extremes touch. The "neo-tribalism" advocated by "fascist pagans" is only shades away from the neo-paganism of Anarcho-primitivism, and the völkisch Islamophobia of Koenraad Logghe is informed by the same ideology as the endorsement of Islamic terrorism by David Myatt. A difficult topic, and we should take it slow and carefully (there is no deadline). dab (𒁳) 17:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Dbachmann on this issue. I would prefer to have an umbrella page and then pages on specific sub-topics with a more precise focus. There is no reason an umbrella page needs to be lengthy, but I am concerned that some of this material just does not belong under the title " Esoteric Nazism."-- Cberlet 13:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's go with option 2 for now. Then see what it looks like. I would like to hold open a discussion on the possibility of making Esoteric Nazism a disambiguation page linking to Nazi occultism and a renamed page holding the current contents of Esoteric Nazism, but what to call it has me stumped. Thanks for a thoughtful discussion, you both are bery well read on these subjects. It is a delight to work with you.-- Cberlet ( talk) 14:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I've added references re Myatt's denial of involvement to give a NPOV, and corrected the mistakes re his middle name and his DoB. This brings it into line with the ONA article here and the article on Myatt. Coolmoon ( talk) 10:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Paganism and Satanism are two COMPLETELY different entities. One being a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses (Paganism), and the other being either atheistic (ie. LaVeyanism), or based upon Judeo-Christian concepts (ie. Luciferianism). The fact that there are "Pagan" Nazi groups out there is a bunch of crap, but thats just POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JanderVK ( talk • contribs) 05:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I concur fully. I don't know who wrote this, i suspect it was some confused christian or something. It's like this article is trying to collect as many negatively-ladden buzzwords as possible into one place without actually knowing their meaning or real context. This needs to be renamed as soon as possible. It doesn't make any sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.187.23.12 ( talk) 10:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
"countercultural fascism" or "avant-garde fascism" appears to be the US term for this complex.
dab (𒁳) 12:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I strongly object to bloodofox ( talk · contribs)'s persistent attempts at sanitization, consistently removing one side of the argument based on "dubious sources" but not the other. See also Talk:Germanic Neopaganism, Talk:Michael Moynihan (journalist), Talk:Tyr (journal). With this article, we finally have a central location to address these questions up front and on-topic. By all means, we should report on both (or all) sides of the divide, and apply reasonable and balanced criteria for the "reliability" of a source. I obviously agree that there is much room for debate, and I would welcome third opinions on bloodofox's approach. I argue that Michael J. Murray's and Michael Moynihan's double membership in Asatru and Nazi and/or Satanist organizations makes them patently on-topic if not textbook examples for this article. Neither Moynihan's nor Murray's involvement with Asatru, Nazism and Satanism are at all disputed. To discount the source given as "dubious" is clearly disingenious. We clearly cannot expect the various groups and "think tanks" associated with these people to be listed on the pages of Nature or Physics Today: WP:RS calls for sources with sufficient notability relative to the topic under discussion. An article by Kevin Coogan in Hitlist can hardly be dismissed as "dubious" in this context. dab (𒁳) 13:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't appreciate that you describe my requests for sources on controversial and potentially libelous matters as "sanitization". While I am most definitely no fan of movements advocating fascism, totalitarianism or censorship, I am no fan of misinformation either, especially when living people are involved. I've looked up some of these claims and this summary essentially equates to some previously mentioned fact mixed with some very funny wives tales in it. I'd like to point some out:
These are examples of a poorly written and researched source; it has very questionable claims and it fails the reliable source test for living people, which requires extreme carefulness. Related, where is Moynihan involved in a "Nazi" organization that you claim above? I don't see this anyway. Are you talking about the Asatru Alliance? Is this your opinion, some else's opinion or do they self-label as Nazis or Fascists? Are you saying Nazi organization because of former associations due to Valgard Murray apparently once having some involvement with a Nazi organization? These are all important basic questions to anything we're dealing with, no matter if we're talking about a television shower or suspected fascists. :bloodofox: ( talk) 05:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
..at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Reliable_sources. With this very important policy in mind, I suggest we look at Coogan's sources, which are basically all interviews with Moynihan as it's obvious by Coogan's fact checking that we are not dealing with a reputable source on a living person and these claims are potentially libelous. We must compare them to contradicting sources. Coogan is also contradicted later by other source I've supplied above. Dab seems set on re-inserting "Nazi skinhead" and "White power" skinhead before the word skinhead here despite the fact that Coogan's source for this is an interview where Moynihan doesn't state this at all, instead stating that he was simply a "skinhead" and, really, that is all we know. Someone is making their own judgment here and we can't pass it along as fact, as Dab is attempting to to do. If we are going to use the terms "Nazi Skinhead" or "white power skinhead," we are going to need to state that Coogan stated this as this in itself is libelous.Editors should avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to an encyclopedia article about the subject. When less-than-reliable publications print material they suspect is untrue, they often include weasel phrases. Look out for these.
In the United States, there are several proponents of combining "folkish" Asatru with neo-fascism or neo-Nazism. These include Michael J. Murray of Ásatrú Alliance (and former American Nazi Party member)[16] and musician/journalist Michael Moynihan (who has turned to "metagenetic"[17] Asatru in the mid-1990s,[18] former member of the Abraxas Foundation).[19] Moynihan and his former associate Boyd Rice were adherents of Anton LaVey's Church of Satan.
[5] -- I would be interested in one such reliable source: if it says "Murray left Nazism 30+ years ago", we can certainly repeat that, but just striking all mention of Murray or the AA won't do. "Folkish Asatru" is the very topic of the "paganism" section of this article, and the AA epitomizes folkish Asatru in the US -- even the (self-designation!) "folkish" imitates the völkisch of pre-WWII fascism. (if Murray is "working to keep out of Asatru" neo-völkisch ideology, I am afraid he must not have been very successful. Anyway, our source that Murray was a member of the American Nazi Party is J. Kaplan (1997) [6], and as far as I can see, this isn't even disputed, so I fail to see anything "defamatory" in the statement. dab (𒁳) 18:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The key successor organization was the Asatrú Alliance, started after the Free Assembly's demise by Arizonan Michael J. Murray (whose "magical" Asatrú name is "Valgard Murray").
As a teenager, Kaplan writes, Murray had been involved in the American Nazi Party, signing his letters "Heil Hitler!" into the late 1960s. In the 1970s, Murray became vice president of Christensen's Odinist Fellowship.
But by 1988, a year after he started the Asatrú Alliance, Murray found himself facing the same political pressures that McNallen had earlier. When a California neo-Nazi published a list of Murray's followers, implying that they agreed with the Californian's racial views, Murray wrote him an open letter saying the Alliance "does not advocate any type of political or racial extremist views or affiliations."
We also need to track down the SPLC's source to see exactly what they said. Obviously, rumors fly largely unchallenged and freely in this territory and they must not be propagated here. Love the SPLC's fixation on boar hunting and lack of disclaimer regarding Germanic Neopagan groups that have no links to Neo-Nazism. :bloodofox: ( talk) 18:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Berger (2005, p. 45) has more:
all of this is perfectly undisputed, and spot-on-topic in this article. Berger goes on to quote Murray (1999) "vilify ... outright lies ... what next, will we be fed to lions" --- I cannot but wonder if the AA couldn't have found another member without a personal past as an ardent Neo-Nazi to submit their outrage over being associated with Neo-Nazis... dab (𒁳) 19:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Out nation's founders felt so strongly about our government's inalienable right to religious freedom without fear of government harassment that they placed it first in the Bill of Rights at the top of the First Amendment. . . . Americans who support the Bill of Rights must question their government's efforts to vilify, demonize and even destroy a law aiding religious minority through what amounts to a smear campaign based on gross misrepresentation and outright lies . . . What next, will we be fed to the lions"
The Jeffrey Kaplan book clearly states that Mike Murray left Neo-Nazism in the late 1970s and also points out that he later took a stand against Nazi attempts to link themselves to the Asatru Alliance when confronted by a group called "New Dawn", and again during the Edred Thorrsson/Temple of Set controversy. He was clearly a member of the American Nazi Party 40 years ago. It is misleading to imply, as the current wording does, that he is an advocate of mixing Nazism and Asatru today. 70.108.114.120 ( talk) 21:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree the precise wording can be improved. Nevertheless, it is entirely inappropriate to speak of "unsourced or poorly sourced material". The material is fully sourced. If you feel it isn't presented neutrally, try to put it into perspective by adding more sourced material. You cannot invoke WP:BIO to prevent the discussion of fully sourced criticism of a person, living or dead. At present, I find I have to do all the actual work, while bloodofox keeps sabotaging progress by disingenous one-sided appeals to "policy". boo, I don't have a problem if you are an adherent of neo-völkisch paganism. Really, it's fine. You are also free to work towards exposing the virtues or benefits of these ideologies, I don't doubt that subjectively, they are being embraced with best intentions by adherents. What you will not do, however, is obfuscate coverage of their history and associations. I also object to your continuous allegations of "smearing" in the context of the "fascism" label. I fail to see how "fascism" is any more inherently "libelous" than "folkish". Both are terms for identical or near-identical ideologies, self-applied by adherents in the early and late 20th century, respectively. To imply that association of one with the other is "libelous" one way or the other would need attribution to a reliable source. dab (𒁳) 08:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
To have the more complete and more honest picture, you should quote what they say about their beliefs, and not only what some scholars (with all due respect) say about them. In that sense, folkism is -- using the language of
Asatru Folk Assembly, even presented on the Wikipedia's page about this organization - "a belief, that
I've continued the discussion with Cberlet on what would be the most appropriate name for Esoteric Nazism and have suggested that the title is so poorly-defined that it would be better redirected to this article. An explanation of the term could be inserted into the lead section here, and the present content of Esoteric Nazism (or most of it) could be moved to Esoteric Hitlerism. Cberlet hasn't replied yet and it also looks like we will need an admin to perform the move on account of the edit histories, so now might be a good time to come to a decision about whether, alternatively, we want to simply go with my original Plan A and merge the stuff into N.v.m. after all.
I have no strong inclination either way. In favour of merger, I would observe that we do seem, on the face of it, to have half an article there and half of one here; that the account of Esoteric Hitlerism there is of quite a modest length, and we will at some point have to write a summary of the subject for the present article anyway; and that the Satanism and neopaganism sections of that article overlap this one. Against, I would observe that N.v.m. has already demonstrated its potential for attracting imbroglios, and my experience has been that coherent articles are often best worked up in the quiet and sheltered backwaters of Wikipedia!
Anyway, guys, I'm putting the merge tags back on so people will notice. A happy Christmas to some of you, and a happy Yule to the rest. Gnostrat ( talk) 23:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
The folkish movement has made itself distinct from the Nazi influence neo-volkish movement.
Folkish movement has absolutely no relation to fascism or Nazis. Neo-Paganism has nothing to do at all with Fascism and in fact opposes it! Odinist are against central authority. The folkish movement does not teach hate or racial conflict or Nazi concepts. What it does teach is that the white race should be treated equally to any other race and offers an outlet for those struggling with white identity. Just as any other race has a culture and history that is exclusively theirs the neo-pagan movement seeks to restore that status to whites by offering them something from their own heritage that is not tainted by multicultural undertones of Christianity or other populist culture. It is no different than a Native American embracing his indigenous tribal philosophies or a person of African descent connecting with his heritage based philosophy or an Asian etc. etc.
Only if a black man says he is proud of his race and his heritage or an Asian or any non white and states that he wants to connect with his heritage and people then he is considered a great person if a white man says the same thing he is a fascist and neo-nazi and all this. Most folkist oppose the Nazis and are strongly against any central authority much more so fascism.
Hitler himself locked folkish Asatruar (wotanist) in death camps! Really get your facts straight and do a little research before you write an article on something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.218.107.126 ( talk) 19:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
"Fascist paganism" in & of itself does not denote "völkisch" folk/culture or race concepts at all. People like Jack Grimes who propagate an Italian-Fascist Roman-paganism and Neo-völkisch movements have little if anything in common. 67.5.157.138 ( talk) 23:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Folkism, as understood and defined in Asatru and Odinist community doesn't belong to the "neo-fascism" series AT ALL. Few points:
1. folkism in this meaning is a RELIGIOUS, not a political attitude; in fact, one may be folkish in religion AND libertarian, liberal, or leftist (anyway: anti-fascist) in politics and there' no contradiction in it. One could NOT, however, be fascist and anti-fascist at the same time. Or to claim superiority of his/her ethnic group and equality of all groups in the meantime. Or could ey, dab? How do you think?
2. folkism in this meaning represents the point of view that each nation/ethnic group/race has its own traditions and by their birthplace, family relations and genetic heritage should follow them.
3. folkism in this meaning doesn't have anything to do with the notion of "superiority", hatred or degrading of any culture; only of uniqueness and preciousness of each element of human mosaic; that all people are equal and should be equally proud of their traditions - Germanic person of Germanic ones, Slavic one of Slavic Ones, Black African of their ones, Hindu of Hindu ones, Jew of Jewish ones, etc.; look at the Asatru Folk Assembly bylaws for example. Or Canadian Asatru Portal ( http://www.asatru.ca/faq.html). I don't know if the latter organization is folkish, universalist, both or none (??), but they DO present this debate in a clear, comprehensive way. Or take a look at the site of Odinist Fellowship UK ( http://www.odinistfellowship.co.uk/ ), certainly a "folkish" organization, though not related to Else Christensen. This is what they say about folkism v. universalism:
4. fascism, neo-fascism and racism IS based on the notion of one's ethnic "superiority", which conflicts with pp. 2 and 3.
5. some non-European ethnic groups, incl. some of the American Indians, here incl. Lakota Nation are sworn defenders of their culture uniqueness and they STRICTLY FORBID anyone that is not of Lakota descent (at least by one parent) to practice their religion and customs, especially the Lakota Sundance. Moreover, they issued the document titled "Lakota War Declaration" on the so-called plastic shamans. Now this would be STRICTLY FOLKISH... And yet you wouldn't call it "fascist" or "nazi", or would you, dab and some others?
6. Similiarly, until recently nobody of Jewish origin would be officially accepted in the community of Judaism religion; it has changed in 2000s, as I remember in 2005 or 2006. It was an old, maybe ancient policy and it was certainly FOLKISH in the strictest sense. But... was it neo-fascist, dab? Especially that it predated fascism for centuries?
7. Exactly the same as p. 6, Persian Zoroastrians didn't -- until recently -- accept ANY converts and in Iran they still don't accept them (for the fear of persecution by the Islamic regime. It is STRICTLY FOLKISH, too.. But is it neo-fascitst, dab? Was it neo-fascist through all centuries, when it was observed??
8. even Matthias Gardell differentiates between three kinds of Asatru kindreds: racist, non-racist ethnocentric and unversalist. And Gardell can't be considered as a fan of ethnic intolerance... Or could he, dab? How do you think?
9. as I said before, NOBODY here claims that there are no neo-fascist or even neo-nazi currents, groups and persons in Germanic neopaganism. Yes, it's a shame, but there ARE some. The question is, however, not the distribution of such ideologies in the Heathen community, but the meaning of the word FOLKISM. This and only this.
Now, I'm not folkish myself... Well, maybe a bit, because while I think that every nation should practice their own tradition by default, I would NEVER deny anybody's right to choose whatever religion he/she chooses, including ethnic one. As I'm pagan ( Slavic reconstructionist), I find it simply unacceptable to deny access to our Gods to anybody. After all, if Gods want to call someone, it's Their right. We, humans, are all equal in relation to Them and we are equal to each other (as humans). Well, am I neo-fascist, dab? Or was I inspired by the nazi currents? If you call me so, I wouldn't have any choice but scream "DAB HEIL!!" :) Critto ( talk) 00:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
The phrase "neo-volkish" is only used four times on google, and not on reliable sites. [8] and who is going to use an umlout in the search bar? I don't know what to, but this isn't a commonly used term as it stands. (People will know what it means, though- well, people who have read about the subject a little or something.) Merkin's mum 21:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Neopaganism seems to have a strong and (among a significant segment) extreme left-wing political leanings, but there does seem to be a growing elements of "Pagan Conservatives" which have begun to become vocal in the form of websites and discussion groups. Some examples are " Pagans For Life" and " Oak Grove Conservatives". These individuals and groups should not be confused with fascists and Nazis. -- 151.201.147.161 ( talk) 06:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted the paragraph about Stephen Cox from the OJB section, as it's unsourced and IMO a vanity blurb. Also Cox doesn't seem to be notable enough for such an extensive mention. If any disagree, feel free to add reliable third-party sources, explain why Cox is notable, and restore. Pointyhat9 ( talk) 18:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
According to Anti-fascistische Actie Nederland, "De Order of the Jarls of Baelder behoorde in de jaren negentig van de vorige, etc., etc.
For those of us who are hard of Dutch, an English translation wouldn't go amiss. Nuttyskin ( talk) 16:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
references 28.^ http://www.heathensagainsthate.org/ 29.^ http://www.angelfire.com/wy/wyrd/antinazi.html 30.^ http://www.angelfire.com/wy/wyrd/odinvsnazi.html are from unreliable sources ἙρμῆςΚυλλήνη ( talk) 17:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
An RfC:
Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the
Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. –
MrX 17:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Words in languages other than english, make unintelligible articles in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.207.187.233 ( talk) 14:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected links on Neo-völkisch movements which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bjoyofsatan\.com\b
on the global blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:56, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
This entry could benefit from a little titbit about some of the people for context. For example Stephen Bernard Cox is mentioned by name but no background is given, Perhaps some info could be supplied from this website http://web.archive.org/web/20051226095558/http://www.arktion.org/main.php?pagnaam=Home&subpagnaam=Our_Founder for example that he is a qualified teacher and has a degree in Art. 31.68.68.188 ( talk) 13:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected links on Neo-völkisch movements which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\bjoyofsatan\.com\b
on the global blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
This appears to now have been resurrected
http://www.theblackorder.org/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Incendiaryfire ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Neo-völkisch movements. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
This article has had a tag on it for a long time questioning the heavy use of primary sources. Is there such a thing as Neo-völkisch movements? Why the german word for this? It just seems like it is (as has been suggested before) Nazi-style occult beliefs. To me this article seems like a hodge-podge of original research that makes this stuff seem bigger and more important that it is. I don't think this article subject fails WP:Notability Elmmapleoakpine ( talk) 19:01, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Neo-völkisch movements. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
The article just survived an AfD, but all the issues raised there remain. The article's scope is very unclear, it has shifted several times during its existence, and there is a mismatch between the title and at least some of the content.
The article was originally called "Nazi satanism" and used the book Black Sun by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke as one of its sources. It is now called "Neo-völkisch movements", a term created by Goodrick-Clarke for the disparate movements covered in his book. If this should be an article about Nazi satanism, all the content that isn't Nazi satanism should be removed, and the original title would be a better choice. If it is about Goodrick-Clarke's term (which is problematic in its own ways, more about that below), all movements that aren't covered in his book should be removed, including much of the original Nazi satanist content; that would mean that the article is fully transformed into a different article from what it was intended as when it was created.
There is more confusion created by the inclusion of the SPLC as a source, because the SPLC uses the term "neo-völkisch" in a different way than Goodrick-Clarke. The SPLC content has been added only due to the current title, and is unrelated to both the original topic and Goodrick-Clarke's book.
And finally there is the fundamental problem that Goodrick-Clarke's term hasn't been picked up by other scholars. There are some scholars who have used the same neologism, but in direct references to the historical völkisch movement, i.e. as a descriptive term for post-1945 attempts to revive the older movement. But this is not what Goodrick-Clarke's book covers; it covers his own category which he calls "neo-völkisch", which only appears to include one group (the Landig Group) that uses the völkisch movement as its starting point. "Neo-völkisch movements" is really a term that is used in this way in one single book, and it's never even clearly defined in that book. Having the article under this title should really limit the scope to that one book, but then the subject is non-notable.
What is the scope of the article? Is it Nazi satanism? Is it Goodrick-Clarke's term? Is it the SPLC's term? Is it post-1945 attempts to revive the völkisch movement? Currently, it is all of the above in a case of WP:SYNTH. Ffranc ( talk) 11:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Just as the original völkisch movement arose as a defensive ideology of German identity against modernity in the late nineteenth century, this neovölkisch revival acts as a defensive ideology of white identity against multiculturalism, affirmative action and mass Third World immigration. As these neo-völkisch groups elaborate their concerns with identity and ethnicity, many of them are drawn, as were their German predecessors, toward esoteric themes of Aryan origins, secret knowledge and occult heritage. Like the Ariosophists of 1890–1945, the new white-pride movements represent only the most radical response of Western societies that are now having to confront fundamental challenges to their cultural identity.Alcaios ( talk) 00:05, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Black Sun examines the survival and revival of "Aryan" racial ideas in response to the challenge of the postwar world. More than half a century after the defeat and disgrace of Nazism and fascism, the far right is again challenging the liberal order of the Western democracies for political space. Radical ideologies are feeding on the threats of economic globalization, affirmative action and Third World immigration. The book explores the farther shores of right-wing extremist ideology. Aryan cults, aristocratic paganism, anti-Semitic demonology, Eastern religion and the occult supply underground beliefs to individuals and groups who fear a loss of status, cultural tradition and identity in the emergent multicultural societies of the United States and Europe.
If the article is turned into a disambiguation page, it could look something like this:
There was a concern raised at the AfD about losing the article history. A disambiguation page could then be a better option than deletion or redirection, if more people end up with the same conclusion as I, that the article is unsalvageable. (There is also the existing disambiguation page Occultism and the far right, which covers some of the various scopes this articles has gone through). Ffranc ( talk) 11:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
OK, I made an attempt at turning it into a disambiguation page. We'll see if someone reverts it. The "Including" part is not optimal, and can be made obsolete if the article about Goodrick-Clarke's book gets a full summary. But at least now all substantial information from the previous article should be possible to find in an article linked from the disambiguation page. Ffranc ( talk) 10:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)