>>10380
>Each ethnic group has a distinct history and a heritage it should cherish and preserve
Okay. If one operates under this assumption I can see how this makes sense. There's no ID here but I would ask that no assumptions are made about my beliefs or motives any further. I'm trying to understand these ideas for their own sake, not to make any kind of point or try to counter them.
> These are the stories that people told their children, generation after generation and millennium after millennium, to root them in their communities and help them to understand their relationship to the larger world.
Could you provide some kind of more concrete example of how understanding the mythology and more abstract practices of the past can help the contemporary man interact with the modern world?
>Gutting your ancestors' folklore and replacing it wholesale with a foreign mythology that is totally alien to the history of your people and their culture is another thing entirely.
Interesting. So you're saying that there exist separate, concrete differences in culture, and that the "essence" of each culture is unique and replaceable. I'm assuming from your overall post that you view synthesis as a negative thing. That when cultures interact too intensely, one will inevitably overpower the other and lead to this "essence" being lost. Nothing was improved. Is this correct?
To what extent is the interaction between European cultures considered positive or negative? Considering how separate and distinct these cultures have been throughout history and still to this day, to what extent is the acceptance of Greek philosophy (to give a random example) a detriment to a Scandinavian person?
>There are intrinsic differences between different human population groups.
I'm trying to understand the mystical component of this, though I'm seeing that you're making an intrinsic connection between culture, race, people and faith that other systems of belief go out of their way to reject and diminish. To what extent would you consider the Gods of other cultures to be "real"? Or is that a needless question, as the only people who need to concern themselves with it would be the members of that particular racial group?
>They are the things that bind together a community and transmit its heritage forward for future generations.
> European polytheism is what we are.
I feel like we're getting broader and broader as I read on, but every sentence you write creates 10 questions on my mind.
For what reason do you think that, considering how fundamental these things are for the development of a people, why has it been put aside in favor of what is to you an inferior way of life and an inferior ideology? What does this system of belief fulfill that you think it needs to be preserved, and how does the "modern" system attempt to provide a (presumably inadequate) substitute for that unique thing?
I guess I'm trying to say, in a tactful way, why are asatru such a misunderstood and misrepresented minority?
>The fact that they keep our culture and identity alive is what it means for the gods to be real.
Ok, that clarifies it, thank you.