The Term 'nation' is to be found in the German language; die Nation, as an alternative to das Volk but it is of alien, Latin derivation (natio-'I am born') and one which was not used by 19th and 20th century folkish thinkers and ideologists. 'Volk' has a more organic and German feel than 'Nation'. Indeed I would encourage my English readers to use the term folc in preference to the alien 'nation'. Folc and Volk are related but not absolutely identical terms. A folc can of course exist without a nation state as is the case today with England.
Both Germanic and Celtic tribes consisted of smaller units called clans that had some kind of common identity, a common origin myth. The clans in turn consisted of units of interrelated families. Our ancestors for reasons of biological health married outside of their clans but only with other clans that were part of the same tribe. This helped to create and maintain a consistent biological unity, identity and avoid inbreeding.
Whilst my knowledge of German, Germanic and Celtic history made me aware that tribalism was more ancient and authentic than nationalism it did not explain my general reluctance to consider myself as a 'nationalist' and indeed I have never claimed to be one, contrary to the claims made by certain websites. It is only with my recent reading of Edred Thorsson's Re-tribalise Now! A Step-by-Step Guide to Cultural Renewal (2020, Arcana Europa Media) that I fully understood the deeper reasons for my antipathy towards nationalism and the 'nation state' concept. Why I did not understand this before I do not know but thanks to Edred's book I can now more fully articulate my feelings for the very first time.
It is no coincidence that the creation of the nation state of England coincides with the spread of Christianity. The dream of a united England was that of King Alfred of Wessex (847/849-899), commonly called by the misnomer Alfred the 'Great'. He is not as many wrongly assume, the first king of England but he did call himself the King of the Anglo-Saxons which of course in reality he wasn't. He had grandiose ideas about forming a single kingdom out of the Anglo-Saxon heptarchy under him and his descendants. The first king of all England was in fact Aethelstan (c. 899-939) from 927-939, a grandson of Alfred.
The centralisation of political power goes hand in glove with the centralisation of religion. The Church pushed for the centralisation of political power in order to extend their control and primacy over the religious life of the Anglo-Saxons. Tribes were a threat to political and religious centralisation. Edred makes clear in his book that the "traditional tribal structures of ancient Europe were targeted for destruction, first by the Roman Empire and then by its successor, the Roman Catholic Church." He points out that tribal loyalties were more important to people than their loyalty to the Church.
The move from tribes to tribal confederations (Saxons and Franks) to 'nations' (and sometimes to empires) coincided with the introduction of Christianity. The christianisation of Norway and the emergence of a king of ALL Norway is one such example in addition to the English one. The temporal power of the king was used to suppress heathenism and to force the outward conversion of the king's subjects to the alien religion of Christianity. The king thus betrayed his gods, ancestors and fellow countrymen. This is why I contend that just as we reject the alien religion of Christianity we must reject the alien and Christian concept of the 'nation state'. It is not only too closely tied to Christianity but it was a willing tool in the eradication of heathen religions and a means of spreading that pernicious religion around the world. It is also responsible for two unnecessary world wars and many European ones.
In a future article I will give some suggestions as to how we may move away from the concept of 'nation' to that of tribe and clan. For the benefit of my foreign readers England has not been a 'nation state' since the Acts of Union with Scotland in 1707.
