What an International Environmentalist Movement Misunderstands

“Scientific progress has the potential to be more salutory than legal regulation. To return to Odin’s advice in the Hávamál once more, the power of the human mind is mankind’s most reliable ally.”

Environmentalist attitudes are nearly ubiquitous within the community of modern-day Germanic and Norse pagans Literature professor Stefanie von Schnurbein notes the ascendant community’s “widespread self-understanding” as adherents of a “religion of nature.” Britain’s Pagan Federation has long considered reverence toward nature central to its worldview, and ecological anxiety has fueled the rise of Norse and other pagan religions in recent years, notably in Iceland. The number of specifically Germanic pagans was estimated at just over 36,000 worldwide in 2014, but this subgroup is a microcosm of a much larger collection of movements with similar beliefs. Journalist Liel Leibovitz writes that there are roughly 1.5 million pagan Americans belonging to a nexus of groups which constitute “one of the nation’s fastest-growing persuasions.” By one estimate, about 10% of American pagans belong to the Germanic variety. This would amount to 150,000 people, a huge increase over the 2014 figure. As of 2022, 1.4% of Iceland’s population profess Norse paganism; this is allegedly “the country’s fastest growing religion.”

Those Germanic pagans who who defy the prevailing pattern of environmentalism have come under fire from the majority in the movement. Thus, in a passionate essay, paganism expert Michael F. Strmiska astonishingly argues that the American Ásatrú (Norse pagan) community is not nearly conservationist enough. However, closer examination reveals that the step from Germanic paganism to environmentalism is far more tenuous than commonly assumed.

Even passionately conservationist heathens themselves seem confused about how their environmentalism can be traced back to their religion. For instance, John Halstead, a pagan environmentalist activist, disputes fellow pagan Jes Minah’s contention that polytheists should view their gods as entities distinct from themselves. Minah argues that if one views, say, a river as inhabited by a spirit separate from oneself, one must restrain oneself from polluting said river: “When we are in a relationship”—in this case, with a river spirit—“we must consider the other.” Halstead rightly objects that this reasoning does not establish a logical path to conservationism. “[W]ho determines whose needs take precedence when (inevitably) there is a conflict between the needs of the river spirit and the needs of human beings?” he sensibly asks.