I should probably clarify that not all defined / defining themselves as “Folkish” are separatists, racists, bigots or supremacists.
To put it bluntly (and simplify) a Folkish heathen generally thinks that it is easiest to assimilate cultural ideas, myth, praxis and so on that developed in the same sphere as oneself.
That is, that it is more “fluent” for someone of a certain heritage to assimilate a religion / cult of wich his modern contemporary is more or less a continuation.
In short, that it would be “smoother” for a Haitian to work within Vodou or a Norwiegian to work within heathenry.
Simply because they are already partly “there” so to speak ( = their cultures already have a lot of traces of this pre Christian culture).
There are all manners of differences within Folkishism too ofcourse (and a lot of personal opinions, overlappings and so on).
There are ideas ranging from above mentioned to “genetic memory”.
There might be those that have more mythic / theological ideas of different Gods having more or less affinity to different groups of people (ethnicities, but also proffesions and personalities and other “traits”).
The other “side” would be Universalists, holding to the idea that anyone that feels called by the Gods can (and probably should) worship them.
In other words, anyone can be a heathen.
From that view it is more a matter of vocation.
If a hip hop gang decides that they get their inspiration from Odin and Bragi, Universalists would´nt necessarily see anything strange in that (these guys are using verse, rhymes, extatic rythms and a slightly boasting style. Typical for those deities. Who cares if they are African / American , Hebrew or Latin American as far as heritage goes?).
In this world of political correctness Universalism is often seen as a sign of being “not racist”. Truth is, bigots can be found in any group and i would say bigotry, however concealed, can be found in any person too.
I also want to clarify that even if i say things about McNallen, i DONT consider him a charlatan, unlearned or anything else of that nature.
I´m pretty sure HE can distinguish between his philosophy and what is actually historically / archeologically attested.
He has a system. It works for a lot of people.
It is a matter of philosophy and theology.
What i turn against is ONLY when it does´nt get distinguished from history / archeology / anthropology and so on.
There not only will, but SHOULD be various forms of heathenry (there always was, and that IS attested).
One of the American groups wich i hold in very high esteem are Folkish.
So what am i?
I am the guy with the drinking horn.