The hammer of Thor has been used by socialists in the past and present to symbolize their ideology. The arm in hammer can represent either Vulcan or Thor's hammer, again depending on how you wish to interpret it. The symbol simply shows a powerful male arm holding a hammer as if ready to strike with it. This is precisely how Thor was depicted in ancient art and mythology. Note this pic of Thor ⚠️ ↗ by Marten Eskil Winge from the early 1870's. This is one of the most famous paintings of Thor in recent history. Note how his arm is upraised in the pic, ready to strike down with his hammer. It's the spitting image of the symbol that the SLP uses, and it's quite possible that the arm and hammer symbol was taken from this painting (and other ancient paintings) of Thor and miscredited to Vulcan (even though Vulcan also used a hammer, albeit for a different purpose than Thor). Hence, I think the evidence suggests that the arm holding the hammer can represent Thor as well as Vulcan. Also, Vulcan was the Roman god of the forge. He used the hammer as a tool, not as a weapon. Thor used the hammer strictly as a weapon, and as such it makes even more sense to consider the arm and hammer to be a symbol of Thor, ready to strike down the enemies of the working class. The first thing many people think of when they see the upraised arm with a hammer is Thor, not Vulcan. It actually makes less sense for Vulcan to symbolize workers' solidarity than it does for Thor, as Vulcan was strictly a weaponmaker, not a friend or protector of the lower classes in Roman society. I think we can argue this particular point indefinitely, and yes it does depend on how one chooses to interpret the image. My point is that the hammer of Thor is a valid interpretation of this symbol, regardless of whether or not it was once used to represent Vulcan. I will do more research on this, however.

I once again remind you that I never said that the Vikings are a model for freedom. You're trying to make your point by putting words in my mouth and making assumptions about what I was trying to say that are totally untrue. I said that Thor, as the god of the peasant classes (or, today, the working class) represents the strength of the working class and serves as its protector. It has been used as such a symbol for a long time, and your post is the first time I have ever seen anyone try to deny it. Please tell me where I said that Viking culture in general is a symbol for freedom. Different deities represented different things. The Christian God is supposed to be a deity of love and tolerance, but how well does the U.S. government practice that in its policies abroad, and how much does American society practice such lofty ideologies despite adhering to a religious doctrine that is supposed to represent this very thing? Do you see my point? The meaning of a deity doesn't have to work in concert with the social and legal policies of the society in which that deity was worshipped/revered.

As for Freya Aswynn; far from being an expert on the beliefs of the Pagan Norse, she is a modern Alexandrian Witch, astrologer, kabbalist and syncretistic occultist. If one wants to know what a medieval Kabbalist believed, one doesn't consult Madonna ( or her Rabbi for that matter.) If one wants to learn about the ancient Thor cult, one doesn't consult a Tarot reader.

Freya Aswynn is well-respected among Asatruar and her expertise in the Norse deities is considerable...she has written more than one respected book on the subject. Both her and Guerber said the same thing about Thor, and several decades apart at that. I have heard Thor described as the god of the peasant classes in many other sources, as well. I just gave you two prime examples. You have decided that these two sources, which say precisely the same thing, aren't worth their weight in gold. The point is, I provided good evidence that more than one source notes that Thor is the god of the peasant class and a representative of the lower classes, as well as a friend of the common man. So you see that I didn't just spring the notion out of thin air, simply believing something that I want to believe. If you continue to believe that this is misrepesenting Mjolnir, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise, but I will let you know that you are greatly in the minority. I believe the evidence suggests that YOU are the one in error, not me.

Also, Freya Aswynn, as her pen name suggests, is not simply an Alexandrian witch. Her book bills her as "[a] dedicated priestess of Wodan and the old religion of the North." I even have a CD with her Norse rituals on it. As one of the world's foremost authorities on the runes she is in a perfect position to say what Thor represented. You have to have a historical knowledge of the Norse religion to know about the runes and how they were interpreted. Where are your sources of info that say Aswynn and Grueber were wrong?

H.A. Guerber rewrote the Eddas into stories for gradeschoolers ( who she thought were unfit to hear the stories as they were writ.) Similarly I've read the D'aulaires, that isn't a source for what the ancients believed. It may serve as an introduction, but one should hardly argue history from a version which has been reduced to tales.

My point is, Guerber said the same thing that Aswynn said about Thor. The two have never met and both consulted the eddas for their sources. Regardless of how much you disparage the work that either did, the point is, I made my case. If you choose to ignore it, then you are free to do so. I have a very good reason to see the hammer of Thor as a symbol of the working class, and it's going to remain my siggie. And I should also point out that the tales of the gods were based upon what the Norse historically believed.

You spend a paragraph characterizing the forging of Mjolnir and then in your last two sentences you introduce your unproven assertion, and then claim that the introduction proves the assertion. This would be not unlike the deceptions of the Welsh trixter god Osiris. Thus proving that Osiris is a Welsh trixter god ;

Your assertion that Brokk and Sindri were symbols of the working class being screwed over they ruling class, which you claim Mjolnir represented, is far more unproven. In fact, it's outright bizarre.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that Thor was worshipped by the lower classes, and then excuse away his use by the upper classes by characterizing him as universal. I'm not arguing that he was a symbol of the power elite; just that he never stood for a classless society, nor for a revolution.

For one thing, I never said that Thor stood for a classless society. The idea of a classless society was inconceivable to people during the age of the Vikings, when the means to produce an abundance for all did not exist. I said that Thor represented the interests of the common man, whatever those interests may be in any given period of time. Today, they represent the class of wage earners known as the working class and certainly do represent the promise of a classless society. I never said that the modern interpretation was identical to the ancient interpretation, just that Thor always symbolized the power of the lower classes (the Vikings had a class divided society, but it wasn't quite the same as the class divided system of today). As for Thor being universal, I pointed out that the hammer was considered so sacred that many different groups of people used the symbol for many different things, much as many people use the cross today. My point was that Thor was not an exclusive symbol of the ruling class. As I also pointed out up above, I gave my evidence and regardless of what you say about Aswynn and Grueber's knowledge about Norse mythology, the point is that they both said the same thing about Thor, as do Asatruar and Norse Wiccans today.

And of course we've argued before about Marxism in practice vs Marxism in theory. Since you seem to disown all practical examples you're free to posit that somehow it might still work.

I see you read absolutely nothing of the SLP's platform. Genuine Marxism as envisioned by Marx and Engels has never been tried anywhere at any time. Hence, there are no "practical examples" of Marxism in practice. There has never been an attempt to create a classless, stateless, moneyless society since the Industrial Revolution was far along enough to make such a society technologically and materially possible. In 1914-17, Russia did not have the technological capacity to create a classless society where everyone shared an abundance, nor did it have a well-defined working class as we know it in America today. This is why Lenin stepped in with unique ideas of his own and created a statist form of capitalism since it wasn't possible to create a genuine Marxist society (please keep in mind that Marxism has always been intended to be a global system, and not a system that can work effectively in one country). This is not what Marxists try to achieve. As I said before, it's intellectually dishonest to claim that state capitalism was Marxism "in practice." State capitalism, i.e., Leninism's features were the exact opposite of what Marx and Engels hoped to achieve in all aspects of the system. Of course I think genuine Marxism will work once it is finally put into practice, as soon as the working class is psychologically ready for such a revolution (which isn't the case today, given the negative attitudes towards human nature and the fetishism of money and privilege currently plagueing most of that class).

If you could find some sources who weren't reworking lore for modern uses, it would be appreciated. Perhaps some actual historians in lieu of popularizers?

And what evidence did you show that Aswynn and Grueber were both wrong in saying that Thor was the god of the working class and a protector of the common man? How do you account for all of the other sources that say precisely the same thing? How is this a "reworking" of lore for modern uses? Saying that Thor is today the symbol of the working class is a modern interpretation of what he stood for in ancient times. The lower classes are still extant but exist in a different form today than they did during the Viking Age. Your posts failed to prove your assertions and I think the fact that different scholars of the Norse religion and mythology say the exact same thing about Thor make it clear that he was indeed a protector of the working class, and his hammer is a valid symbol for those who support the future victory of the working class over the current class tyranny.