The Appropriation of “Hellenism” - A "Profound Offense"
Once again I have been banned from a Pagan reddit after talking about the cultural appropriation of Hellenism by Pagans.
In recent years, the term “Hellenism” has found itself at the center of a weird battle. "Hellenism" is a term describing all things having to do with Greek heritage: history, language, philosophy, art, way of life. In neopagan circles, it is being used to indicate a Pagan religion created and defined by other neopagans. This redefinition raises major ethical concerns about cultural appropriation, as it detaches “Hellenism” from its authentic cultural context and reduces it to a religious label. I argue that the neopagan repurposing of “Hellenism” constitutes deeply harmful cultural appropriation.
This post comes after I was banned from a subreddit for talking about this topic. This topic will often result in a banning as neopagans are convinced it is ok to use “Hellenism” as a religion and any critique is unwelcome. This post will explore the issue in a concise manner, though it can be explore more deeply.
Cultural appropriation occurs when elements central to a culture’s identity are redefined by outsiders. “Hellenism” is more than religion; it embodies the entire Greek cultural experience, including language, history, and national pride. Narrowing its meaning risks distorting its wider meaning, cutting it ties to the cultural context in which the term originates from.
In The Ethics of Cultural Appropriation, Joel Feinberg's concept of "profound offense" is helpful to illustrate how Greeks feel when "Hellenism" is misused by neopagans. "Profound offense" describes a deep often visceral kind of reaction to certain acts or expressions that goes beyond mere annoyance or irritation; a "profound offense" goes to the very core of an individual's or group's identity, values, or deeply held beliefs. A “profound offense” often arises when cultural or historical sensitivities are disregarded. The redefinition and use of “Hellenism” by neopagans qualifies as a “profound offense” - inflicting harm by diminishing its role in Greek self-understanding and memory.
When outsiders redefine “Hellenism” to mean a neopagan religion, they risk misleading others about Greek history and beliefs. The ethics of cultural appropriation stress respect and consent in engaging with symbols from other cultures. As a cultural symbol, “Hellenism” deserves respect for its significance within the Greek community. Redefining it without Greek consent disregards its historical weight and cultural integrity. Respecting such symbols involves recognizing that some, like “Hellenism,” are integral to the identity and cohesion of a people.
A common counterargument that neopagans provide to justify their appropriation is that words change meaning over time. While linguistic evolution is natural, it’s important to distinguish organic shifts within a community from external appropriations that impose new meanings. Language changes are typically driven by those who use the words, and Greek society has not adopted “Hellenism” as a neopagan religion. This redefinition comes from outside, disregarding the Greek experience embedded in the term. Such an imposition undermines Greek agency over their cultural symbols.
In conclusion, the neopagan appropriation of “Hellenism” is not just a profound offense, it is egregious. It is not a case of linguistic shift but a redefinition that erodes the term’s cultural context. While language evolves, it is ethical only when changes occur organically within the originating culture. The Greek people deserve the respect and autonomy to define their heritage without outside reinterpretation and or misuse.
It is my deepest hope that neopagans recognize the harm they are doing and make a shift towards neutral terms such as “Hellenistic Religion” or a new term like “Hellenicitism” to avoid further harm and offense.