|
|
Quite often I see Satanists speaking big words on Social Darwinism, how the weak shall be trampled under foot, be destroyed, tormented or otherwise bothered by the elite. Curiosly enough, these "Satanists" always count themselves among the elite. Well, words are one thing, but in this essay I shall try to focus on the one thing that matters to materialistic, no-nonsense Satanists: deeds.
Some of you have probably had to move out of unsafe neighborhood s or at least your parents had to do this. Everyone in America knows this. Yet you would want to move back into these areas? You know, you can if you wish. Just move back...you'l l get cheap rent too. Then fend for yourself and see how you like it! That's life in the Hobbesian Jungle for you.
Have you wondered just how many Satanists claim they want to live in the "jungle", how many who think Thomas Hobbes was onto something "desirable" when he described what he saw as the "natural state?" These Satanists SAY they want the Jungle Law to prevail, and they equate this law with a rather simplistic, Hobbesian state-of- affairs where war, strife, fighting and cut-throat competition is the rule. The fact is, animals themselves do not live in a social "jungle" and thinking this is just more xian hype and ignorance of the natural world. The only people who imagine life is like this are never conquerers or predators, they are always people who have experienced life AS such: victims! Victims of sibling rivalry encouranged by xian parents and victims of the parents. That's why such fools can't tell the difference and have no feel for the real carnal world of animals out there.
I don't know if you would move back into those neighborhood s, but I know what I'd do. I surely do not want to live in a war zone where each day is a struggle to stay alive -- literally. Did any of you live through the race wars in L.A.? Was it great? Funny? Rewarding? Did your "superior" qualities show through? Did you trample some weak folks under cloven hoof? Ha! You probably hid in your safe little suburban homes, doors locked, alarms on and the whole rest.
I personally love to be able to walk the streets at any hour I damn well please. I want be to left alone to do the things I like. Like write, read books, listen to beautiful music, discuss with people, and cook wonderful dinners served with pleasant wine. I want a job where I'm not exploited by some insane company with a fascist, Xtian leader, I want a clean environment and healthy food to eat. Did I mention sex? And that's all, goddammit!
Let me mention some Satanists whose actions speak for themselves. Last I checked (TBF, vol. 5, No. 1-2) the famous artist Timothy Patrick Butler, CoS Priest, explicitly said that he was moving out of that black neighborhood -- nor did he neglect to mention that he was armed to the teeth. From what I could see, he did not like his situation. He didn't seem to wanna-be a "tough guy." No, he seemed to wanna-be left alone to do his own thing -- preferably in a safe neighborhood . Another prominent Satanist whose actions demonstrated something alike is Anton LaVey. Did he want to live in a "jungle" or some other war zone? Not at all! From what I saw Doc wanted amusement parks, he wanted to play his music, write, raise his son, tend to his pets, create androids, have fun, have sex and eat well. I presume the Gilmores live in comfortable distance to such places too. Magistra Tani Jantsang has no wish whatsoever to move to such an inner-city jungle, and she lived in one most of her life so she knows what it's like. Tani Jantsang tells me that she moved away from such a war zone -- she could survive there -- but it simply wasn't fun and she could do without the strife and fear of getting shot at or mugged or worse having to "shoot others back" and hope the law doesn't come down on her. Nemo, Priest, recently hailed the loner people in the movie Stargate: they didn't want to rule, they just wanted to be freed from those rulers. Those are the deeds of well-known Satanists and they speak more than words, and certainly whatever they've said about Social Darwinism should be synthesized with these deeds. Social Darwinism is essentially a false doctrine put forth by colonial forces to "justify" their own exploitation of blacks during a time when blacks were unarmed! I think such colonials have since changed their tune since the big, bad, red, devil leftists equally armed such colonized people and told them to shoot back. Well well.
Yet take a look at those, pardon the expression, idiots that think they'd like social Darwinism and who are attracted to Satanism. They mouth off about just how "big, bad and superior" they are, (penis talk of impotent would-be administrato rs...) constantly telling other people how "elite" they are, how much ass they would kick, etc. etc. These types more often than not say they want a nazist, fascist, anarchist or extreme Social Darwinist state where they fantasize they would be able to rule over others, boss them around, and lord stuff over them. hot air, I say - - and how xtian of them! These people wouldn't last one day in an inner- city war zone, and behold, they know this themselves, because none of them move there. Get it? They are lying, and they advocate a world that would wipe them out. Not smart -- but very like Jesus delighting in his own crucifixion. One of the indispensabl e trademarks of the Satanist has always been knowledge, or as the Nine Satanic Statements say: "undefiled wisdom." Regarding Social Darwinism things are no different, and we have to really know what we're talking about before we open our mouths. Imagine how much those "Satanists," feet in mouth, scare off the truly intellectual Satanists we want to attract. The CoS doesn't need a ToS to give it a bad rep with these fools around. Those really in the know will run away scared because they'd know those Satanists are objectively and scientifical ly wrong. This is not good, and it cannot be tolerated.
Contrary to what these idiot, wanna-be "Satanists" have done, I have studied the things they only fantasize about, and the data I've collected simply disagrees with their pipe-dreams. In fact the wannabes are absolutely and objectively wrong -- scientifical ly wrong -- like Creationists are wrong. Let me state this in a super- crunched format for everyone to see. If it doesn't ring a bell, perhaps you should consider looking into these matters yourself.
There's the thing about Hobbes. He postulates a "natural state" where everybody is at war with everybody -- only violent anarchy rules. The "sad" fact is this: among mammals this state of nature does not exist, has never existed and it cannot exist among natural animals (without wiping them all out). Hobbes' "natural state" is completely at odds with everything science knows about the evolution of man. It doesn't even fit Charles Darwin, plus Darwin, as he is misinterpreted, was "wrong" on one very important point. Darwin was wrong regarding the cut-throat competition among animals -- a notion he took from Thomas Malthus (who had Hobbesian leanings). Recent and more technologica l research on the areas where life is the most diverse show that the "fittest to survive" are the animals most able to cooperate!
That's how this new data has been translated into Darwinian terms now.
Research is currently done among evolutionary economists, zoologists, people in "complexity studies" and cellular biologists, the latter who count Nobel laureate Christian DeDuve and Lynn Margulis among them. (Lewontin has written an excellent book, Human Diversity.)
And surely everyone would want to familiarize himself with the work of Robert Axelrod who wrote The Evolution of Co- operation. The Modified Golden Rule on p. 51 of The Satanic Bible, is, incidentally , strongly favored by Axelrod's research. Not only is the Modified Golden Rule, or TIT-FOR-TAT as Anatol Rapoport called it, utterly Satanic, but it is also the most succesful of all the strategies used in Axelrods tournaments, and the TIT- FOR-TAT is a cooperative strategy! Imagine that: you can, backed with science, say that Anton LaVey's Modified Golden Rule is PROVEN to be the most succesful! This ain't just aesthetics, it's fact. Satanism has an important addition to the Modified Golden Rule saying, roughly, that you have the moral obligation to take a suckers money. In recent studies, similar to Robert Axelrod's, another strategy called "Pavlov" actually exploits players that are suckers (those that cooperate unconditionally). What's interesting is that this "Pavlov" strategy is more succesful and stable than the Modified Golden Rule, but the Modified Golden Rule with its addition is exactly the Pavlov strategy!
What is known is this: humans as well as other animals compete with each other for resources, but this is not the same as Hobbesian war at all. Rather cooperation is the rule! That's the way it is and the record needs to be set straight. All the fields of study mentioned confirm this tendency: we are social animals and cooperate far more than compete with each other; this goes for wolves too. Natural selection has favored those animals which were able to cooperate. On a cellular level current research is hinting that very "Communist" (sic) practises may have been the origin of life as we know it! And take a look at any "primitive" tribe in the Amazon or elsewhere in the world and you'll see that they work together almost like Communists in all respects. They're Share-ists, or what Marx called "Primitive Communists." More at communAL- ists to be specific.
I am that way too. When meeting people I like I am very sharing towards them. What's mine is theirs and I have absolutely no problem with this. Ever so often they share back and do me favors. Why has evolution favored these cooperating, sharing animals? Simply because they tend to get things done, and they don't waste inordinate amounts of resources fighting among themselves - - like some Satanists seem to think is the superior thing to do. What would happen evolutionari ly with Satanists if we were like the "Social Darwinist, strife- Satanists" think we are? The answer is that we would eventually go extinct if we embodied such a "warrior ethic." We would be squabbling among ourselves, fighting over splitting the pie, who's the greatest, the best, etc. etc., while those sharing, trusting, "socialist" types would get things done and in the end they would all come out richer than even the richest Satanist among us. I am not planning to go extinct, and I'm socialistic inwardly. I can be trusted and want to do business with people I can trust. You know, this is "responsibil ity to the responsible" -- biologically . However, trust that I would harsly punish someone who cheated me or didn't share back, just like the Pavlov strategy! This is not some pipe dream like that entertained by some "Wannabe Satanists" who puff themselves up to compensate for their inferior egos.
How, then, do concepts like stratificati on, egalitarianism and Social Darwinism fit together then?
First this question must be answered: what does "stratificat ion" and "egalitarian ism" actually mean, or what did it mean before irrational Xtians perverted those concepts? Stratificati on has certainly nothing to do with "the strong keeping the weak down." Do you imagine that Dr. LaVey, a Gypsy, was in favor of militarily strong Nazis for exterminatin g other militarily unarmed Gypsies? Obviously, Doctor didn't mean what you think he meant! It is about letting water seek its own level unimpeded by anything, including dogma and propaganda, and acknowledgin g that the waters have levels: this is true honor and respect for living things: to accept what they are. And this is where egalitariani sm comes in. It means: equal rights for everybody. Nothing more, nothing less. Do not confuse this with the Xtian perversion of making people equal, often by placing intelligent people at a disadvantage and subsidizing the fools. But this is a far cry from the Xtoid desire to humiliate and control people. Xtoids want to lord stuff over people, to rule over them, and they've done so in the past (think: imperialism, missionaries , cultural and literal genocides). This "Little-Lord-Syndrome" is not a Satanic trait, and it should not be confused with the righteous anger one feels when a specific person has singled himself out as one's enemy. Our anger and hate is specific and aimed at the particular object responsible for triggering the feeling. Xtoid anger is general, diffuse, and not aimed at anyone in particular, in fact only seldomly at the actual perpetrator and never directly.
So what's wrong with exploiting the weak and keeping slaves? Well, a wise person might ask "Who ends up being the real slave in the end if you have to care for the slaves, depend on them to do your chores and not sabotage them, and watch your back lest they kill you?" Well, people can do whatever they want as long as it's not done in my backyard. But please stop complaining when the "slaves" chase you out of your homes because some other "lord" decided to free them, arm them to the teeth, and persuade them to destroy your little "clean and white and ever-so Xtian" society! Don't come whining to us Satanists! We would never have created such a problem for our descendents to deal with since we have foresight (which is what "Prometheus" means).
If you lack historical and carnal knowledge you may not know that keeping slaves is -- in the long run -- a very dangerous thing to do. Keeping slaves is like begging for revolution and social upheaval: the kind of upheaval where your little police are outgunned. Maybe even one where some of the police are allied to those former slaves! One can be certain that the opressed and exploited slaves will turn against their opressor; remember Niccolo Machiavelli' s advice that the Prince should be feared, yet being hated or loathed was dangerous to oneself. Slave keeping Satanists would probably have loved the Czar of Russia, Nikolaus II, and the rest of those rulers who kept the Slavs down in abject poverty, slaughtered them when they protested that taxes starved them, refused them any education and smashed their culture. I'm glad they shot that little Czarist son in the head, killed the lot of them. Need I mention the blacks in America, who've finally had it with the honkey whities? No wonder, the way they got treated. I'd do the same, but then I'm such a prole you wouldn't believe it: fuck the king, kill him! The mythical Lucifer of Milton had similar ideas! A Satanist with normal carnal instincts might realize that if you kill the weak, they will eventually "kill you back."
There are other problems to forcefully keeping other people down like a little lord. Two things which distinguishe s man from many other animals are these: 1) he is able to foresee his impending doom, and 2) he's able to make quite a fuss about it. So starve others and they will not only steal your food, but they may also kill you, burn down your home and exterminate your whole genetic line; like Keyser Soze in The Usual Suspects. In fact, they might eat you for dinner, or your chldren, juicy and tender meat after all. And there may not be anything you (or your children or grandchildre n) can do about it! So what makes Satanists think that they can just oppress the "weak", starve them and have them die quietly? A lack of carnal instinct would cause this. That is not Satanic. These issues require careful thought, though I won't claim to have all the answers ready.
What I see, when reading what intelligent Satanists are saying about Social Darwinism, is this: they are mostly advocating a society which is egalitarian in the true sense. Egalitarian societies do have stratification. Skilled and able individuals do ascend in such cultures and not all people procreate. That is Social Darwinism. These Satanists understands the concept perfectly. However, this has very little to do with the wrong Hobbesian/Malthusian idea of the human race as a murderous, strife- ridden and unncessesarily brutal race which has elevated a misguided warrior ethic to great moral heights. By their deeds Anton LaVey, Timothy Butler, Nemo, Tani Jantsang, and other high ranking people in the CoS do not inspire such a view. Those who think that The Satanic Bibel advocates this "strife ethic" have surely gotten the wrong idea, and science proves them wrong too! No healthy animal, no purely carnal being, fits such a view. As one Satanist told me: "I see Social Darwinism as a peaceful process." Right on Comrade! Study the social interaction of a pack of wolves or cats without prejudice and you'll know what I mean, or better, study the Bonobo chimp since that animal is more than 99% identical to a human. (After all, we are not even in the same genus or family as a wolf, dog or cat.)
Carnal reality and earthly existence is exactly what divides the Satanist from other humans. And here I touch upon the problem. Klippoths are another species: Dr. LaVey said this. He also was clear about what he meant. Whereas the Satanists I count as my friends are loving, sharing and responsible people, there is another breed which does not conform to this view. We're talking about those who are not animal/zoos but are thanatos, klippoths. We're talking about people who have had their animal selves and carnal instincts broken and who are not healthy, natural animals. their personal life experience has been that of The Victim; at home, at school, sibling relations, you name it. Victims. They go by many names around the world. In the West these dualists are known as Xtians. Tani Jantsang would call them Klippoths or pretas. They are the only breed which comes close to embodying the "Hobbesian man", a being obsessed with violence, destruction, misery and unreason. Incidentally , the top neurologist Antonio Damasio, author of Descartes' Error, has proven that such a "Hobbesian man" is brain damaged! Only a person with severe brain damage would act as short sightedly and irrationally as the Hobbesian man. Dealing with these sick people might require radical means which would not look like those used against healthy animals. Do not be fooled by Xtian propaganda: no Satanist conforms to such a destructive, meaningless being. Xtians would have you believe you're such a monster, because then you would require salvation. However, the point of Satanism is: you do not, not, not need salvation. You're not born in filth, sin and degeneracy. You're born a beautiful being capable of ecstatic heights of pleasure and emotion, and you are inclined to cooperation. Should you think communality, cooperation, sharing and helping one another is Xtian, pause and take a look at the deeds of Xtians. Do you really see them as helping each other, sharing and cooperating? Do you see them as "too loving" or "compassiona te"? If you do, it would seem you have adopted the views of the exploited; then you've swallowed their lies. I don't know if the Xtians are born in filth, but they might as well be. Their whole society is also in accordance with this state-of-being: everything is strife, in-fighting, backstabbings, none of their relationships really work, they cannot be trusted, they don't enjoy sex, anorexia and bulemia are rampant, and so on. Hobbes, in Xtian England, may have seen this as "natural" and if you do too you might conclude that "natural" means "filthy and at war with yourself and everybody else." The news is this: it is not the way of the Left Hand Path which embodies the idea of man as a carnal being, and it is not the path of The New Man. Science proves I am right!