Politics and Thelem...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Politics and Thelema  

Page 4 / 12
  RSS

steve_wilson
(@steve_wilson)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 155
08/06/2010 12:34 pm  
"name538" wrote:
I want to have a job,.

The slaves shall serve.


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
08/06/2010 1:11 pm  
"name538" wrote:
I want to have a job,.
"steve_wilson" wrote:
The slaves shall serve.

Yeah, but he wants to have it scientifically proven why he shall serve.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 3:14 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
Cam, what do you think of the original U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights? Which amendments to them do you think should not have been made, and which ones could be easily repealed? Further, how closely do you think our government is in alignment with it, and how far do you think it has strayed, if at all?

Hey, Az, Have you read Jim Wasserman's 'The Slaves Shall Serve: Meditations on Liberty'? http://jameswassermanbooks.com/


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 4:19 pm  
"Patriarch156" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
Thank you for the reply, Patriarch156. I do wish you could contribute here more often, particularly with regard to the input of your own opinions.

To what end?

I did this now out of my respect for you and your wish to know more about particular my point of view, but I fail to see what I have really accomplished. This is the Home of the Aleister Crowley Society, not the Kjetil Fjell Society and as such my own point of view remains largely irrelevant for anyone else.

As you Will, Kjetil, but thanks again for your personal participation in the forums here this week, however reluctant.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 6:21 pm  
"name538" wrote:
At least in Yemen or China, people are not told they can have a better life, then they do everything they are told since childhood that it takes to get that life, and once they fight and study and work and succeed at all they were told. They are told, oh yeah, well we were just messing with you, you are such an idiot. All those "losers" who dropped out when they were 15 to get factory jobs are making $45,000 a year, have big homes and nice lives, while you who worked on studying the classics and trying to earn your way into high society, are just some egg head college fool with a head full of smarty pants crap no one cares about. It fact if you open your mouth, they will just make fart noises to block you out, tell you to stop the "Fag talk", or even decide you are dangerous and call the police or fire you from work.

You will be lucky to get a minimum wage job, the bosses claiming you are too smart to work there and them some co-worker deciding whatever you said was nerdy and upsetting and telling you boss lies to get you fired. (even if you don't mention your interest in Crowley's works which gets you chased out of the work place as a "satanist")

And you have to constantly hide who you are, your interests, your intelligence, "Act like a dumbshit and they will treat you as an equal".

That is the world I live in. I see Thelema as the opposite of this, where intelligence and culture are rewarded and people can express their true thoughts without persecution.

Thelema is the only hope we have to not end up like that movie "Idiocracy".

Thank you for the candid exposition of your dissatisfaction with your own life, name538, and your disillusionment with life in general. It may be useful for purposes of illustration, I think, so thanks.

It is, as you say, very early in life that we are instilled with the artificial life-goals that are intended to set us on our courses into the future. No mention is made our having natural built-in life goals (true Will), so these go largely ignored. When the artificial life-goals inevitably fail, we are derailed and left in great distress and inner conflict; well, you know the story very well, it seems.

"name538" wrote:
Will that help to get rid of the sewer pipe coming out of Hollywood?

Part and parcel of the mechanism which constantly reinforces the aforesaid artificial life-goals.

It seems to me, name538, that you are looking to proper Thelemic politics to do what proper Thelemic parenting and early education should do. Both have equally important functions, but the parenting and education come first in the sequence of life's events. Were we to merely politically re-order the world of adults when the adults are each drastically off course as individuals, would we not be wasting our time? And would so much of the 'jackboot' style of politics be necessary if proper parenting were employed in advance?

Just thought I'd offer what might be a somewhat broader Thelemic perspective.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
08/06/2010 7:06 pm  

93,

"Noctifer" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
I believe the drug thread was locked last week.

So what?

Hooray! Sarcasm meets with sarcasm. 🙂

Leary could have presented those same ideas plainly, by the way. They have been presented plainly by others, in other works. This is not to say they aren't valid ideas.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 9:22 pm  
"Camlion" wrote:
Thank you for the reply, Patriarch156. I do wish you could contribute here more often, particularly with regard to the input of your own opinions.

I think we are in agreement generally, and certainly with regard to many specifics such as this:

"Patriarch156" wrote:
Moreover and more to the point the nannystate now makes it impossible to fail, making libertines clients and leaving society to clean up for their mistakes rather than letting them set an example for others. Self-discipline, good manners, culture and an ability to think rationally and critically is disapearing everywhere and are replaced with the infantile cults of equality, pacifism and hysterical therapy cults where being a looser is something to be proud of.

I believe that weakness and dependency are being cultivated at an alarming rate by those who benefit directly by them, and are all too welcome in the eyes of their real victims.

As for the feasibility of Crowley's political goals, I am less than optimistic for the foreseeable future, and am quite interested in what I would call interim solutions toward the same ends.

Is not most of Crowley's political goals contained within the Class E of his writings, and nearly no one of them contained within the Class A of his writings?

Thus indicating the flexible and pragmatic nature of these goals in relation to Thelema, and their subordination to each individual's pure will, each individual's pure will being the idealistic core matter of Thelema.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 9:41 pm  
"wellredwellbred" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
Thank you for the reply, Patriarch156. I do wish you could contribute here more often, particularly with regard to the input of your own opinions.

I think we are in agreement generally, and certainly with regard to many specifics such as this:

"Patriarch156" wrote:
Moreover and more to the point the nannystate now makes it impossible to fail, making libertines clients and leaving society to clean up for their mistakes rather than letting them set an example for others. Self-discipline, good manners, culture and an ability to think rationally and critically is disapearing everywhere and are replaced with the infantile cults of equality, pacifism and hysterical therapy cults where being a looser is something to be proud of.

I believe that weakness and dependency are being cultivated at an alarming rate by those who benefit directly by them, and are all too welcome in the eyes of their real victims.

As for the feasibility of Crowley's political goals, I am less than optimistic for the foreseeable future, and am quite interested in what I would call interim solutions toward the same ends.

Is not most of Crowley's political goals contained within the Class E of his writings, and nearly no one of them contained within the Class A of his writings?

Thus indicating the flexible and pragmatic nature of these goals in relation to Thelema, and their subordination to each individual's pure will, each individual's pure will being the idealistic core matter of Thelema.

I would say that the primary purpose of government should be to facilitate the knowing and doing of true Will (Thelema) at optimum levels by its citizens, while refraining from interfering with same as much as possible, yes.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 9:46 pm  

Let me say this then.
A properly ordered society in the political sense, supports it's political goals not with jack booting and punishments when people disobey the laws set forth. Rather, it supports a culture and "religion" that instill in the people a desire to behave properly on their own, without being constantly lorded over by a police state. Each individual by undergoing a scientific program of self discovery and initiation training will be initiated into society with a personal desire to perform their proper function and will work with total focus and dedication to that station without resentment. The Social system of course on it's part must live up to it's promises, if you are trained in a certain way, there MUST be a place for you in society. If you pass all the ordeal and work hard, you internalize all the values and cultures of society, you must be rewarded for this, not punished for it, to find yourself an out sides.

You must not be taught that it is virtuous to share but then called a fool and constantly stolen from, and when you complain "But I am sharing like I was taught by society that it is right and good to do, and yet society shuns me and does me harm when I share, but when I hoard and steal I get arrested by the police" The people just say, well use common sense, you know dawn well if you share people will take advantage of you, and you know not to get caught not sharing.

What kind of society is that. It is illegal to smoke this drug, but if you don't smoke it you are socially alienated. (the same thing happened with alcohol during prohibition, Crowley wrote a piece on it.) These kinds of double standards make it near impossible to be well adjusted enough to do your WILL.

Society both socially and politically must have a SINGLE standard and it is best if behavior is modified by positive stimulus rather than punishment, especially when one agency of society punishes the same behavior than another agency positively reinforces. This can only lead to Depression or Schizophrenic dissociation. Why do you think so many people are poisoned by Psychology medications these days?

Our society makes many promises like those the Gods make to any who follow out their ordeals, but it leaves you in the lurch once you have wasted years of your life following the social ordeals. Like this "mad Arab" who served the God well in detail and made all the proper signs and sacrifices, traveled to meet them on all the spheres, and obscure places, and yet for all this the God's turn their backs and forsake him.

"I have traveled on the Spheres, and the Spheres do not protect me. I have descended into the Abyss, and the Abyss does not protect me. I have walked to the tops of mountains, and the mountains do not protect me. I have walked the Seas, and the Seas do not protect me.

The Lords of the Wind rush about me and are angered. The Lords of the Earth crawl about my feet and are angered. The Spirits have forgotten me.

What God have I offended? What Goddess? What sacrifice have I failed to make? What Unknown Evil have I committed, that my going out should be thus accompanied by the fearful howlings of a hundred wolves?"

Hounded by these howling, the Arab was torn to pieces in the market by invisible wolves. (Perhaps a metaphor for the schizophrenia caused by the Gods betrayal)


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 10:00 pm  

http://sekhetmaat.com/wiki/Documents/The_Beginning_of_the_New_World

"There must be found a formula based upon absolute common sense, without one trammel of theological theory or dogma, a formula to which no man of intelli­gence can refuse assent, and which at the same time affords an absolute sanction for all laws of conduct, social and political no less than individ­ual, so that the right or wrong of any isolated or concerted action can be determined with mathematical accuracy by any trained observer, entirely irrespective of his personal idiosyncrasies.

This formula must be scientific, not religious.

This formula is:

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law."

This formula does not, as ignorant or malicious people pretend, mean "Do anything you like." On the contrary, it is a most severe self­-control of every individual or social unit to concentrate its whole energy performing his true proper function; and this function is to be deter­mined by a profound, accurate calculation of the potentialities inherent in its constitution.

The first practical step towards this end is the formation of a strong central organization to direct coherently the activities of the numerous adherents already established in many countries."

Ok in this short piece, we have the Law is scientific and mathematically accurate, contains no religious elements like spirits, souls, qualia, epiphenomena minds, etc. That the law is not do anything you like, that it IS strict discipline to preform your PROPER FUNCTION (or as I said station), and that this WILL and Proper function will be worked out by a central authority made up not of democratic votes, but from a Panel of Experts, the elites in their fields.

Thus this denies
1) religious elements
2) doing just anything you want
3) democratic egalitarianism

it supports.
1) Cold hard science
2) Doing what you are designated to do by Nature, Ability and Social-Political assignment.
3) Hierarchy and central authority.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/06/2010 10:05 pm  

Glad to hear it with regard to no 'jackbooting.'

"name538" wrote:
Each individual by undergoing a scientific program of self discovery and initiation training will be initiated into society with a personal desire to perform their proper function and will work with total focus and dedication to that station without resentment.

Until this "program" is ready for application on a broad scale, I guess we will have to do the best we can toward the same goals with interim solutions. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
08/06/2010 10:43 pm  

93,

"Camlion" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
Cam, what do you think of the original U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights? Which amendments to them do you think should not have been made, and which ones could be easily repealed? Further, how closely do you think our government is in alignment with it, and how far do you think it has strayed, if at all?

Hey, Az, Have you read Jim Wasserman's 'The Slaves Shall Serve: Meditations on Liberty'? http://jameswassermanbooks.com/

Oh yes indeed. 🙂 I read it a few years ago, and here about two or three months ago I began reading it again... before all of this debate about it came up of course.

I just read it at leisure, so I'm at the UN constitution at the moment.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 12:13 pm  

Here is the Radical Behaviorist view of the WILL, which I adhere to. Also the Skinner approach to designing society.

Far from being incompatible with Thelema, Skinner's discoveries from his experiments in Operant Conditioning show exactly the methods by which Thelemic leaders can govern the society by conditioning the environment and social order, such that each individual will feel the sense of freedom and still perform the tasks and behaviors necessary for society to function.

"B. F. Skinner argues that since people are the result of their conditioning, and will get conditioned by their upbringing and environments anyway, we ought to control people's upbringing and environments as much as possible to ensure that their conditioning is positive. The science of psychology, particularly Skinner's behaviorist principles of positive and negative reinforcement, can and should be applied to this task. Such a plan would be far better than the current situation, in which people's conditioning is more or less random; receiving positive conditioning is now just a matter of luck. But because people's actions and feelings are determined, you can create a perfect society simply by figuring out how to condition people so they don't do anything harmful, make a contribution to society, and have a happy consciousness.

Note that Skinner does not discount the importance of feeling free. Like all the interesting hard determinists, he acknowledges as an empirical fact of psychology that people prefer doing what they want to do, and prefer not to be coerced into doing what they don't want to do. Any happy society must take into account what people actually want. But since the hard determinist thinks that people's wants are determined by conditioning, s/he does not place any special emphasis on what people want right now, or what they have wanted at at various points in history. Social order depends on manipulating people's wants, so they voluntarily choose what they have actually been programmed to choose."


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 1:08 pm  

Name 538 etc.,
I thought in this debate you were right, but you were wrong, Camelion has a much more adept understanding of things(though i doubt we will be understood). I will look further into your enunciations. Get (outside) and cry, for the earth! Then perhaps you'll get the point.
Ah, regardless, one debates pointlessly. Que sera.....
RTh.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
09/06/2010 5:34 pm  

i have mostly stayed away from this thread, and my slight offering henceforth to be put down will probably be relegated to the dust bin of ignore-ance but regardless i felt i should say this simple maxim which has got me through my life quite well through many ups and downs.
As a preamble, instead of looking toward some political and abstract concept to fulfil your happiness, the easiest way is to simply do it yourself.
*So, if you want to be happy simply choose to be.*
It may sound pedantic and silly but it is true in my opinion.
Short reasoning and observation has showed me that the majority of people secretly enjoy whining and being depressed and so constantly foster an environment and set of choices that reinforce said negtaivism. Furthermore the majority is too weak and will-less to Choose to be Happy and so they choose depression and fear because it is easier literally.
if you simply make an effort to smile and tell yourself i am happy and choose to be happy. it comes on its own.
yes negative things exist but they exist for the betterment of existence. crowleyites should be the first to recognise that.
just my two cents.


ReplyQuote
sonofthestar
(@sonofthestar)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 375
09/06/2010 7:00 pm  

93!

"As a preamble, instead of looking toward some political and abstract concept to fulfil your happiness, the easiest way is to simply do it yourself."

True enough christibrany!
It's a first step which might take some steps to attain through to.

name538,
At least two of your most recent postings, touch upon certain touchy subjects;
which certain people, in contemplating such aspects of life,
at certain phases of their life, ...pursue in the dark inner sanctums
of their alone time reveries;---deeply striving, for that glimpse of light,
that is of such potency and illuminating power, that at some time---finally,
would seem to suddenly---result in that certain "Breakthrough" most yearned for.

It would seem as though all the negative aspects of things mundane, be they
personal financial problems, health problems, relationship problems, ...assume
a threatening tangibility; that one is surrounded by all burdensome kinds,
of seen, and unseen forces...
waiting to pounce.
If it's not immediate personal problems, then "The Ills and Woes of The World" ...
are ever ready to consume the mind's attentive thought instead.

It is a stage along the way.
Such ill magnified streams, are to be observed in the same manner, as are,
all other manner of the various kinds of thought patterns and trends under study:
as from afar;
coolly and calmly--devoid of the many emotions that usually accompany such delving,
such as frustration, anger, fear...etc.

And after such "wondering" has seen quitting time to entertain the gray matter,
one can...
step from the room of the realm of passing thought--out into the green yard of day,
where the only answer to all such questing questions,
is as it were--found engraved on the multi-faceted face of the Sun Dial,
amid all the letters and numbers ringed after ring: To Thine Own Self Be True.
That, and to also take the advice of Mr. Motta:
To ardently engage in,
the Continued frequency of the performance of, The Mass of The Phoenix--!

93! 93! 93!


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
09/06/2010 7:09 pm  

I always wondered how people could reconcile the "sinister" path of Andrew Chumbley and the "dark side" materials of Grant, but still cling to moral values that are basically those of most liberals and leftists. How can you be "sinister" and all "dark side" and not be transgressive?

"The nature of Horus being 'Force and Fire', his aeon would be marked by the collapse of humanitarianism."

- Crowley

Was he wrong about this? If he was, then why don't we just keep the beliefs in equality, democracy, etc. that came out of the Old Aeon?

Doesn't any discussion of Thelema and politics has to acknowledge that Carl Schmitt was correct when he insisted that "all the significant concepts of the modern doctrine of the state are secularized theological concepts"? If we are intent on upholding and defending certain political philosophies that had their origins as theological concepts in the Old Aeon, then we have to be working in opposition to values of the New Aeon.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 8:13 pm  

All this advice, Just make yourself happy, think positive, fill yourself with light, all that bullshit.

I do not care how I FEEL.
I do not care about feelings at all, feelings are just another behavior, just some state of the human body-brain, and a behavior is just a Space-time event. The feelings in the brains of one little primate are the LEAST interesting and the LEAST important thing that one could possibly concern oneself with. Rather the right and proper flow of events than exist OUTSIDE and in the much bigger and wider world are what matters.

It does not matter If I personally am miserably or in bliss, if the whole world beyond me is out of alignment. In the end I don't really care if everyone is miserable, so long as they are efficiently working in their place.

Of course, once everyone is in their place, they will be happy, since this is tho main element of what produces the Space-time event called happiness, or the contentment of the organism, where it's biological (including psychological) needs are fulfilled by it's proper labor and social role in the world.

Keith418,

I certainly acknowledge this Carl Schmitt's conclusions, I came to them by way of Max Webber's attributing Capitalism to Calvinism, and the radical traditionalism of Julius Evola, who attributes in a Nietzschean way humanism, democracy, capitalism, communism, and basically what we now call liberal progressivism, to the natural development of "Jewish" Christianity and it rots out the core of western Traditional culture.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 8:19 pm  
"Keith418" wrote:
If we are intent on upholding and defending certain political philosophies that had their origins as theological concepts in the Old Aeon, then we have to be working in opposition to values of the New Aeon.

As I see it, Keith418, each stage develops using some of the previous stage as its foundation and, in turn, provides part of the foundation for the next stage. No stage really 'starts from scratch.'


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
09/06/2010 8:32 pm  
"Keith418" wrote:
I always wondered how people could reconcile the "sinister" path of Andrew Chumbley and the "dark side" materials of Grant, but still cling to moral values that are basically those of most liberals and leftists. How can you be "sinister" and all "dark side" and not be transgressive?

"The nature of Horus being 'Force and Fire', his aeon would be marked by the collapse of humanitarianism."

- Crowley

Was he wrong about this? If he was, then why don't we just keep the beliefs in equality, democracy, etc. that came out of the Old Aeon?
.

just a quick note.
i know what i posted before contains no practical material but if you think about it , it makes sense.
to answer your question simply, i am a huge Grant fan, and Chumbley I haven't read but I am interested. The so called 'dark side' in their writings, it reconciles with a positive view like mine, like so:
everything is necessary positive and negative.
The positive exists to offset and balance the negative and vice versa.
The negative exists to challenge and provide stimulus to the material world, and it is 'good' in the sense that the negative provides the impetus to improve oneself and to change. If there is no stimulus to change, in the clothing of the negative, then there is stagnation.
The positive exists to provide a goal and also a reward for 'vanquishing' or 'integrating' the negative into a positive force.
too much negativity is bad because one is overwhelmed and unable to improve or change.
too much positivity is bad because one becomes stagnant and airy and unable to truly act.
so that's how the so called Nightside integrates with a positive outlook such as my own.
You acknowledge the negative and experience is but you don't dwell or obsess on it.
hope that helped you and made sense everyone but Keith in particular.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 8:38 pm  

There is no light and no dark.
Nothing exists for any reason, there is no GOD, or divine order of things
Things just exist, there is no higher purpose.
That is why we have to organize things by our own power, to make things work efficiently.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
09/06/2010 8:39 pm  

thats your world . you make it.
i make mine 😉
in your world everything may be doom and gloom and no order or purpose
in mine things have purpose because it is more enjoyable
suit yourself 🙂


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
09/06/2010 8:43 pm  

It seems to me to be a way of avoiding the question and the choice. People want to be "sinister" without really defying the prevailing morality of their society. The prevailing morality of our society is to push for democracy and equality. Crowley thought democracy was stupid and he denied equality over and over again. Instead of agreeing with him, people cling to old aeon values that clearly have their origin in Judeo-Christian theology. If we are still aligned with, and supportive of, secularized Judeo-Christian beliefs, then why do we need Thelema and any "sinister, dark side" stuff at all? Could this conflict be why the Thelemic community is so dysfunctional No one can build too much when they suffer from these kinds of conflicts.

"The majority of the people in this world are ataxic; they cannot coordinate their mental muscles to make a purposed movement. They have no real will, only a set of wishes, many of which contradict others ...and at the end of life the movements cancel out each other..."

- Crowley

If I say I am a Thelemite, but believe in Old Aeon values, then aren't I exhibiting the kind of ataxia he is describing here? I will note that even the people insisting on "orthodoxy" are in no rush to endorse AC's condemnations of egalitarianism and democracy.

Nietzsche was made a Gnostic saint for a reason. AC even goes further and describes him as a "prophet" of Thelema in "Magick Without Tears." Given this, why do people calling themselves Thelemites seem so unwilling to apply Nietzschean criticisms to contemporary society? Crowley did. Why doesn't the current Thelemic community?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 9:00 pm  

Keith418,

It seems to me that HA had very old Aeon progressive views, which he challenged Crowley with directly in a series of letters. On the one hand, he did revive the OTO, but one wonder's if his progressive influence has deeply damaged Thelema, a wound that HB has not healed and one wonders if he intends to heal it. As a Minerval, I shall stay out of the business of higher grades.

But, it seems to me that the Deviation from Crowley began with HA, and Garmer allowing the membership to dwindle to 7, did not help matters.

The other problematic influence is the instance of the media to constantly state that the beetles and the hippie movement was influenced by Crowley, which is far from true. A few musicians got a superficial and wrong idea about Thelema and used the slogan Do what thou Wilt, to mean the same as "follow your bliss" which those are totally the opposite in meaning. Thinking that Crowley's promotion of Ritual Drug use, was the same as the hippie drug saturated lifestyle.
Crowley was not a prophet of hippies, spaced out crystal gazers, liberal-socialism, who float around acting all dippy.


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
09/06/2010 9:14 pm  

The OTO is hardly the entirety of the Thelemic community and I have deliberately avoiding it casting it as such in this discussion. Where are the other people on this issue? The Grant folks and the Chumbely people appear to me to be just as confused as anyone else. For all their talk about the "sinister" and the "dark" they seem just as unwilling to pursue Crowley's Nietzschean related paths and that sort of analysis of contemporary problems as anyone else.

"A pervasive moralism, reduced essentially to bad conscience, that is, to an anemic moral code, has replaced the search for truth. Contemporary man is satisfied to merely reject the objects of his disgust. His only compass in the general disorder of his thoughts is the consensus of repugnance - towards Nazism, totalitarianism in general, anti-Semitism, apartheid. There is no other solid ground to stand on."

- Chantal DelSol

Compare this to Crowley's criticism of modernity in "The New World." Don't they seem to be coming from the same place in terms of looking at the problems of contemporary aimlessness? Unless we agree with Crowley about the problems of society, and the nature, their effects, and their origins, we will never agree with him about the solutions to the problems he offers.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
09/06/2010 9:19 pm  

i think that just because most people are too stupid and weak to implement crowleys solutions doesnt mean they will never be viable solutions. they will just remain intellectual and not pragmatic based on the cowardice and idiocy of the common individual.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3951
09/06/2010 9:29 pm  
"name538" wrote:
It seems to me that HA had very old Aeon progressive views, which he challenged Crowley with directly in a series of letters.
Crowley was not a prophet of hippies, spaced out crystal gazers, liberal-socialism, who float around acting all dippy.

No, McMurtry did not have "old Aon progressive views"; he had views that you don't approve of. McMurtry was a rather more substantial man than you give him credit for.

Of course Crowley wasn't "a prophet of hippies, spaced out crystal gazers, liberal-socialism, who float around acting all dippy". Nobody supposes that he was; it's a caricature on your part. Why do you float such idiotic caricatures?

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/06/2010 9:30 pm  

Well, The OTO has been promoted as authentic, And the kind of people who accept grant's extraterrestrials and contacting aliens to save the earth, and that literally, are probably not likely to question modernism, some people are "so open minded their brains fall out"

Also this Darkside nonsense sounds like Lavey, people who want to appear evil because they have hurt egos and think by scaring people they will feel superior to them. This kind of mentality, is very much what Nietzsche was against. Not noble souls, but psychologically injured sorts. Lions trying to hide their hurt paws, by roaring loudly.

The public image and tendency to attract these sorts of people, perhaps has turned the Potential Ubermensch away from Thelema. Also the religious poetry and jargon of Crowley attracts people who want to believe in supernatural nonsense, for emotional reasons, that the potential ubermensch would avoid, being more concerned with practical reality of actual science and not wanting to get caught up with nerds in their escapist occult fantasies.

The sort of people Thelema most needs are repulsed by the thick Jargon and never take the time to look into the Truth behind the poetic rhetoric that makes occultism sound like sci-fi nerds playing D&D


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
09/06/2010 9:56 pm  

Crowley's reception of Liber Al came with a crisis for him. He had been going in one direction. Then he was forced into another. I wonder if the Thelemic community's problems result when the people in it do not let themselves undergo the same crisis. Either they insist that Thelema doesn't mean what Crowley said it meant, or they avoid looking at the logical, and very real consequences, of what it does mean. But they never seem as traumatized as he was. Instead of struggling to accept something that's hard to accept, they simply tell themselves it doesn't mean what it does, and doesn't really say what it really says. They skip the crisis. But what else do they skip?

How often do people insist that Crowley was wrong? If you add up all the things that so called Thelemites (regardless of their affiliations) overtly or covertly deny and object to about his teachings, then what are we left with to use? I don't think there's a lot left in the end that's either very meaningful or very challenging.

Unless Thelema differs very radically from contemporary, societal values and beliefs, then it is, or swiftly becomes, redundant. If all it is is nothing more than a sort of spiritualized version of Unitarianism, then we don't really need it. We already have Unitarianism. If contemporary popular culture promotes and reflects our deepest values, highest morals, and ruling ideologies then why try to do anything with Thelema at all? We can just go to see a Steven Spielberg film instead.

I would suggest that in resisting Crowley's "hard to accept" messages and teachings, which are difficult to accept precisely because they oppose and offend our highest moral values, and in failing to reckon with the effects of the same kind of crisis he had about the moral teachings contained in Thelema, the modern Thelemic community has only rendered itself superfluous and redundant in just this sense. Could this be why, after all these years, it has so little to show for itself?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 1:48 am  

Keith, I differ with only a small percentage of Crowley's total writ, and that part concerns not his political goals but only the immediate practicality of his proposed means of achieving them. He did not advocate the sort of large scale revolution that would create an immediate societal vacuum to be filled by something radically different from the status quo, and there are already highly qualified people (imo) working at present with what he did design to eventually replace the way things are at present. My own personal interests are in interim solutions employing existing societal and political infrastructures. If you prefer to wait until a system resembling Crowley's Orders is ready to govern the planet, you are perfectly free to do so.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 2:16 am  
"name538" wrote:
The sort of people Thelema most needs are repulsed by the thick Jargon and never take the time to look into the Truth behind the poetic rhetoric that makes occultism sound like sci-fi nerds playing D&D

This doesn't make any sense at all.

The intent of the whole post in which it occurred was to insult, too. I'd like to register a personal objection to this sort of rubbish continuing to spew onto these glistening pages.

name538, I suggest you do some growing up of your own - you are clearly still in school (which is fine) and feel you have something to prove, but all you're proving is an inability to think, or learn. It might have been fun for you playing with the grown-ups for a while, but I fear we're all a bit over your spewing insanities now.

Also this Darkside nonsense sounds like Lavey, people who want to appear evil because they have hurt egos and think by scaring people they will feel superior to them.

Have you ever heard of a chap called Aleister Crowley?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 2:30 am  

In the modern world where we have science and education, one makes oneself an insult to oneself and an insult to the world by believing in literal GOD(s), spirits, astral planes, souls, heaven, reincarnation, etc.

Occultism uses metaphors, rituals are FICTIONAL plays that act out moral principles and produce brain states that allow changes in behavior and cognition, by disarming defense mechanisms and allowing changes to self image, part of which may include vivid dreams about themes such as gods and spirits.

The things than exist in dreams are not REAL and it is not an insult to call people who believe dreams are reality delusional, it is merely a fact.

The value of occultism is in causing and interacting with dreams as a way to effect the brain and the resulting behaviors to one's advantage.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
10/06/2010 3:59 am  

That is your take on it , name32234, which is fine
but to go around spouting your ideas as if they were the end all be all of the very subjective thing we call the truth is the very annoying thing that people are so tired of hearing from you.
either stress your ideas as your ideas and your opinions, or don't say them at all.
its not so much what you have to say that we are tired of hearing, its the way you are saying them.
well and some of them are just very immature sounding.
i wasnt going to post anything of this sort but since noctifer, mr staley, kieth and others already said what i had in mind about what you have said, i had to show some support.

Your insults in a mask of philosophical words and your so called critique of occultism as a very transparent veil for your hate and anger at the disgust you feel at your personal life really is getting kind of tiring...


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 4:08 am  

I realize this has already been said, name538, but you're stuck in your head.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 4:12 am  

The notion of Truth as a matter of opinion is part and parcel with liberalism.
it is postmodern nonsense.
I am not expressing my take on it, I am explaining TRUTH. Which is why we have science, because it tells you the Absolute factuality of the world, which in not subject to how you or anyone FEELs about it.

The world exists as it does and all we can do it accept it as it is and put up with it.

The only reason you thing truth is mutable to you opinion is because you want to accept liberal equality nonsense that everyone is equal and so we have to accept everyone's opinions as equal. Probably stemming from a mentality than it is wrong to be right while others are wrong, because it might hurt some ones feelings, and not be equal.

People are NOT equal and Neither are opinions, TRUTH exists in and of itself, and SCIENCE defines it, not FEELings, beliefs, opinions, or and such nonsense.

Science is the facts, DEAL WITH IT, no the world doesn't care if you like it or not, it IS what it IS.

If you want to believe in a Spirit, evoke it in visible apperaance before a crowd of people, get it on film, and remove all possibility that it might be a hoax or an Illusion.

Since no one has done that, EVER.
Then spirits are chemicals in the brain, just brain activity and have no effect outside of creating sparks in the brain.


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
10/06/2010 4:21 am  

I am reminded of a the saying, "Sometimes being pragmatic isn't being pragmatic."

As long as we suffer from what Crowley called "the bed of Procrustes" (see Liber Aleph) we will judge what is "pragmatic" from the point of view of the dominant society and its values. The fact that most people calling themselves Thelemites are reluctant to criticize their society with the same constancy, acuity, lucidity, and vehemence that Crowley did, indicates to me that no matter what they tell us, they really are more wedded to standard, conventional ideologies than they may even understand. Remember, it's exactly when ideologies become transformed into "good, pragmatic, common sense" that they are no longer seen as ideologies and have, therefore, succeeded.

The collapse and aimlessness of modern society - so well described by Crowley and so self evident in the experience of lived existence - might prompt people to start to re-examine what they see as "pragmatic." The crises that surround us might also propel the magically inclined to re-investigate the genealogies of their highest moral values, and to do the same questioning of those values and their origins that AC & Nietzsche did, but this is the point at which the much vaulted "metaphysics" of magicians and occultists seems weakest. When they criticize society, most so-called Thelemites seem more like conventional members of secular society, rather than system-denying, and system-defying, Thelemites. Do they ever seriously deviate from the same anxieties and proscriptions offered by non-initiates - either on the left or on the right? I don't see a lot of evidence for that.

I'd suggest that "pragmatism" usually means nothing more than rejecting Crowley and going with the flow coming from the Old Aeon. The guilt trips may have changed a little, and the targets may have slightly shifted, but the guilt sure remains.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
10/06/2010 4:28 am  

im not saying there is no objective truth, i am saying that what is true for you is only true for you as we are definitely not parcel to the whole reality and are only processing it in the way our primitive brains and our personal perception can handle.
the fact that you still dont understand that your truth is not my truth or anyone elses is really sad and shows that you really think yourself to be the almighty know it all.
thats all im going to waste my time with.
if it was just me complaining it would be one thing but you are really too far gone to see how silly you are being. who says human beings even have the CAPABILITY to see the truth? you would show much more intelligence if you admitted to the POSSIBILITY that you MIGHT be incorrect.
sigh.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 4:49 am  

I have presented known science tested conclusions, based on known elements and known causes with known effects.

I have not proposed undetected or undetectable elements, mysterious events, Powers or forces.
I have denied that any such exist, until such time as they are shown to exist, not by anecdote, but by evidence that can be repeated and tested by anyone, that are recorded in controlled tests.

The political system I spoke of, which agrees very much with Crowley's, uses Radical behaviorism as it's methodology. The methods of operant conditioning are clearly effective, documented and tested both in the lab and in the field. They are used to treat autism and as the basis of at least 2 intentional communities.

The workings of the brain though not perfectly known, we know enough to explain how the sense of self is constructed and the notion of volition, as well as feelings, beliefs, thought, all arise from the external environment, not from within as if out of some spiritual black hole.

Even the aspects of Genetics that effect behavior, are a result of the external environment than brings two people together and the happenstance of their DNA, is all chemical.

There is no evidence or anything spiritual or outside the realm of science, and thus if we are to construct a society we must construct it on TRUTH, which is found in science, not in Cockamamie nonsense.

"Nature in order to be controlled, must be obeyed"


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 6:06 am  

Yeah, we're all really grateful for the lesson. You can go now.


ReplyQuote
steve_wilson
(@steve_wilson)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 155
10/06/2010 11:50 am  

I do so LOVE people who put words in CAPITALS as though shouting increases truth. However, since science is the be all and end all of the arguments by name538 I should point out that science has established that volition does indeed arise from within. The basic human needs, from feeding to learning to speak, are pre-programmed. There even appears to be a basic grammar inherent in our neural structures that we attempt to attach words to as we grow.
This has been known for over 25 years, if you are going to quote science, or even SCIENCE, keep up to date.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 12:05 pm  

You desire food because you are hungry, that is a biological need. It is completely mechanical, you do not decide if you are hungry or cold. Your body as a mechanical system does. There in no "YOU" other than as a model of mechanical processes happening in another part of the brain. The Sense of self is a holistic model than combines all the other parts of the brain and sensory inputs, a model of the whole.

Often you may think that "YOU" use volition to decide an issue, when in truth the volition feeling was not stimulated until after the behavior was already decided. It has been shown that say you are asked to press the button that matches the color that answers a question like which color begins with R. Then 2 colors are presented, a study shows that the your hand has already pressed the button for Red, before YOU decide that you will press the button. The brain then remembers the event out of order, storing the Desire or WILL to press the button and move the hand as preceding and causing the hand to move, when in truth the hand moved first and the WILL to move it was a story made up after the fact to explain it.

In some cases, behavior is first processed against the holistic model such than WILL to do it precedes actually doing it, but in either case we can never place WILL as the prime mover of one's behavior, at best the Conscious volition is a step in the process of behavior, which might alter or stop the behavior response. (Again in a totally mechanical way).


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 12:52 pm  

Wow, thanks.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3951
10/06/2010 1:46 pm  
"name538" wrote:
You desire food because you are hungry, that is a biological need. It is completely mechanical, you do not decide if you are hungry or cold. Your body as a mechanical system does. There in no "YOU" other than as a model of mechanical processes happening in another part of the brain. The Sense of self is a holistic model than combines all the other parts of the brain and sensory inputs, a model of the whole.

Often you may think that "YOU" use volition to decide an issue, when in truth the volition feeling was not stimulated until after the behavior was already decided. It has been shown that say you are asked to press the button that matches the color that answers a question like which color begins with R. Then 2 colors are presented, a study shows that the your hand has already pressed the button for Red, before YOU decide that you will press the button. The brain then remembers the event out of order, storing the Desire or WILL to press the button and move the hand as preceding and causing the hand to move, when in truth the hand moved first and the WILL to move it was a story made up after the fact to explain it.

In some cases, behavior is first processed against the holistic model such than WILL to do it precedes actually doing it, but in either case we can never place WILL as the prime mover of one's behavior, at best the Conscious volition is a step in the process of behavior, which might alter or stop the behavior response. (Again in a totally mechanical way).

It's no wonder that you have a sense of powerlessness and dispossession (see your previous posts ad nauseum on the subject) when you think that there is no you other than "as a model of mechanical processes happening in another part of the brain". Explains the tidal waves of your posts which spew over these boards so relentlessly, of course; now THERE'S a mindless, mechanical process..

You're quite welcome to believe that you are nothing more than a slot machine which responds to slabs of sensory input rather than pennies; I don't think, so therefore I'm not. I'll pass on it, thanks.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 3:57 pm  

You can not deny the science. What you think does not matter.
Although the fact that part of your determined mechanical process, is to produce the thought "Blow destiny" and feel as though you are free, is a rather important part of your behavioral system. On the path to Truth however, you must discover than it is an illusion. There are complex feed back systems of recursive interaction between any part and the whole, that give rise to the seeming autonomy of the SELF from the Continuous processes of the external reality. However the ending of those folds and realization that SELF is an illusion and all is one continuous flow of Cause and Effect, is the highest Samadhi we are seeking. The continuous world is the Cup of Babalon into which we are to pour every last drop until we have not a single thought which is owned by the SELF and all is from the OTHER. Self is but one impersonal subprocess in the vast sea of impersonal events, just a space-time activity, the dance of Atoms and Galaxies, Dust lost in the winds of time.


ReplyQuote
steve_wilson
(@steve_wilson)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 155
10/06/2010 4:00 pm  
"name538" wrote:
You can not deny the science. What you think does not matter.

Speak for yourself, and try to get the science right for a change.


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1827
10/06/2010 4:14 pm  

What you think does not matter.

Is that what you think?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/06/2010 4:41 pm  

Perspective. Personally, I'm visualizing the sephiroth on the Tree of Life thinking each other are a bunch of assholes, and then going out of their way to prove it. 😛


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
10/06/2010 4:47 pm  

If we agree that the system we live in dysfunctional without Thelema guiding it, then how can we simultaneously assert the value of being functional and successful within a system we currently decry? If we do not have any grievous problems with the current system, if we disagree with Crowley about its aimlessness and general state of crisis, then we would never be motivated to establish Thelema as an any alternative. After all, you only go looking for an alternative when you are unhappy with what you currently have. Radical alternatives, like Thelema, require that you be radically dissatisfied with what you have. If people are declared to be "dysfunctional" under a non-Thelemic system, how do we know that they are at fault and not the system itself? If anyone can be "functional" and successful within the current system, why would they ever be motivated to alter that system into something in which they might no longer be as successful?

Crowley clearly wanted talented and successful people to support Thelema and to work to establish its law. But those same successful people had little motivation to seriously change a game they were already winning at. If we only have a pool of unsuccessful, alienated, and dysfunctional people to draw from, how won't their defeated mentalities, and their lack of talents, prevent us from being successful in creating a truly Thelemic society? This paradox appears to me to be as omnipresence as it is undisclosed and unexamined.

Wouldn't anyone capable of creating a truly Thelemic society also be capable of devoting their energies to successfully navigating the existing, non-Thelemic society? If we alter Thelema to appeal to the successful and competent in the non-Thelemic society, aren't we already conceding the virtues and advantages of the kind of society Crowley fought against? If we condemn the current society in the same unequivocal terms Crowley did, then won't we alienate all the "winners" - the people who have an investment in modernity and current, secular society, that we need, with their talents and abilities, to help build an alternative?


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2375
10/06/2010 4:56 pm  

im not even going to go into detail how the whole experience of astral projection outside the body negates almost all mechanistic views of the universe. but then again someone so tied into their miserable existence isnt going to have the energy or foresight necessary for such a wonderful life changing experience.

now that we see theres no making certain people understand certain basic points i think we can all go back to simply talking politics but you can count me out for obvious reason(s)
sigh


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3951
10/06/2010 4:59 pm  

name538, if you are simply "a model of mechanical processes happening in another part of the brain" then why do you appear to be sitting at your computer responding to my post? This would appear to be an act of volition on your part.

Today there were several choices for me to make. Yesterday I received a two-disc set of Mulholland Drive, and could have settled down to watch it today. However, I also have a mountain of deluxes of The Magical Revival to despatch, and Waterfive and others will no doubt be pleased to know that this is what I opted to do. I appeared to have volition here.

Of course you might be right and the world is simply unfolding in a foreshadowed, determinist, mechanical manner, with only the illusion of volition on our part. However, how might you test this thesis to discover whether or not this is the case? If you can't test it, then it is simply one of those "fancy pictures" that Los never tires of cautioning us against.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
Page 4 / 12
Share: