Page 1 of 6 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#18155 - 01/14/09 05:29 AM Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic community'
Musicaphillia Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/11/09
Posts: 11
I came across this on the official Church of Satan website, found it interesting as this essay may describe some members of this discussion forum.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/MythCommunity.html

Top
#18156 - 01/14/09 05:55 AM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic community' [Re: Musicaphillia]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3112
Let me put it in this way.
There is pride, and there is arrogance.
Most people got the latter. Even the ones who were pride of being an elitst. Even so, in my opinion, the CoS' pride is a bit turning into arrogance.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#18160 - 01/14/09 09:07 AM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Dimitri]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
I think he's just pissed off that people are finding a Satanic communication venue OTHER than the CoS that they can't control.

The CoS does not own the term "Satanism", despite what they may think.
_________________________
«Recibe, ˇoh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#18161 - 01/14/09 09:28 AM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: The Zebu]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The CoS doesn't have much value in Satanism as a whole any longer. While modern Satanism was the driving force for Satanism for a couple of decades, it became stagnant at some point, almost impotent. There is very little offspring and very little direction.

What matters now in Satanism and what will define it isn't found mainstream. It's back into the dark, the underground. It's going occult again, as it was intended to.

The CoS, -and to a degree maybe all traditional modern satanic based orgs- aren't doing much more but trying to keep the last pieces of the disintegrating satanic puzzle they once dominated together.

D.

Top
#18166 - 01/14/09 11:26 AM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: The Zebu]
Musicaphillia Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/11/09
Posts: 11
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
I think he's just pissed off that people are finding a Satanic communication venue OTHER than the CoS that they can't control.

The CoS does not own the term "Satanism", despite what they may think.


Yes, I believe you are right. I did agree with some of his essay, but what I didn't understand was why it is so wrong to have an internet forum based on Satanism. and another thought that went through my head is that LaVeyan Satanism is not the only Satanism that exists so who is he (Gilmore) to say that there can't, to some degree, be a kind of community (or whatever one wishes to call it) where these areas of our lives can be discussed?

Top
#18167 - 01/14/09 11:34 AM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Musicaphillia]
Musicaphillia Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/11/09
Posts: 11
I did however agree with the fact that there are a lot of people who claim to be satanists, yet they don't really know anything about Satanism. But I don't believe that every one of those people are attempting to steal the limelight from the CoS.

Edited by Musicaphillia (01/14/09 11:36 AM)
Edit Reason: Grammatical Error (whoops!)

Top
#18169 - 01/14/09 11:52 AM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
I'm not much of a fan or Gilmore, although I have nothing really AGAINST him... and I'm not that much a fan of the direction that The Church of Satan has taken since Dr. LaVey's death. But he is correct in that there is no "Satanic Community." There really can't be in a religious philosophy that stresses individual strengths and individual accomplishments, even on behalf of the organization as a whole.

"Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, "

The Second Coming - Yeats

Every organization runs into a fracturing of its power base and its core values at one time or another. The Church of Satan has its first schism in the departure of Michael Aquino and the formation of the Temple of Set. LaVey told me and others, and wrote about it as well, that there would be no real unity of the Church of Satan after his death. He often quoted the passage out of 1984:

"'You understand,' he said, 'that you will be fighting in the dark. You will always be in the dark. You will receive orders and you will obey them, without knowing why. Later I shall send you a book from which you will learn the true nature of the society we live in, and the strategy by which we shall destroy it. When you have read the book, you will be full members of the Brotherhood. But between the general aims that we are fighting for and the immediate tasks of the moment, you will never know anything. I tell you that the Brotherhood exists, but I cannot tell you whether it numbers a hundred members, or ten million. From your personal knowledge you will never be able to say that it numbers even as many as a dozen. You will have three or four contacts, who will be renewed from time to time as they disappear."

To LaVey, there was much more weakness in unity than there ever was "strength." There was often a deemphasis on associations of Satanists. In the beginings of the Church of Satan, there used to be group gatherings at hotels and get togethers, some of which the then leadership of the Church might travel to attend. But it quickly became evident that these were merely show and tell sessions that did little good, although they did garner a bit of publicity for an up and coming organization that was quickly becoming a world-wide phenomenon. By the time I had gotten to the Church Admin, in the 80's LaVey himself avoided anything such as that like the plague.

People sometimes ask me what the hell is going on with The Church of Satan these days... like I would actually know... and all I can tell them is that it seems to be changing. I don't particularly care for the changes I see, that it's become much more of a cult of personality... PERSONALITIES... who seem more concerned about selling than Satanism as LaVey envisioned it. Titles and elevated degrees are much more prevalent today, because everyone NEEDS recognition. In my day, it was more preferable to be the power behind the power... the puppetmaster, if you will... rather than the little guy dancing on the string.

Sure. I had my degree and I had my title. Haven't even thought about them for a long time, because LaVey once told me that he respected something that Hitler once said. "When my generals cover themselves with medals, I shall distinguish myself by wearing none." The only badge I wear is Satanist. When I refer to myself as a LaVeyan, I reference the Man.

There's no Satanic Community, and even within an organized structure, there are only cliques and cabals, brought together loosely to self-inflate and to self-promote and to sell the concept, the word, the book, the trinket and the very essence of what once had to be wrested from the black secrets of life for oneself. "This ain't your father's Oldsmobile," as the commercial said. The Church of Satan today is a whole different animal altogether.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#18171 - 01/14/09 12:06 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Jake999]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3112
 Quote:
In my day, it was more preferable to be the power behind the power... the puppetmaster, if you will... rather than the little guy dancing on the string.

You know jake, not everyone in this modern age/days wants a title (with this I'm referring to myself). But still, do not forget sometimes having a title can make life a bit easier (depends again on which kind of title..).

 Quote:
Later I shall send you a book from which you will learn the true nature of the society we live in, and the strategy by which we shall destroy it. When you have read the book, you will be full members of the Brotherhood.

This part intrigued me a bit. I have always been interested in human nature and am always searching for manners to "bent" people in a positive way (towards me). Mostly if I run into trouble I use some psychology and "cold readings" to get me out or reduce the damage. Now, this book.. how was it titled? Seems like one I should read. Unless you are referring to the SB or other books Laveye wrote.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#18172 - 01/14/09 12:27 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Dimitri]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Dimitri:

It was a quote from George Orwell's 1984.

It was a passage in which O'Brien was telling Winston the nature of the "secret brotherhood" that was in resistance to Big Brother.

LaVey used it to show that The Church of Satan was not one BIG organization, but a fluid and changing underground that was hard to define and harder to attack, more like geurillas than an army.

Jake
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#18173 - 01/14/09 12:38 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Jake999]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3112
Aaaaah, looks like I misread a bit.
I thought it was something he had written and used much verbally to indicate certain things. My bad.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#18175 - 01/14/09 12:43 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Oh but I agree there is no satanic community, at least not in modern Satanism but I try to see community here as something let's say spiritual. A global source of knowledge, understanding and resulting progress shared between participants. And inevitable, with the decline of modern Satanism, there is a resulting decline in this global knowledge and progress.

Communities or forums are tools for participants to communicate and, as should be, improve themselves even if the real organization or structures are artificial or rather illusionary.
And especially at this level modern Satanism is coming to a stop. It has been at least half a decade since I've read something thrilling in any modern satanic environment and it is not because I became a source of all knowledge but because there has been very little new output. If I compare what I've read during the last decade with the enormous flow of written material and thought of the first decades of modern Satanism, it is evident that it's drying up. There is only dust at the bottom of the well it seems. It's turning into a perpetual rehash of same-so.

One should expect that a noob whom enters a domain where certain subjects are debated and expanded upon for decades would feel like he'd stumbled into a alien society but it isn't so. Within a day or two every noob can freely participate because all arguments seem to be change-proof. If I look around now, I have to admit I feel like looking at a ghost town. It looks like a town but it is lacking life, lacking change and worst of all; lacking progress.

To a degree it is understandable, modern Satanism focused on selfishness so hard and on purpose or actual progress so little, schisms and a multitude of almost-identical wanna-be-differents are an inevitable result. It is almost like Christian religion, all have a slightly different bible with the same message and not much more is done but rephrase the content of those very bibles.
And things do come to a stop, things become stagnant and to a degree repulsive. It shows a severe lack of merit, creativity and will.
It shows human nature too, the alluring ease of slacking.

D.

Top
#18177 - 01/14/09 02:04 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

Within a day or two every noob can freely participate because all arguments seem to be change-proof. If I look around now, I have to admit I feel like looking at a ghost town. It looks like a town but it is lacking life, lacking change and worst of all; lacking progress.

Every noob can try to participate, but very very few actually get it. I find that to be a pretty important point. Also, I don't see how Satanism needs to 'change' or 'progress'. It is what it is, a tool to be utilized. It is up to the individual how, or if they even have the intestinal fortitude, to use it.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#18183 - 01/14/09 02:45 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Don't tell me that a philosophy about individual progress and merit based upon reality does not need change and can be static and valid.
Even religion is changing, slow maybe but it evolves, so something like Satanism should be ever-expanding and improving, as its participants are or should be.

D.

Top
#18186 - 01/14/09 03:07 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Ok, just for the sake of discussion, and because I abhor abstract ideas masquerading as tangible knowledge, why don't you give me an example. What exactly is WRONG with Satanism, and how do you feel it should be changed? What would you have it evolve into?

I personally feel it is every bit as valid and useful today as it ever was.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#18188 - 01/14/09 03:31 PM Re: Peter H. Gilmore's take on the 'satanic commun [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
If you can't see it, I can't explain it.
I know, sounds like a cop-out but that's how it is.

Perception = reality.

D.

Top
Page 1 of 6 12345>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.027 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.