Page 7 of 57 « First<56789>Last »
Topic Options
#41088 - 07/30/10 07:40 AM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Dimitri]
Raffy Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/20/09
Posts: 76
Loc: Chicago
 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
So what you are pointing at is to discuss the ONA's view of culling?

Which is why the thread has the title ONA and Culling, and why I posted part of an ONA text about the matter.

The issue is not about the meaning or interpretation of certain words - such as culling or mundane (all of which I have defined in one way or another, and all of which are well-defined by the ONA in their texts) - but about the issues which such words refer to or are representative of or may point us toward.

I enumerated some of these issues in my previous reply to you.

That this does not seem to be understood is interesting, but not surprising. That a lot of replies involve argumentum ad hominem is also interesting, but again, not surprising.

Therefore, there seems little point in continuing posting here.
_________________________
Those who are not our sinister brothers or sisters are mundanes

Top
#41092 - 07/30/10 10:20 AM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Raffy]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: Raffy

Therefore, there seems little point in continuing posting here.


Discontinuing this thread would be a good idea - the entire thread has been misunderstanding. A meaningful conversation or a good debate requires a shared vocabulary - since we cannot get there, for whatever reason, it seems pointless to continue.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#41093 - 07/30/10 11:19 AM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Autodidact]
Raffy Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/20/09
Posts: 76
Loc: Chicago
 Originally Posted By: Autodidact
A meaningful conversation or a good debate requires a shared vocabulary

Or an acceptance that some terms have specific technical - non-mundane - meanings when used in a specific context. Especially when the context should be obvious, and has been made obvious, in this case their ONA usage.

That many, it seems, do not understand this, or cannot distance themselves from mundane preconceptions, or cannot prevent themselves from resorting to argumentum ad hominem, may well indicate that a meaningful discussion here is indeed not possible.
_________________________
Those who are not our sinister brothers or sisters are mundanes

Top
#41094 - 07/30/10 11:46 AM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Raffy]
TV is God Moderator Offline
Moderator
member


Registered: 08/11/08
Posts: 273
Loc: The Cornhole
 Originally Posted By: Raffy

Therefore, there seems little point in continuing posting here.

 Originally Posted By: Raffy
well indicate that a meaningful discussion here is indeed not possible.

But you just... keep... posting...

Top
#41095 - 07/30/10 11:59 AM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: TV is God]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Some of us here will continue to post in this thread soon so would you please keep the trivialities out of it.

Thank you,

D.

Top
#41097 - 07/30/10 12:10 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Raffy]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Raffy

That many, it seems, do not understand this, or cannot distance themselves from mundane preconceptions, or cannot prevent themselves from resorting to argumentum ad hominem, may well indicate that a meaningful discussion here is indeed not possible.


Well, you posted a fairly generalized article on culling and then did not frame the discussion in any way other than to say "good riddance to mundane trash".

The subsequent posts were an attempt to nail down a context which you also did not assist in further clarifying. Caldrius stepped in and suggested that context would indeed be key in this discussion and it continued to go off track because no subsequent direction was established.

I think that despite a lack of direction, the thread received many well thought out ideas and posts. That you underscore the fact that the thread (your thread) lacks direction and then blame the participants for not 'feeling you' while attempting to establish context, should be telling you something that's evidently not sinking in.

The concept(s) of culling as a viable practice is obviously going to be a hot button discussion. It was up to you to frame the discussion to isolate your particular area of interest since it's not a general topic of conversation but a very specific one with very specific criteria.

Meaningful discussion here is indeed possible. You have to bring as much as you expect to get.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#41098 - 07/30/10 12:42 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Fnord]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Us vs Them

It is interesting to observe how people react when they find out they are located into other's "them" group, especially when in a derogatory context. The humorous part is that it isn't exactly new when it comes to human behavior. Anyone of us is in a lot of "them" lists at any given time and seldom in a positive context. If that is too hard to handle, Satanism certainly is the wrong label to swing around. It seldom triggers cheerful responses. In the microcosm of Satanism, there is also nothing but us versus them, even when most uphold their individuality as a sacred cow. Each different group is consider a them by the others and seldom in a positive context. I myself hardly care at all. If one does, I suggest they grow some skin.

Us

It seems almost blasphemous to consider oneself in an us context but many don't understand the benefits of it. I come from a tribal culture, something so quickly disappearing that even during my lifespan I saw most of it evaporate. Down here us was centered around towns. If you were born into a certain town, you were one of them and during my grandfather's days, this was enough to trigger fights between neighboring clans. Mind you, most of these towns are closer together than normal neighbors in other countries. That tradition persisted until my youth, evaporating quickly since then for a multitude of reasons. One of the biggest benefits of us is power. People do not realize how much power an us-mentality can contain and how much they can accomplish compared to a group identical in size but consisting of pure individual, "disconnected" units. I encountered this same power when I was in the army and while being a biker. This same power is to be found in many circles where individuals meet that share enough similarities, and respect their differences, to be able to work together. If they group up into an us-structure, it can become a force. Of course, together with this comes duty.

Not long ago, it happened to me that in the middle of the night, while I was doing things to my girlfriend my mother didn't even know one could do, I got a phone call which said "Come, we got a problem". Most would complain or not understand how one, in such a lovely situation, can not choose for that. Still, I told my girlfriend "gottogo", dressed and went. When you are in an us structure, duty or honor is one of the main parts which keeps it together. To some of us this comes natural and it has little to do with a sheep mentality. Wolves also hunt in packs.

Some prefer hyper-individuality above all and while I don't consider it negatively, I do see the disadvantages of it. No matter how strong, smart or courageous one is, individuality is essentially weak. If your Will to Power is strong enough, you need to learn how to establish power. The military, multinationals, religious groups, political parties and even organized crime use this principle.
If you're satisfied with things as they are, individuality might be the path to take. If you prefer to have more control, an us-structure is the option.

Culling

We all advocate culling in one way or another; we don't need to be hypocritical about it. If it is about those we despise most, we don't shy away from sharing our opinion on how they should be removed from the gene-pool. Check out most threads about rapist, child-molesters or other humans we consider vermin and you'll notice most have no problem advocating culling in that context. Of course some prefer constructs like the death-penalty to do that task but I find that the easy way out. It's still advocating culling but without having to make ones own hands dirty.
I'm not promoting the mass extermination of mundanes and neither do I promote organizing death camps, even when I'd look smashing in a uniform. First let me explain what I consider mundanes. Mundanes are those that are not like "us" and don't have the potential to ever be. As such, I do think some Satanists, or others I meet out there, do have potential and I respect those, even when they might not choose to go as deep down the rabbit hole as I do. Not all raw material is destined to turn into gold. What the factors are that make the difference is for another debate. Even mundanes, which I range from cattle to pets, I rather see put to good use. I mentioned it somewhere before that they breed those of us and as such, I prefer a distillation instead of an extermination process. I guess I'm a moderate in this context. However, what I do advocate to be culled is dross. And dross is the trash out there that needs to be removed from the streets. And if you consider yourself your own authority, you don't need another authority to do it for you.

D.

Top
#41099 - 07/30/10 01:19 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Diavolo]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1753
Loc: New York
Personally that is the kind of specific information that I was looking for in regards to the OP’s ideas. Clear and to the point, and details that one can actually discuss.
Unfortunately I have to go to work so I don’t have time, but for the most part I totally agree with you, except possibly on the last sentence, but that also depends on the individuals situation.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#41100 - 07/30/10 01:24 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

If you're satisfied with things as they are, individuality might be the path to take. If you prefer to have more control, an us-structure is the option.

Oh I don't know about that. This may be a matter of semantics or perspective, but I see things a little differently. Our universe, as in how we see and perceive things, is of our own creation. Most have their universe shaped and molded mostly by outside forces, while others take matters into their own hands and endeavour to break the chains of convention and instead build their world as they see fit. There are miserable millionaires, and completely content people that have nothing. It's all a matter of how one sculpts their own universe and further, how one perceives, both intellectually and emotionally, ones own position.

In that sense, how things 'are', and how much control one exerts, starts with the individual.

On the other hand, it would be hard to argue that a group can get more done than an individual in most situations. The thing is in order to be part of a group, unless what that group is doing directly mirrors your own desires, you must at least in part sublimate your will to that group. There is nothing wrong with this, of course, we all do it all the time.

My only issue in this thread, (which is a claim I don't think you personally are making Dia, but correct me if I am mistaken), is that some seem to be making the claim that the only way to be 'individual' or 'exceptional' (read:not mundane) is to participate in such group-think. To me this seems like an absurd concept.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#41106 - 07/30/10 02:42 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Dan_Dread]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread

My only issue in this thread, (which is a claim I don't think you personally are making Dia, but correct me if I am mistaken), is that some seem to be making the claim that the only way to be 'individual' or 'exceptional' (read:not mundane) is to participate in such group-think. To me this seems like an absurd concept.


I, for one, was not making that claim that one must participate in group-think - I hope I did not come across as such.

I was trying to make some simple points:
- if you kill members of another group, they will kill you back
- if you want to leverage the benefits of a group, they will (attempt to) impose their rules on you; breaking those rules, they will (attempt to) impose consequences

My thinking in now thus: the OP brought up culling in the general sense. I (and I suspect others) was not able to discern any specifics, so the conversation had to stay general.

In most modern societies, the law allows one to be responsible for oneself, but dictates some interactions - killing, for example, is an activity most governments reserve for themselves. Violating that law invokes the ire of that government.

Engaging in the killing of a nation's citizens without following that nation's rules - for any reason - seems short-sighted. They'll attempt to impose consequences, and will eventually succeed.

Note that one's beliefs or reasons are irrelevant in this.

Without further reason or purpose, I don't understand why one would follow this path, as it doesn't seem to buy you anything.

(On a separate note, to be "exceptional" does require a group, as the concept of "exceptional" is comparative - it requires someone to be exceptional to.)
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#41107 - 07/30/10 03:51 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
When I talked about people being satisfied taking the individual path, I didn't imply it would make them by definition happy or unhappy or would rob them of potential accomplishments. What I implied is that a force, called Will to Power by some, might not be as strong in them as in others. This of course is open to debate.

I realize that happy or unhappy is a subjective thing. I know people that own close to nothing and are completely satisfied with it. I also know people that have way too much and are constantly miserable. As such, happiness is totally dependent upon the expectations and state of mind of an individual, no matter what philosophy or religion s/he follows. I'd even dare to say that people that prefer to excel in all they do might be unhappier than those that are completely at ease with being as they are for the rest of their lives. I met mentally disabled in life who smile a whole lot more than me. Still, I don't consider happiness so important I'd prefer to trade with them.

As you correctly assumed, I don't claim the only way to be individual or exceptional is a matter of submitting oneself to group-think. I see value in groups and in submitting oneself partly to accomplish goals but I don't think a Borg mentality brings anyone much profit. I don't know where you got the idea of group-think, as far as I know, ONA is open source thought-ware in which all are free to do, think or construct whatever is appropriate to them or to a situation at hand.

D.

Top
#41111 - 07/30/10 05:59 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: Raffy]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



One last post from me and then I will leave this.

The only conclusion illustrated in this thread: that the philosophy of the ONA is the philosophy of criminality. There is no greatness in that work.

I think you ONA guys have taken Nietzsche and twisted his thinking completely out of shape in a shameful way.

Daffy, I actually think you may be mentally ill, like psychopathic, based on what you have typed here. I am strongly suggesting, in the most sincere terms, that you seek psychiatric advice for your possible illness.

It is unethical to cull innocent people, do you understand? Don't be so obsessed. Most people aren't mundane, they are hard working and are contributing to their society in a positive way.

If you cull innocent people you will eventually get caught and lose your liberties in prison or worse. Is this getting through to you?

You have lost touch with reality. You need to get a bit more pragmatic. Anyway take care.

Top
#41113 - 07/30/10 07:04 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: ]
Caladrius Offline
member


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 320
Loc: SoCal
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
One last post from me and then I will leave this.

The only conclusion illustrated in this thread: that the philosophy of the ONA is the philosophy of criminality.

[...]

It is unethical...


OMG! My mom told me not to be friends with those criminal types!

Just out of curiousity, what other sheltered girl scout ethics do Australian Satanists live by? Can you list us 10 ethical commandments? Just so those bad ONA people can be properly educated. Seems their mothers forgot to teach them a few things about morals and ethics! Shame on those psychopaths!


Edited by Caladrius (07/30/10 07:08 PM)
_________________________
Chloe 352

Top
#41114 - 07/30/10 07:16 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: ]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"The only conclusion illustrated in this thread: that the philosophy of the ONA is the philosophy of criminality. There is no greatness in that work."

Your opinion that you are entitled to. That being said, everyone has one. Just some people don't agree with you on this matter.

"I think you ONA guys have taken Nietzsche and twisted his thinking completely out of shape in a shameful way."

Shameful way???
WTF, this is a Satanism site, not a christian site. Satanism isn't always nice and clean. Shame is something that is pushed by Xitian fuck heads. There is nothing wrong with thinking, wanting, and doing things to make yourself better than everyone else. Fuck mediocrity and all that brings. If you aren't willing to push yourself and do more, what the fuck are you doing?

"It is unethical to cull innocent people, do you understand?"

You missed the point behind the ONA idea of culling completely.

"Most people aren't mundane, etc......"

In using the term as it is used by the ONA, they are.

The ideas of laws, and the reasoning/acceptance/use of them was previously discussed. I thought in my first post on the first page of this thread it made it pretty clear. Maybe you should re-read it.

It's not a matter of Raffy losing touch with reality. He is making you think and question yourself, your ideas, and how you feel about things.

The ONA, and its system is not for everyone, and I am fuck glad about that. You want something nice and clean and sweet, go to MCOS.


Morgan
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#41119 - 07/30/10 10:35 PM Re: ONA and Culling [Re: ]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
Regarding Satanism and criminality, some issues need to be clarified. While people concerned with the Sinister Path's PR go at great pains to stress that Satanism is a peaceful, law-abiding religion- that is, "good clean fun"- we find ourselves in an awkward situation.

Like I've said before, you don't base your religion off of the quintessential paragon of evil in western culture because you want to be "socially acceptable".

I once remember seeing a Christian t-shirt with a grunge-looking cross on it, which read, "This shirt is illegal in (*insert absurdly high number here) countries". The tendency of Christians to flaunt their persecution complex to make themselves seem "underground" or "edgy" aside, it is obvious that Satanism can claim a much higher hit count-- more thorns in our crown, if you will. For every country that outlaws Christianity, there are two more that have some kind of archaic anti-witchcraft law that outlaws any esoteric or non-monotheistic religion. I saw a documentary about heavy metal in the middle-east (can't remember the name), and there was an interview with these two young guys that did a black metal project out of Saudi Arabia and called themselves Satanists. Their faces were blurred out because the state could execute them for their views. I think that speaks volumes for people who never meet with any real-life reaction from their beliefs.

Secondly, Satanism is antinomian by nature. Your own morality has no doctrinal constraints. An individual is capable of breaking the law if he sees fit.

Christianity has the same idea. The Laws of God are above the Laws of Man-- and in Satanism, YOU are that God.

However, the major qualifier would be that any consequences of your actions are yours to bear alone. That means, if you kill someone, you deserve any punishments that end up falling on you as a result. One could argue that crimes could go unpunished, but the general reality is that a person who lives that far outside the law isn't going to meet a happy end.

I realize that most outsiders don't get the subtle difference, but trying to dumb it down to "Satanists never break the law" is silly and usually falls on deaf ears anyway.

I understand Michael Aquino's stance, with his having been deeply harassed over false abuse claims. He speaks with a lot more authority than other people who have never met with serious opposition from the public or "left the closet" for that matter. The policy seems to work for the ToS, so more power to 'em. It's not my clubhouse so I'm not one to tell him what his rules should be.

My general problem with the ONA's idea of "culling" is they seem to emphasize that it is something that all of their initiates should do, as if it is some kind of religious duty.

The reality is that murder of another person isn't something the average person faces regularly, and even then it is usually in extreme cases of self-defense or war.

Now, I'm going to take a blind stab in the dark. Let's see if the following statement is correct:

If you are reading this, and you are an ONA initiate, you personally have never premeditatively culled a properly hand-tested opfer as instructed by sinister MSS. Ever. You never will. And the more you endorse "culling", the more you are simply blowing hot air over something you will never do in your life, regardless of how many other people you think do it in secret.

And, believe it or not, many people have managed to become self-actualized individuals without planning and committing a murder.

Makes one wonder how Satanism ever got this far before the ONA popped up in the 80s and started telling people you needed to kill people to be a "tr00 Satanist".


Edited by The Zebu (07/30/10 10:45 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ˇoh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
Page 7 of 57 « First<56789>Last »


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

Generated in 0.026 seconds of which 0.005 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.