Page all of 7 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#47647 - 01/31/11 01:43 AM red satanism
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
How many people here have pondered the idea of mixing Satanism (which is more broad then just Lavey Satanism) with Marxism-Leninism? I know a few people who do this. I also know some websites that throw major chimp outs when the idea is even mentioned.

I like the idea. In my mind, Satan, as the underdog, symbolizes the working class against the ruling class (which is "god").

It's symbolic, because in my opinion, neither deity does exist. In the scenario that "god" did exist, I would deny it, and so would Satan. Satan rises up against the ruling order!

Top
#47650 - 01/31/11 01:51 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
thedeadidea Offline
member


Registered: 08/15/10
Posts: 209
So Satan is symbolic of anything to you ?

What have you done to convince anyone of the synthesis of the two other then merely sugguest it in an abstract way?

Do you practice or were you born this stupid ?

Top
#47651 - 01/31/11 01:56 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
HeimiricIX Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/29/10
Posts: 75
Loc: Mexico City.
Just a quick answer since I'm in a movie-break:

Satanism is a individualistic, predatory religion. It has nothing to do with Marxism, we are the predators and the people are our prays, if we, as individuals, are not members of the ruling class is because we have chosen to and because it suits our individual needs.

Best.
_________________________
HeimiricIX - Made you look

Top
#47653 - 01/31/11 02:00 AM Re: red satanism [Re: HeimiricIX]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
I personally don't believe Lavey should be able to monopolize the term "Satanism." I believe the man had some merits, but then I disagree with a few of his ideas.
Top
#47656 - 01/31/11 02:10 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Dude, you do realize you were here before and wrote other posts.
Maybe you should reread some of the stuff you wrote as well as the follow up discussions.

http://www.the600club.com/dir/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Main/3261/Number/40680#Post40680

If you click on your profile, then click on the link to your posts, you can read them all. I only listed one link, I figure you can do the rest yourself.
After all you did register here on 8/11/09.

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



Top
#47659 - 01/31/11 03:53 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2435
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
V.I. Lenin kept a copy of "Darwin's Ape" permanently and prominently on his desk in the Kremlin. You can see it here at the front of the desk. The ape also graced my desk; see Plate #49 in The Church of Satan. That's about as Satanic as you can get ... ;\)
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#47661 - 01/31/11 07:20 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
Just like Satanists follow Lavey and follow Lucifer with different degrees of precision and different interpretations, the same thing exists for Marxism and Marx. Different "reds" interpret Marx differently and come to different conclusions. Therefore even if Marx himself was not a satanist, the ideology of red Satanism is not automatically ruled out.

The question as to whether Marx himself was a satanist is different than the question as to whether "red Satanism" could exist. After thinking it through, I do not think Marx was a satanist because he would have considered it "silly," but I do think he has many things in common with satanists. Atheism, class consciousness, willingness to advocate violence (it is true that some satanists are against this) etc.

It's just that most libertarian satanists support the upper class and its right to property and hierarchy, but they do not deny these class distinctions. If you ask a libertarian satanist why they are opposed to Marxism, their answer will be a class conscious one about entitlement and hierarchy. Essentially, libertarian satanists believe in "human rights" when it comes to the price system and property, and Marxists don't believe in those rights.


Edited by Meatl Gear (01/31/11 07:28 AM)

Top
#47664 - 01/31/11 08:00 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3075
 Quote:
Just like Satanists follow Lavey and follow Lucifer with different degrees of precision and different interpretations, the same thing exists for Marxism and Marx. Different "reds" interpret Marx differently and come to different conclusions. Therefore even if Marx himself was not a satanist, the ideology of red satanism is not automatically ruled out.

Just to make things clear, any person here will hardly follow LaVey or other local stars in the LHP. They merely share the same views on life and ideology and even that's discussable. I do not follow LaVey but merely echo his ideas as written in the SB. A respect as a result from recognition from my part. Learn the difference, following someones ideas is an indication of herd-mentality and also indicates you just take every word for granted without the application of critical thinking.

If I were to follow ASL then I'd be nothing more than the fundamental religionists.

Blending the philosophy with political views automatically rules it out. It shows a lack of:
- interest and knowledge of the sinister philosophy itself
- lack of knowledge on this political "branch"

 Quote:
The question as to whether Marx himself was a satanist is different than the question as to whether "red satanism" could exist. After thinking it through, I do not think Marx was a satanist because he would have considered it "silly," but I do think he has many things in common with satanists. Atheism, class consciousness, willingness to advocate violence (it is true that some satanists are against this) etc.

The true question would be if I'll put 2 or 3 spoons of sugar in my tea. Marx is not, was not and will never be a Satanist. You might ascribe him a few traits which you think are Satanic, but the lack of scriptures/letters in which is said he is a Satanist are simply non-existent which results in him not being a Satanist. And that's quite the end of the discussion.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#47666 - 01/31/11 08:33 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
Satanism is about empowering the individual. Marxism is about empowering the collective. In practice, Marxism crushes the individual and makes him subservient to the State. Care to explain how Marxism is the least bit Satanic?
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#47672 - 01/31/11 09:26 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Oto Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/09/11
Posts: 8
I was a marxist as a 16 years old. Since I am satanist, I dont care about working class or ruling class, but about my own well-being - that was the first thing I learned from Satanism. So I dont need any hybrid of Satanism and marxism.

You wrote "Satan, as the underdog, symbolizes the working class against the ruling class (which is "god")"... I find this analogy pointless. About 20 years ago, working class in my country was actually ruling class. Who was "god" and who was "satan" there?

A FEW traits you think Satanism and marxism have in common (e.g. Atheism) are neither specific nor unique for any of them - there are as well many other "isms" which have such traits in common...

Top
#47674 - 01/31/11 10:03 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Oto]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
Has anyone answered (STFU) the OP? No.

MetalGear(I'll assume a typo in account creation):

click this link, read, and rejoin.

JK

p.s. I lean towards progressive politics personally, so I look forward to seeing you back on this thread with an added bit of insight.
_________________________



Top
#47675 - 01/31/11 10:09 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
You are slinging this "argument" all over the internet and hoping that it will stick somewhere.

Elsewhere, the logical fallacies of your "points" have been underscored repeatedly yet you choose to be persistent with them despite that.

Fist very succinctly summed up the most glaring problem with your "argument".

Answer the exact question that Fist posed to you, with clear and logical progression, and I will award you a brass figlagee with bronze oak leaf palm.

Satanism isn't a group project and it's not a cause for the victimized masses to flock to.

Of course, you are free to hold whatever imagery works for you in your own mind. Here, you will be asked to support it, and if you cannot do so, to drop it in the public venue.

And so, the gauntlet is thrown.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47676 - 01/31/11 10:10 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Oto]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
You claim that since you are a satanist you don't care about anyone else. My question is since when did being a satanist mean that you don't care about others at all? I totally agree that a satanist by difinition should live as they want and look out for number one but your statement sounds just plain selfish to me.
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#47679 - 01/31/11 10:20 AM Re: red satanism [Re: thedeadidea]
Fnord Offline
senior member


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

Do you practice or were you born this stupid ?


And here you are again with the personal attacks.

FYI, this argument style is substandard for this board. I would suggest addressing points and backing those points up with data in the form of your own ideas or the ideas of others that support your points.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47680 - 01/31/11 10:23 AM Re: red satanism [Re: manofsteel]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
 Quote:
My question is since when did being a satanist mean that you don't care about others at all?


You actually don't understand enough about LHP material to even understand the answer. That is why I posted Books of the LHP. Go read some of those titles and get back to me.

None the less, because you are of the lazy 'give it to me now' interwebs generation (and I feeling charitable), let me help you out a little:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_self-interest

Please read the links in the 'See Also' section.

And,

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=objectivism_nonfiction_the_virtue_of_selfishness

I am pretty sure you can find the free pdf if you google around for "The Virtue of Selfishness".

Now, try not to do any other talking until you have completed your homework.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#47689 - 01/31/11 12:23 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
Born Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/17/09
Posts: 22
Loc: Ontario, Canada
I've noticed a rise in interest in mixing Communism with Satanism. It must be said that the two will NEVER congeal. When we compare Communism and Capitalism in Satanic context, it's not hard to see where Satanism would truly flourish to it's greatest potential.

With Communism, there's always a core foundation that is built upon a sort of Marxist utopia. A leveling of classes and promises of betterment and equality for the proletariat.

I thought communism had always had a form of monarchy and birth rites anyway. As in any society, fundamentalism and totalitarian view finds ease on the coat tails of honorable intention. History has shown time and time again where it leads.

From the view of a Satanist, there are those that have power, and those that give it. Regardless of whether there were a common societal philosophy such as Satanism, absolute power would eventually corrupt absolutely. The strong within a group of strength would still rise, as to the intentions and their legitimacy relative to the masses...it would be solipsism to 'hope' that any mandate would hold the 'greater good' and mindfulness of you and your kin as paramount.

Capitalism is just as bad in the obvious separation of class and often deplorable conditions from birth. Out of the two political concepts, are the 'masses' in either one, any less likely to succumb to a predetermined societal role of sorts?

The traditional view of freedom in liberalism comes from the capitalist success stories. They become beacons because the system provides an out for a life many can agree is often shit. Communism attempts to inspire the individual to accept the existing 'shit life' for a 'could be worse' scenario.

There are so many gates at the starting line of Satanism, that really each pursuant path is reflective of one's existing core convictions...Be it opportunistic, dominant, indulgent and hedonistic, artistic and philosophical, driven to succeed, or all of the above. One of the two societal structures certainly seems to allow Satanism to flourish more than the other in my opinion.

Unless you're part of that 3%, it doesn't matter the political ideology...you are under the thumb of those chosen by their predecessors to maintain power. Satanism involves more of a revolution of the mind and personal liberation from conceptual hindrances and dualism (among many other evolutionary epiphanies). It's unlikely for a 'Satanic Party' to ever emerge and take their rightful place in current political arenas, in the West or in China as current examples of said ideologies and politics.

The only reason Capitalism is in the state it is, is due to a complacent herd that handed their life decisions to the more dominant within their ranks and submitted all decisive power to the voluntarily unseen.

So many stuck their head in the sand for so long, and are now slowly becoming aware how vulnerable their asses really are being straight up in the air.

Apologies for over zealous response with 'quick reply'. The intent was to respond to the OP.


Edited by Born (01/31/11 12:27 PM)
Edit Reason: responded to wrong poster.
_________________________
Without innate intelligence civilization would never have been created. When intelligence declines..

Top
#47693 - 01/31/11 02:03 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Born]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
Unlike others, I have not argued that Satanism is tied to an economic system inherently. Satanism is a world view and a system of ethics. You can live by satanist ethics in any political system. You can even live by satanist ethics under Islamic Fundamentalism, you'd just have to be smooth and hide it.
Top
#47701 - 01/31/11 02:53 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Unlike others, I have not argued that Satanism is tied to an economic system inherently. Satanism is a world view and a system of ethics.


Satanism may not have an inherent political system, however, the ideals of Satanism work better with some political systems than others. Satanism champions merit, personal accomplishment and individuality. As has already been pointed out, ideologies like Socialism, Marxism, Communism etc. conflict with the aforementioned merit, personal accomplishment and individuality.

Personally I have always seen Satanism as being more aligned with Anarchy (my take on Anarchy at least).
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#47702 - 01/31/11 02:58 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Is Satanism a political position? Really?

The circumstance of well being for the 'masses' ensures the power of the ruling class, be it Corporate or State power. I don't see it impossible to be a Satanic Marxist, but it likely would only be practical in an already self described Communist nation.

Largely having power in America is a class based phenomena. I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth, so I'm cattle, a 'peasant'. I'm going to do better, I have superior intelligence and skill sets with which to do better. But I have no illusions about where I'm coming from.

Being a Satanist doesn't make you any better than a peasant. Real world results makes you better than a peasant, making lots of money, influencing lots of people, buying elections...etc.

The fact I hate being a fucking sheep is my main motivation to start businesses and make a difference, for myself and others. And making that difference in the lives of other people isn't selfless, it's where influence comes from and greater power grows.

Top
#47703 - 01/31/11 03:36 PM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
I do not think capitalism is about merit as much as it is about perception and networking connections. How many times does an interviewer select an employee by giving them a test, and then taking the person with the highest score? Not very often. Under capitalism, people hire for dumb reasons. They may not like the way your hair is combed or type your name into google and not like what shows up. Freedom mean you are free to be an idiot.

When you are buying a product, would you not admit that brand loyalty plays a role. That it isn't only merit, but also the brand?

Stupidity should be painful. I believe in totalitarian governments. That being said, I do not argue that you are less of a satanist if you disagree with me. It isn't a litmus test issue for me. It apparently is a litmus test issue for others.


Edited by Meatl Gear (01/31/11 03:39 PM)

Top
#47709 - 01/31/11 04:56 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Meatl Gear
How many people here have pondered the idea of mixing Satanism (which is more broad then just Lavey Satanism) with Marxism-Leninism? I know a few people who do this. I also know some websites that throw major chimp outs when the idea is even mentioned.

I like the idea. In my mind, Satan, as the underdog, symbolizes the working class against the ruling class (which is "god").


Satanic Reds

You go Comrade.

PS: the King beat me to it. Ah well, nothing wrong with making sure you see it.

D.


Edited by Diavolo (01/31/11 04:57 PM)

Top
#47715 - 01/31/11 06:58 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1096
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Meatl Gear
I do not think capitalism is about merit…How many times does an interviewer select an employee by giving them a test, and then taking the person with the highest score?


You have a strange definition of “merit.” Performance on a test can indicate aptitude, but it says nothing about work ethic or responsibility. A stellar test-taker may still sleep in, steal from work, or slack off on the job.

 Originally Posted By: Meatl Gear
Under capitalism, people hire for dumb reasons. They may not like the way your hair is combed…


If someone shows up to a job interview with a green mohawk, he either lacks social skills or he’s apathetic. Those are perfectly legitimate reasons to reject him, as it will affect his performance. In my experience, most employers hire on the basis of credentials, so you’re really making an issue out of nothing.

 Originally Posted By: Meatl Gear
Freedom mean you are free to be an idiot…Stupidity should be painful.


Any employer that hires for stupid reasons will see his business fail against his competitors. The great thing about capitalism is not just that one is free to be stupid, but that one will naturally suffer the consequences of his stupidity.
_________________________
Texas is to 'Murika what 'Murika is to the rest of the world.

Top
#47716 - 01/31/11 07:59 PM Re: red satanism [Re: XiaoGui17]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3773
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Communism and Satanism are philosophically mutually exclusive. It is true that Satanism does not represent one political position, but if one truly embraces self deification through manifesting as the adversary to herd mentality and slave ideologies it is incoherent that one should also be a supporter of communism, which is the philosophical grand-poohbah of both of these things.

Also, I can't speak for anyone else, but Satanism to me is not just something directed at religion, but rather religion is just a particular manifestation of what the principle of the adversary stands against. If you are going to decry religion for being a mind control matrix or pushing values counter to our core animal nature, to embrace other, more relevant examples of this same thing shows a lack of understanding, and further separates in a demonstrable way those that are from those that are not.

And with that said, a couple of things -

1: Great points, Fist and Born. I fear though, you might as well be talking to a wall.

2:
 Originally Posted By: myk5
Is Satanism a political position? Really?

No, but politics are of the same stuff as religion. It is a counter position to both.(at least, it can be..I only speak for me)

3:
 Originally Posted By: meatsauce
How many times does an interviewer select an employee by giving them a test, and then taking the person with the highest score? Not very often.

All the time. They call them 'resumes'
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47742 - 02/01/11 01:13 AM Re: red satanism [Re: XiaoGui17]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Well, the capitalism = merit equation is as realistic as any communism in practice meeting the ideals of communism in theory.

Microsoft is the most successful operating system, but enjoys far less 'merit' than either Linux or Macintosh as an operating system (granted this is a subjective evaluation and gamers especially may disagree).

Pop music now is inundated with 'autotune' to enable mediocre singing in the very top hits.

The most successful fast food restaurants make the least nutritious mediocre food.

The most competent person in any office is often that lowly paid secretary everyone ignores until she gets sick and the office can't function without her.

Of course there are people that are simply brilliant and are compensated in accordance with that brilliance, but it's not so often a correlation between brilliance and wealth or power can be made in general.

Spending the last year of so learning about e-commerce I've figured out the people making the most money are not the people with the best product, but the people that can sell a shitty product to the greatest number of suckers. Marketing to the greed of people with no skill or intelligence, that's the shortcut to wealth online!

Top
#47744 - 02/01/11 01:35 AM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3773
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Of course capitalism=merit. Those that can rise above others by their wits, sweat, and drive do, while those that can't complain and call for a more egalitarian approach. The quality of any given product or service is often times irrelevant, that there will always be suckers is the traction by which the clever move forward.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47745 - 02/01/11 02:02 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
quality of any given product or service is often times irrelevant, that there will always be suckers is the traction by which the clever move forward.


This is very true. There's always the example of the old-time barber who watched a Supercuts move in across the street from his old, barber pole store. The sign above the Supercuts read $6 HAIRCUTS. Being a clever entrepreneur, the barber raised a sign over his shop that said, "WE FIX $6 HAIRCUTS."

There will always be shoddy material and shoddy products and there will always be a market for them in those people who will cut any corner to save a dime, and then damn the legitimate products for lasting while theirs crumbles in their hands. The man who finds a way to take advantage of the situation in a win/win scenario merits his wealth and fortune.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#47747 - 02/01/11 02:53 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Dan_Dread]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
Communism and Satanism are philosophically mutually exclusive. It is true that Satanism does not represent one political position, but if one truly embraces self deification through manifesting as the adversary to herd mentality and slave ideologies it is incoherent that one should also be a supporter of communism, which is the philosophical grand-poohbah of both of these things.


 Originally Posted By: Fist
Satanism is about empowering the individual. Marxism is about empowering the collective. In practice, Marxism crushes the individual and makes him subservient to the State. Care to explain how Marxism is the least bit Satanic?




Satanism is not political and it is my firm belief that all political ideologies can be used by Satanists. It all depends on the environment created by the ideology and whether it creates something good for the individual Satanist or not. You cannot try to politicize Satanism since it isn’t meant to be political in the first place. Many people fall into the trap of thinking liberalism equals Satanism in the political spectrum which is as wrong as to equal Satanism with any political ideology.

If communism serves your purposes and goals more than any other ideology then that Satanist should fight for a communist revolution. If not, another ideology might be better suited. Or, like most it seems, not care at all and just try to make it in whatever the current system is.

If anyone is interested how self professed Satanists connect red ideology with Satanism, The Satanic Reds is probably the group to go to.

Top
#47757 - 02/01/11 08:22 AM Re: red satanism [Re: TheInsane]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3773
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
And the resident representative from the local 'Satanism is anything I want it to be' club has spoken. Are you still here?

As I said, this is a good subject to weed those that are from those that aren't, and in that respect is a valuable thread.

Just for LOLs though, insaneinthebrain, why don't you actually explain how your position is coherent instead of your your usual bald 'it is because I say so' style assertions? How can you philosophically both be a Satanist and a communist?


This should be amusing if nothing else...
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47786 - 02/01/11 12:42 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
How can you philosophically both be a Satanist and a communist?

This should be amusing if nothing else...


I'll give it a go, but just because I like driving uphill in the snow . . .

Satanism = maximizing individual betterment. (a loose JK rip)

Here's the rub: we aren't tigers. Human beings exist within a collective matrix of expression we like to deem "society". This is why MONEY was a huge step up in cultural evolution, it allowed for fluidity of transfer among the pack. And so too every "communal" advancement: roads, armies, memes,the internet, etc. No man exists in isolation.

This means that maximizing the self requires maximizing a larger field. Anarchy is an ultimate fail in this regard, unless you're that dude with the long ass beard trappin' rodents on his little island.

We can talk all day about how Satanism favors individual merit, but until we can place that in a viable system of maximizing it, we fail. Understanding human nature as I do, I believe a collectivist model best maximizes the interests of the individual, and I see the alternatives as little more than aristocracies in disguise.
_________________________



Top
#47794 - 02/01/11 02:06 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Dan_Dread]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
And the resident representative from the local 'Satanism is anything I want it to be' club has spoken. Are you still here?

As I said, this is a good subject to weed those that are from those that aren't, and in that respect is a valuable thread.

Just for LOLs though, insaneinthebrain, why don't you actually explain how your position is coherent instead of your your usual bald 'it is because I say so' style assertions? How can you philosophically both be a Satanist and a communist?


This should be amusing if nothing else...


I have no idea why you always feel the need to be rude to people. Maybe you are building your image as en “evil Satanist” :P Furthermore regarding the 'it is because I say so' was the critique of the idea that Satanism is somehow political. Would you disagree with that and actually claim Satanism is political?

Now I am no communist and while I have read communist literature I am by no means an expert. Therefore this will by no means be a defense of communism. Jason King has already answered this above and my reply is in the same vein. Satanism is indeed about maximizing individual betterment. How this is achieved is very different and it also has to be because we are all different. Some people think that a communist rule would, in the long run, be beneficial to their own personal betterment which is also why some Satanists claim to be communist or Marxist or reds. Again, I am no communist and wont defend or try to explain how that would happen. They themselves are the best people to go to for an answer regarding that.

The capitalist society is often taken for granted when we discuss success. What equals success in our given society is seen as _actual_ success (in lack of a better way to put it). But as we all should know it is only success measured by the given laws and rules under which we work. Capitalism values nothing more than money so that is what we today measure success in. In other systems other things are valued and if these things fit the individual Satanist better then why should he not strive for that kind of society?

Btw, on the 'Satanism is anything I want it to be' you seemed to not disagree to much with me when I explained my views a few months back but you always come back to critique me. I also invited you to discuss this, public or private, but you never responded. I love a great debate so the invitation is still there if you care accept. I like a good debate and you always learn from it.

I know you have bad blood against me from heated discussions in the past but maybe its time to put that behind you?

Top
#47797 - 02/01/11 02:24 PM Re: red satanism [Re: TheInsane]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3773
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
No bad blood. I don't even look at the names beside posts in any meaningful way..if I notice a trend I may eventually point it out, but it's always the content I am responding to. And while it's true you have written things I agree with in the past, for the most part your writing drives me to respond with one hand, the other firmly embedded in my palm.

When you say 'some satanists favour this or that' while mentioning things that are mutually exclusive to core Satanic philosophy, you are demonstrating you don't have a grip on core Satanic philosophy. That is why I say this sort of topic acts as a sort of visual filter to see who is who. If you find brutal honesty to be 'rude' that really isn't any of my concern.

If you truly believe in the egalitarian ideals presented by communism, you are not of the right stuff. Sure, a Satanist might thrive in a Communist system (as much as anyone could 'thrive') but that would be despite the system not because of it, and that Satanist certainly wouldn't be swallowing the kool-aide and submitting his will to the collective. There is much more to this than 'maximizing personal betterment'.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47801 - 02/01/11 02:45 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Dan_Dread]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
Well, yeah of course. A satanist uses the system in a profitable way for him or herself. Thats the whole point and I have never said anything different.

That being said I do not see Satanism as political (just as little as I see the LHP as being political as some people here have tried to think of it). Therefore there should be no thought that system A is more Satanic than system B. The Satanist always uses the system.

Most Satanists seem to favor the current system which is democratic which also is very much against the elitist, individualist approach Satanists have. But Im guessing they think this system gives them the best chances to prosper. And if it truly does then they should fight for this system and not another.

Top
#47806 - 02/01/11 02:54 PM Re: red satanism [Re: TheInsane]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3773
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I for one, do not favour Democracy. I didn't drink THAT koole-aid, either. Functionally, getting ruled by a mob, or a set of tricksters using rhetoric to steer that mob, is really no different than a king or a dictator.

My personal political system of choice would be market anarchy, but being a realist I am not expecting to ever see one, nor will I be losing sleep over it.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47808 - 02/01/11 03:05 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Dan_Dread]
Dutch Satanist Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/19/10
Posts: 69
Loc: Delft, The Netherlands
I'm pretty much indifferent of politics, but if you would peg me down on it, you could call me a liberal constitutionalist. Even though I am not an American, I do agree with many things in the American constitution, especially the rules regarding seperation of religion and state, the right to bear arms, right to free speech, and the right of the state wrt nullification (which means that a state law will always overrule the federal law). And of course that the government shouldn't interfere with the personal lives of the people.

But to get back on topic; Marxism is in my opinion incompatible with Satanism. It's this whole collective thing and the eradication of individuality that doesn't jive with it. I'm not a number, I'm a free man!
_________________________
“There is a beast in man that needs to be excersised, not exorcised.”

Top
#47809 - 02/01/11 03:08 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Jason King]
Fnord Offline
senior member


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

This means that maximizing the self requires maximizing a larger field. Anarchy is an ultimate fail in this regard, unless you're that dude with the long ass beard trappin' rodents on his little island.


Anarchy does fail in the way that you've pointed out. Anarchy isn't the opposite position to Communism, though, and I think no one is proposing anarchy as a valid opponent position. I think those "communal" functions can best be addressed by the private sector with healthy competition as a way of controlling cost. An overbearing governmental entity helps no one but the overbearing governmental entity (see the streets of Cairo right now for evidence).

 Originally Posted By: Jason King
Understanding human nature as I do, I believe a collectivist model best maximizes the interests of the individual, and I see the alternatives as little more than aristocracies in disguise.


I can't go with you down that road. Collectivism alludes to some sort of rule system that would require people to share equally in everything (egalitarianism/collective need > the individual). This kind of thing stomps down on the individual via the method of leveling the playing field. This allows no place for excellence.

We do agree that governing bodies are a necessary thing. I think we disagree on the details.

I do thank you though for taking the argument on. Yours has been the most lucid and clear to date (which isn't surprising).
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47810 - 02/01/11 03:40 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fnord]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
I can't go with you down that road. Collectivism alludes to some sort of rule system that would require people to share equally in everything (egalitarianism/collective need > the individual). This kind of thing stomps down on the individual via the method of leveling the playing field. This allows no place for excellence.


I would not agree that collectivism alludes to a system that requires people to share equally in everything. Collectivism is a rather broad term that basically just means that the system puts more value in the goals of the collective than the goals of the individual. How the shares are divided can differ alot depending on the system.

Top
#47811 - 02/01/11 03:46 PM Re: red satanism [Re: TheInsane]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
Collectivism is a rather broad term that basically just means that the system puts more value in the goals of the collective than the goals of the individual.


That doesn't contradict anything I said.

 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
How the shares are divided can differ alot depending on the system.


Some supporting examples of this position would be...?
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47816 - 02/01/11 04:13 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fnord]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
How the shares are divided can differ alot depending on the system.


Some supporting examples of this position would be...?


Fascism. Collectivist but they never wanted to divide the shares equally. In fact one of the main streams of thought is class collaboration which essentially means that you keep people in different classes (i.e. different shares of the cake) and make them work together for the common good of the nation. The classes werent all static though. Fascism promotes, at least in theory, meritocracy.

Top
#47818 - 02/01/11 04:25 PM Re: red satanism [Re: TheInsane]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
I'm not going to argue those points specifically. Circling back to the discussion, which is whether Satanism is best served by leftward leaning politics, are you saying that Fascism is the best sort of government to support Satanic philosophy (realizing that it starts left and moves progressively to the right)?
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47822 - 02/01/11 04:59 PM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1096
Loc: Amarillo, TX
The popularity of fast food and Microsoft can be explained by one thing: affordability. Mass production of a bare-bones product is more accessible to a greater number of consumers. The alternative is that only the rich can afford computers and food. The fact that higher quality computers and food cost more should indicate to you that merit is rewarded; people are willing to pay more for a higher quality product.
_________________________
Texas is to 'Murika what 'Murika is to the rest of the world.

Top
#47824 - 02/01/11 05:10 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Jason King]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1096
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Jason King
Understanding human nature as I do, I believe a collectivist model best maximizes the interests of the individual, and I see the alternatives as little more than aristocracies in disguise.


Emphasis added. You've stated a position. Do you care to make the case for why you believe this?

I believe the failings of a collectivist model, as it interacts with human nature, have been made clear in practice. Communism fails to produce innovation, incentive, choice for consumers, and the competition that drives producers to maximum efficiency. Even ignoring corrupt and oppressive regimes, directed economies that were marginally successful and peaceful (such as Orderville) were eventually abandoned because they failed to satisfy those that worked within them.
_________________________
Texas is to 'Murika what 'Murika is to the rest of the world.

Top
#47826 - 02/01/11 05:20 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fnord]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
I'm not going to argue those points specifically. Circling back to the discussion, which is whether Satanism is best served by leftward leaning politics, are you saying that Fascism is the best sort of government to support Satanic philosophy (realizing that it starts left and moves progressively to the right)?


Thats a tough question. I am personally drawn to fascism (which I do not put as the same category national socialism just so we’re clear) but there are aspects of it that I dont like. And there are aspects I would worry about if it ever came to power again. Of course with systems that provide a strong regime it all comes down to what is prioritized and Satanism probably wouldn’t be one of those things in a fascist country. However I’d like to think that for me personally and for my country it would be good if we applied some of the positive aspects of fascism. I always saw egoism as different from selfishness where egoism provides a more intelligent approach and a wide perspective while selfishness is basically stupidity and only looking out for the short term (which most of the time will bite you in the ass in the end). So by changing some of the things I think needs to change around me I will also gain from it which is my approach to everything really. So while Fascism may not actively support Satanism (which system would?) I think some of its ideas would provide good change for my country and ultimately to myself as well.

Top
#47839 - 02/01/11 08:29 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2435
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
There have been several "-isms" floating around this thread, and that's part of the general problem:

Communism IsNotTheSameThingAs Marxism
Marxism INTSTA Marxism-Leninism
... INTSTA socialism
... INTSTA collectivism & etc.

To add to the confusion, there are:
Political
Economic
Class
Social
dimensions to all of these.

And modern morphs of ManyOfTheAbove as well.

During the Vietnam War I interrogated VC/NVA prisoners & defectors. Almost without exception none of them knew anything about Karl Marx or communist theory. To the extent they were politically motivated, they were simple Nationalists who wanted any & all non-Vietnamese the hell out of their country.

China used to be its own style of communism, which at first toyed with M-L but found Stalinism much simpler when you wanted to get things done in a hurry, which post-Stalin became Maoism [because Chairman M wasn't about to kiss the ass of a young newcomer like Khrushchev], which today is careening into a new type of state-capitalism that would have Karl M spinning in his grave.

So you've already got a very messy matrix here. If you try to relate this to "Satanism", you've got all the controversy over its definition, including the added religious/metaphysical dimension. So lotsa luck.

That said, I think Animal Mother came closest to a bull's eye when he said that "communism and Satanism are antithetical". Simply because in all its variations communism is a leveler of people while in all its variations Satanism is a distinguisher between them.

To understand this, it's most helpful to get a grip on "pure/original" Marxism, because once you do that, the various takeoffs on it are much easier to see. Then it's a simple matter of taking your personally-preferred definition of "Satanism" and comparing. So here goes:

[M.A.A., in the Ruby Tablet of Set, 10/1/1984]

The European industrial revolution, which created the conditions conducive to the onslaught of modern capitalist/labor/socialist developments, began in England at the start of the 19th century. The move towards industrialization spread to Belgium as a consequence of English investments in that country, and France and Germany experienced their major industrial booms between 1830 and 1870. Sweden, Denmark, and the low countries followed during the period 1871-1914, as did Austria, Bohemia, and Russia. By the period just prior to World War I, the principal countries which were still essentially pre-industrial were Hungary, Italy, and Spain.

During the 1870s a gradual transition could be seen from individual entrepreneurship to various forms of industrial combination and conglomeration. Government aid to such industrial enterprises was also a new development, consisting of a gradual liberalizing of corporate law and the instituting of protective tariffs in order to help protect budding national industries against competition from further-developed foreign ones. By the 1890s England, Belgium, and Holland were the only countries still observing a free-trade policy.

The consolidation and organization of business encouraged (by example) the organization of labor. Labor unions first began to experience general legal toleration in France in the period 1864-1884, in England in 1871-1875, and in Austria in the early 1870s. The first international labor organization, the International Workingmen’s Association (the “First International”) was founded in London in 1864 and existed until 1876, when it dissolved due to a split between the anarchist faction of Bakunin and the socialist/Marxist factions. In 1889 the Second International came into existence, but it did not survive World War I.

Marxism, sometimes called dialectic materialism to distinguish it from the dialectic idealism of Hegel, is a theory and practice of socialism including the labor theory of value, dialectic materialism, economic determination of human actions and institutions, the class struggle as the fundamental force in history, and a belief that increasing concentration of industrial control in the capitalist class and the consequent intensification of class antagonisms and of misery among the workers will lead to a revolutionary seizure of power by and the dictatorship of the proletariat and to the establishment of a classless society.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was strongly influenced by Hegel, but believed that Hegel had made a fundamental mistake in using nations as the basis for his dialectic and in relating it to a divine manifestation or purpose. Marx considered the dialectic to be a function of economic struggle between social classes, and he denied the existence of any supernatural intelligence, calling all religion “the opiate of the masses”.

According to Marx, one cannot choose one’s social class. Rather one is forced into a particular class by the forces of economics, particularly the means of production.

As more and more economic power becomes concentrated in the hands of the upper class (the bourgeoisie), the middle class will disappear, leaving only a large, impoverished working class (the proletariat) opposed to the bourgeoisie. Eventually the strain between these two classes will lead to revolution, resulting in a classless, utopian society. [“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”] Marx called this end result socialism, but it was ultimately called communism. As a general rule, “socialism” means ownership of the means of production by the state, while “communism” means ownership collectively by the proletariat.

Essential to Marxism are the concepts labor theory of value and theory of surplus value.

The labor theory of value suggests that the value of an item results from “the quantity of labor necessary for its production in a given state of society, under certain social average conditions of production, with a given social average intensity, and average skill of the labor employed”. Members of the proletariat “sell” their labor-power (the ability to labor for a specific period) to employers from the capitalist bourgeoisie, but they are not paid the entire value of their labor. The part that is not paid to the laborer is called the surplus value. The capitalist keeps this surplus value as his profit.

As smaller competitors are driven out of business, the capitalist faces increasing pressure from large competitors. Since the cost of producing similar goods is more or less the same, trying to undersell competitors is not effective in the long run. The only way the capitalist can increase his profit is to pay the workers less and less. As the worker realizes that he is being exploited, he will develop class consciousness and ultimately revolt.

As economic forces and not ethical values determine relationships in a capitalist society, Marx charges that capitalism dehumanizes mankind, causing insecurity, fear, and self-alienation. Unable to find value in other humans, victims of self-alienation find it in produced goods - a phenomenon which Marx calls fetishism (love of possessions).

Marxism began the transition into what is called Marxism-Leninism at the turn of the century. Lenin’s “What Is To Be Done?” pamphlet was published in 1902. Lenin’s form of communism argued for a speeding-up of the Marxist process via a “dictatorship of the proletariat”, as well as for establishment of a revolutionary socialist state prior to the utopian state of pure communism.

Marx’ utopian society would require perfection in its citizens. This contrasts with most other political philosophies, which are geared to deal with enduring imperfections in human relationships (hatred, greed, selfishness, sloth, power-lust, etc.).

Marx, like Hegel, based his ideas on a necessary, inevitable force of history. Thus communism would eventually come no matter what capitalism tries to do to stop it. The other side of this coin is that there is nothing would-be communists can do to speed it up; their society must first evolve to the “last stages” of capitalism. The first country to embrace communism, Russia, was not in an advanced state of capitalism - nor have been the other countries which have become communist. Lenin modified Marx (“Marxism-Leninism”) with the concept of the state-embodied dictatorship of the proletariat: the running of the country by a communist party elite until its economic systems could be advanced to full communism. The state apparat would then “wither away”. It is noteworthy that power is addictive, and no “temporary” communist governments have shown any signs of withering away.

Marx conceived communism as supranational, assuming the nation-state system to be a device for economic and class inequality and exploitation. In their effort to justify their continued control, however, modern communist governments have strengthened their nationalism.

Marxism has been corrupted by its use as an ideological slogan in many countries and systems which were completely foreign to Marx’ original analysis. This leads us to a certain contempt for “Marxists” today, since they seem to be emotionally, not rationally motivated. This should not necessarily reflect upon Marx himself. A precise Marxist would say that the economic polarization forces which Marx identified have been delayed by deficit financing, compromises with the pre-revolutionary proletariat (unions, benefits, unemployment compensation, etc.), but that these are all merely postponements of a final reckoning.

... There, wasn't that simple?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#47843 - 02/01/11 09:30 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



(Dr. Aquino, have only just noticed your post. I thought I would add mine anyway. Hopefully will bear some use for members)


About six months or ago I sat down and read The Age of Turbulence by Alan Greenspan. This book is basically an autobiography and a pretty good one, though quite dry and technical at times.

I was interested in a lot of what Greenspan had to say, particularly in regards to a trip he made to the Soviet Union at the invitation of the Soviet government during the later Gorbachev years.

Apparently the purpose of the trip was to provide educational opportunities to the Soviets regarding capitalism and capitalist economics.

Greenspan mentions that he was allowed to visit the room where the whole Soviet communist economy was co-ordinated and directed from. Unfortunately I do not have the book to hand right now, so I cannot recall the name of the room, specific part of the Soviet bureaucracy responsible for working there or the exact location of the room.

However, I was struck by the notion of it – the whole Soviet economy being run out of one room and we are talking about an enormous country with a huge population.

With a totalitarian centrally planned economy like this you would have to determine the goods and services needed by the entire population and then co-ordinate efforts and arrange for their production, transportation and consumption etc. on a national scale. Everybody in this type of system has a more or less assigned role and they follow what are supposed to be carefully thought out quotas and goals, based on genuine intelligence/information, in order to complete their small part in the process, so the overall goal can be met.

I will provide another post here once I have my hands on Greenspan’s book again because Greenspan’s perception and thoughts regarding this system and its inefficiencies and problems etc. are valuable, but basically I think that two tentative and yet reasonable conclusions can be posed with regards to this type of economic system and Satanism:

1. A communist system is intended to remove social classes and forms of inequity and domination from a society, but this is not in fact the case when one moves from theory to the reality of it in practice. The two great classes existing under capitalism may have been removed by communist revolution, but classes themselves are not eliminated, they are merely re-constituted in differing forms in the new society. The rule of the bureaucracy and the party leadership takes the place of the bourgeoisie and its state. Forms of hierarchy, stratification, might is right, and top to bottom power relations still constitute the basic components of the society. Satan as the symbol of the peoples struggle for justice against the bourgeoisie is inappropriate, as this Satan never actually acquires “his” victory once communism is installed. Might is right wins out here yet again.
2. Pretty much all of the Marxist concepts, such as substructure/superstructure, mode of production, alienation, the commodity, labour power, historical materialism etc. are all concepts which essentially see the individual and his/her “subjectivity” as an effect of something larger and something which the individual has little control over – he/she is a piece in a machine, or an element in a system, or a victim of historical or economic forces. Even the means of transcending, placating, and/or removing this so called evil system and actualising or realising the end point of the dialectic involve the individual entering and acting within yet another system, whether it is the union movement, or the party, or within industrial armies etc. Individualism is downplayed at every instance and anti-individualism is carried right into the heart of the communist system itself via the strict arrangements in place regarding production and consumption and ownership.

I am not sure how a relationship between Satanism and Communism can be maintained. There is no way the class struggle and its goals can be related to Satanism as far as I can see.

Top
#47844 - 02/01/11 10:16 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
Thanks for being my judge but I believe I am just fine without the reading since I have already done so. Just because I don't debate all the bullshit online doesn't mean I don't know anything. By they way I don't remember asking for anyone's opinion but thanks for throwing it out there. Your comment had absolutely nothing to do with the thread by the way. Maybe you could use some help on that. Just returning the favor. \:\)

Edited by manofsteel (02/01/11 10:17 PM)
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#47868 - 02/02/11 07:08 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
 Quote:
I believe in totalitarian governments.


Ok, so given that the world is filled with so many wonderfully totalitarian govts why do you not move to one of these places? I am sure you would have no problem emigrating to North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela or Iran.

And, you still haven't answered the original question! Allow me to restate and clarify it:

In PRACTICE all such systems Maxism/Leninism/Communism and all similar communitarian systems (regardless of theoretical ideals) all ultimately end up forcing the individual to be subordinate to the State. Given that Satanism is about aggrandizing the individual, how is Satanism the least bit compatible with such systems?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#47877 - 02/02/11 11:13 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
Under those systems, there are still way to "get ahead" and "get revenge against enemies," you just do it through the state instead of economically. Instead of boycotting someone who pisses you off (as under capitalism), in communism, you join the communist party, and ruin their life that way.

Also I think a black market could benefit during communism. And if you do not get caught with your crimes, wouldn't that be Darwinism? I am not saying that I take individualism as far as some (Lavey influenced) satanists.

Top
#47886 - 02/02/11 01:16 PM Re: red satanism [Re: XiaoGui17]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Microsoft is more popular than Apple because of affordability maybe. But that doesn't explain how Microsoft's OS is more popular than the more stable and free OS, with free top software, that is any flavour of Linux.
Top
#47888 - 02/02/11 01:44 PM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Okay, so reading the comments I've collected some conclusions from what others have written.

"Merit" doesn't actually mean merit - having enough merit and cunning to exploit those stupider than yourself is sufficient, and that degree of merit on an objective scale can even be terribly mediocre.

Personal power isn't determined by the system of managing entire populations, every system that exists to date permits aristocracies that do not correlate to merit, and individuals with determination, will and merit can find ways to prevail.

Personally I can and do describe myself as a leftist. If I am to go after power, great power is often largely a function of it being lent it by others.

I don't agree that criminals should be granted a warm cot, three wholesome meals a day, a gym, free educational opportunities and sub-minimum wage job opportunities - while law abiding people with mental illness or hard luck end up on the street, starved, stinking of filth and often dead from exposure. -Too fucking lazy to kill or rape anyone? Is that their lack of merit justifying their killing?

Top
#47906 - 02/02/11 05:53 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
 Quote:

Under those systems, there are still way to "get ahead"...


And you base this on what? First hand experience, extensive research, or wishful thinking?

You really ought to study the history of Communism. My read is that if offers nothing that I would want to be a part of. From people I have personally known who lived under such systems, none want to go back to it.

One of the problem with people who think like you do, is you get a romanticized vision of the perfect Communist State without factoring in human nature. Human nature tends to gum up the works in these systems. You also seem to think that you will be included in, or rise to the top of such a system. What makes you think that you will be any more successful in a totalitarian State than you are right now? Maybe you will be a loser there too?

Success in life, in large part, depends on the ability to network and build alliances. This is a fundamental human dynamic. Many otherwise smart but socially inept people cry sourgrapes when others, who are not as smart as them, but more socially adept, rise to the top of society while they languish in the doldrums. Ever put any critical thought into why this happens?

Again, I will offer you people yet another public service:

Check out "The Millionaire Mind" by Thomas J. Stanley. He explains, based on statistical research, that millionaires tend not to be the people with the highest IQ or best test scores, but rather people with the greatest social acumen.

Historically, in totalitarian States, the people who rise to the top are those who lead a cult of personality and those who know how to network their way though the system. People who rose to the top of NAZI Party or USSR Communist Party were not the best and brightest apparatchiks or govt functionaries, but rather possessed the same social skills they would need to succeed in any human culture.

In other words, perhaps the reason you people can't make it in the world has nothing to do with the system you are living in. Maybe YOU are the reason you can't get ahead?

The most horrifying most people will ever learn is just how much of their own life they truly control. Once this revelation is made, suddenly YOU become responsible for your own life and can't blame YOUR problems on some external boogieman.

In life, it is going to rain, the question is weather you will get an umbrella or even leave the house at all. At least under a capitalist system I have more choices on what I can wear outside and where I can go once I get there.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#47946 - 02/03/11 07:21 AM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1096
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: myk5
Microsoft is more popular than Apple because of affordability maybe. But that doesn't explain how Microsoft's OS is more popular than the more stable and free OS, with free top software, that is any flavour of Linux.


That's a matter of convenience. Microsoft computers come with a pre-packaged, ready-to-go version of Windows already on their computers. Linux requires a certain degree of background knowledge and effort on the part of the user, and most would rather have that taken care of for them.
_________________________
Texas is to 'Murika what 'Murika is to the rest of the world.

Top
#47951 - 02/03/11 07:43 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
Oh lawd....

Well for one, the only way a person *might* be able to get ahead in a communist state is if they were in the top 5% of those who controlled the wealth, goods distribution, or just had the right connections.

Skim a bit off the top and you'd be "ahead" of the poor proletariats, but that would only make you King Shit on Turd Mountain. "Oooooh, meatl has an extra stick of butter and a tin of coffee! He is GOD." Of course, you could use these goods to trade for other services or favors, and while you might end up as a small-scale Grand Poobah, you'd never be wining and dining with the privileged classes. Think: the spacious Waldsiedlung housing compound of DDR Politburo. Or the Chinese communist elite.

Either way, you'd certainly have a great deal less as a commie GP than you do now, under this oppression of Western capitalism.

Do you think you'd be allowed to surf the net freely under a communist regime? That you could post on a Satanic forum (even under a proxy) and not set off some red flags?

Stop kidding yourself, your idealistic/romantic view of this system is as bad as the Left believing that by simply electing Obama into office, he could turn our country back into the bright shiny jewel of the West that it used to be. Or that by re-electing Republicans back into office, that would somehow fix everything that the Democrats mucked up.

Have you never read George Orwell's "1984"? That's a pretty accurate depiction of a totalitarian/communist controlled state.
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#47952 - 02/03/11 07:45 AM Re: red satanism [Re: XiaoGui17]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
It's less true today, new computers are shipped with linux pre-installed, it's not that it's less convenient, it has more to do with something called....marketing.

Capitalism is a paradigm where the first person to engineer the stupid, wins! Engineering the stupid is largely a capacity of already having money to command the attention of as many people as possible. This is not a function of empowering merit, it is a function of advertising.

This is also why politics no longer rewards the capable. People support the best known 'brand' because it is the most familiar brand, because it has more money to back its promotion than any other brand.

This has something to do with how human being arrives at an opinion. Human beings have many reason to have specific opinions, but peahps the most important reason is that the opinion seves to make them ACCEPTABLE to others. And how you best know what the right opinion is, is because your neighbors share it, or at least most of them do. This is why political parties have districts and states, this is why if you advertise heavily you can simulate the sense of a community standard and thereby control a populace. This is also why American news offers the least real coverage of any news in the world - owned and controlled by Global Corporations with interests to protect as it is.

So that's a snap shot of one way power works. Notice, perhaps merit was present in constructing this reality, but what there is supports an American class of privilege rather than one of merit.

Top
#47953 - 02/03/11 07:59 AM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
And just fyi, if you are looking for actual capability of rising through class by means of merit alone, USA is very poor compared to Brasil. Numbers don't lie. USA has a class structure based on birth and not merit.
Top
#47997 - 02/03/11 07:12 PM Re: red satanism [Re: myk5]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
 Quote:

Capitalism is a paradigm where the first person to engineer the stupid, wins!


Hmm, would you care to clue me into any great invention coming from a Communist state? What great products came out of the 'ol USSR?

Would you want to use a State produced OS? A State produced computer? How about a State produced car?

The USSR had reputation of making absolute crap commercial products. The only great invention to ever come out of the USSR was the Avtomat Kalashnikova Model of 1947 - the AK-47 and it was invented by one man. Most nearly every significant invention of the modern age has come from US with the CAPITALIST (although horribly over taxed) Europe and Japan coming in a distant second and third.

Again, Communism (in it's many forms) stifles creativity, innovation, and personal initiative. Of course, for people who already have limited creativity and personal initiative, Communism actually seems like a good deal.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#47998 - 02/03/11 07:48 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
Gattamelata Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/23/10
Posts: 43

The nuclear power plant? The cosmodrome/spaceport? The satellite? The list of inventions when it comes to space tech alone is quite extensive.

In the fields of mathematics, physics, materials science, chemistry etc the Soviet-funded research institutes achieved cutting edge results.

Well, all this in despite of more than because of Communism, but still..
_________________________
Society : an inferno of saviors. —Emil Cioran

Top
#47999 - 02/03/11 08:13 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Gattamelata]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
And the people around Chernobyl are sssssoooooooooo proud.

"Natasha!"
"Yes, Boris?"
"I must say, you have a remarkable glow about you today."
"Thank you darlink! I was scavenging for food around the reactor core this morning."
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48003 - 02/03/11 08:34 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Gattamelata]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
Ah, hey little buddy, nuclear power in an American invention. Ever hear of the Chicago Pile-1?

But yes, I will give Ivan the first satellite. Good job. They made the first satellite, and Khrushchev only had to starve about 5 million 'comrades' to fund the operation. After all, who needs food when you at tin ball that goes 'beeb'?!

Why, to put the first man in space the USSR only had to starve about 10 million. Remember, one man is a tragedy, millions are just statistics!

Of course, America pretty much dominated space after that - put a man on the moon, created a satellite based global communications network, and gave the world GPS - while at the same time giving the average American the highest standard of living in the world. Yep, that evil Capitalism again!

I must tell you, I tried to do a little google search for 'Soviet patents' and 'Soviet inventions', and I had a hard time finding much in the way of new technologies. There seems to be no Soviet equivalent to INVENTING the light bulb, telephone, computer, internal combustion engine, the solid state transistor and semi-conductor, or any other invention that we associate with modernity. However, I do find the Soviet use of cadaveric blood transfusion intriguing but I do not think it could ever see much use beyond the AWESOME Soviet healthcare system.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#48006 - 02/03/11 09:22 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
Gattamelata Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/23/10
Posts: 43
 Originally Posted By: Fist
Ah, hey little buddy, nuclear power in an American invention. Ever hear of the Chicago Pile-1?


True - but the world's first nuclear power plant, viz. a nuclear power plant designed to generate electricity for a power grid - was a Soviet one, developed by Igor Kurchatov.

 Originally Posted By: Fist
But yes, I will give Ivan the first satellite. Good job. [...] Of course, America pretty much dominated space after that - put a man on the moon, created a satellite based global communications network, and gave the world GPS [...]


Well, as I mentioned, the list of Soviet space tech inventions is quite impressive. One can mention such applications as: the orbital space rocket, the space capsule, the space probe, the reentry capsule, the space suit, the plasma propulsion engine, the proton rocket launch system, the lander spacecraft, the Soyuz rocket (the most frequently used and generally considered the most reliable launch vehicle in the world to this day), the orbital module system, the automated space docking system, the space exploration rover, the space station (and later the modular space station), the Hall effect thruster system, the unmanned resupply spacecraft et cetera.
_________________________
Society : an inferno of saviors. —Emil Cioran

Top
#48008 - 02/03/11 10:03 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Gattamelata]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
You know, I am not sure I haul out Russian reactor design as a monument to Soviet invention.

Never the less, this thread continues to leave me with unanswered questions:

1. Why did the USSR go on to lose the 'space race'? Why did they not dominate space in the way the US has?

2. Why doesn't Russia enjoy economic success with it's products outside of rather limited military sales?

3. Why do Westerners wax romantic about the Communist State while the people who actually live there die trying to get out?

4. How come the above Westerners don't simply stop complaining about Capitalism and move to the Workers Paradise of their choice? I am sure you could get a nice job in China reclaiming the lead from old car batteries.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#48016 - 02/04/11 12:12 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2435
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Fist
1. Why did the USSR go on to lose the 'space race'? Why did they not dominate space in the way the US has?

They actually won the space-race in all firsts except for manned Moon-landing: first satellite, first animal (Laika), first man, first woman, first to land unmanned probes on the Moon, and first to place nuclear & thermonuclear warheads on an ICBM (the SS-6 & SS-7 "Sapwood").

Once the USA landed Apollo-11 on the Moon, the USSR didn't bother and just went back to orbital stuff.

To some extent all this was determined by who brought home which German rocket scientists at the end of WW2. Also the USA was better at miniaturization, so we didn't need such big boosters. The Soviets compensated by building gigantic boosters. So we had certain types of advantage & vice-versa.

 Quote:
2. Why doesn't Russia enjoy economic success with it's products outside of rather limited military sales?

It went from Czarist feudalism to forced communism to amateur capitalism. And it was never comfortable being an international trading player in the way that Europe and Japan & now China are. Russians tend to be very Russia-oriented, as Napoleon & Hitler learned the hard way.

 Quote:
3. Why do Westerners wax romantic about the Communist State while the people who actually live there die trying to get out?

This question is at least 20 years out-of-date.

But the USA had a love-hate relationship with the USSR all the way along. During WW2 Stalin was "Uncle Joe" and our good buddy. And generally Russians have liked the USA except when we've flipflopped them into "the Enemy".

 Quote:
4. How come the above Westerners don't simply stop complaining about Capitalism and move to the Workers Paradise of their choice? I am sure you could get a nice job in China reclaiming the lead from old car batteries.

China is becoming more capitalist all the time while the USA is becoming more socialist. If you wait long enough, you can get your car-battery job right here.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48027 - 02/04/11 03:14 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Gattamelata]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Gattamelata
Well, all this in despite of more than because of Communism, but still..


I don't think so. With a planned economy and a strong rule it is easier to put your forces behind certain projects like the space project in this case. I would say that one of the reasons they did succeed was because of the way the country was run.

Still, this doesnt mean I'm a communist but some things are easier to accomplish with different ways to rule and govern a country.

Top
#48032 - 02/04/11 06:43 AM Re: red satanism [Re: TheInsane]
Gattamelata Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/23/10
Posts: 43
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
 Originally Posted By: Gattamelata
Well, all this in despite of more than because of Communism, but still..


I don't think so. With a planned economy and a strong rule it is easier to put your forces behind certain projects like the space project in this case. I would say that one of the reasons they did succeed was because of the way the country was run.

Still, this doesnt mean I'm a communist but some things are easier to accomplish with different ways to rule and govern a country.



If we look at the Soviet space program, it actually had an interesting design that turned out to be highly efficient. Unlike the USA, which set up NASA as a single coordinating agency, the USSR operated a fierce meritocratic system of sorts where different teams did not cooperate but instead competed against each other in cut-throat fashion in order to deliver the best results.

Of course the ’unlimited funds’ provided by a planned economy contributed, but it does not give a full explanation on why the Russians achieved such success. As for such an explanation, I would not focus much on the ideology of ’Communism’ though. When this ideology interfered in the fields of science it mostly did more harm than good.

Bear in mind that the fields of hard science (with certain notable exceptions) were the least censored and therefore the most free disciplines one could pursue within the Soviet system. Add to that the long tradition of Russian science regarding space exploration and related subjects, pioneered so early as in Imperial Russia (see Konstantin Tsiolkovsky) and later developed up through the 20’s and 30’s, where Soviet rocket technology in the 30’s was comparable to Germany - before Stalin’s purges created a major set back for the Russian scientific pursuits. A set back that healed rapidly though, as captured German scientists where set to work after the end of WWII and a change in Stalin’s policy resulted in the release of the remaining elite of scientific personnel from the Gulag camps.
_________________________
Society : an inferno of saviors. —Emil Cioran

Top
#48070 - 02/04/11 07:30 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
MuppetSlayer Offline
Meq - Banned
stranger


Registered: 04/27/10
Posts: 23
Loc: UK
Jason King gave a good explanation, but I think the attempt to synthesize Satanic and Leftist thought raises some interesting philosophical points.

I am not an elitist. I am not an egalitarian. I consider both a form of rigid overgeneralized thinking. In reality, one cooperates when its in one's best interest, and one competes when it's in one's best interest. When you compete, you apply statification and merit. When you cooperate, you get down (or up) to the other person's level in a quasi-egalitarian fashion. This does not imply equality on a philosophical level. But it does mean it's often in one's interest to be civil and not be a dick. I have good friends of different socio-economic class, and don't hold it against a person for being a prole if they also happen to be an exceptional friend to me.

The Satanic Reds have a different understanding to human nature to LaVeyan Satanism. Both start with human beings as animals. Both consider the happiness of the individual. The leftist Satanists, however, stress human beings as SOCIAL animals, and consider humans as inescapably interdependent. They use social science and academic philosophy to understand the human animal, instead of discredited theories such as social Darwinism. This leads to different political views, such as the view that state welfare improves the happiness of a nation, and thus gives an individual a better stab at happiness.

Humans are social animals. However selfish we may be, helping out the vulnerable in need often feels good. We may repress it, but it's a hardwired instinct as much as sex - and a Darwinian explanation can help to explain why this helped and helps our species flourish.

But here's the rub with socialism. It is not 'free love', where individuals willingly help each other out of a symbiotic sense of mutually satisfying good will. It's coerced sharing. People are forced to share. And what is worse, this is a "one size fits all" approach to sharing. Individuals who are naturally more generous lose their sense of generosity after being coerced. But individuals who are naturally selfish will understandably resent being forced to play the role of altruist when it is not in their nature to do so. (As many on this forum will no doubt relate to!)

Here my own views are more in line with classical Epicureanism. Communes can work on a small scale, as the Epicureans practiced to some extent. Epicureanism focussed on the happiness of the individual, and saw this kind of friendship as central to the good life (compare Epicurean theory with Maslow's hierarchy of needs). However, these relationships must be entered into voluntarily, and by mutual informed consent. The Epicureans were basically a group of friends who chose to live together and share their belongings as a means to their individual happiness, as each saw it. In this sense, they were true egoists.

MuppetSlayer
_________________________
muppet (ˈmʌpɪt)

—n (slang) (UK)
An ignorant person who has no idea about anything.

Top
#48085 - 02/05/11 04:39 AM Re: red satanism [Re: MuppetSlayer]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1096
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: MuppetSlayer
When you cooperate, you get down (or up) to the other person's level in a quasi-egalitarian fashion...But it does mean it's often in one's interest to be civil and not be a dick...The leftist Satanists, however, stress human beings as SOCIAL animals, and consider humans as inescapably interdependent.


I've never understood the idea that cooperation entails egalitarianism. People can cooperate within hierarchy; indeed, the most effective multi-person operations are coordinated because of leadership and direction. Too many people trying to plan something together end up with a hopeless mess. While humans can work together to realize a vision, the vision itself is often the design of a single competent individual.

 Originally Posted By: MuppetSlayer

They use social science and academic philosophy to understand the human animal, instead of discredited theories such as social Darwinism.


I'm not sure how social Darwinism is a discredited theory. There have been misapplications of it and misunderstandings of how it is meant to function, but that doesn't mean that the theory itself is flawed.


Edited by XiaoGui17 (02/05/11 04:40 AM)
Edit Reason: typo
_________________________
Texas is to 'Murika what 'Murika is to the rest of the world.

Top
#55846 - 06/14/11 05:02 PM Re: red satanism [Re: XiaoGui17]
assault_ninja Offline
Banned--Idiot
stranger


Registered: 06/14/11
Posts: 36
I've joined this forum just to read Dr. Aquino postings and never really planned to post anything, but then I saw this topic.

You see, the relationship between individualism and communism is not as simple as it might seem at the first glance.

There's a novel called What Is to Be Done? by Nikolai Chernyshevsky. This book in some ways predates Nietzche, Ayn Rand and LaVey. Chernyshevsky believed in the same rational selfishness, that was later championed by Ayn Rand and LaVey. His characters are downright Randian, he even has his own John Galt. But Chernyshevsky was also an utopian socialist.

So here's the thing, this book was really influential in the revolutionary circles at that time. Lenin particulary loved it, at some point he read it twice during the same summer. Some historian, don't remember the name, even stated that What Is to Be Done? did more for the revolution than Das Kapital.

Also, Ayn Rand was probably directly influenced by it, but AFAIK never acknowledged that. Of course, that would somewhat undermine her political philosophy.

There's also a case to be made about it influencing Nietzsche, since he was a big fan of Dostoevsky and attacking Chernyshevsky's ideas is pretty much the main theme of Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground.

Top
#56271 - 06/26/11 09:37 PM Re: red satanism [Re: assault_ninja]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I would like to point out that I am apolitical and only believe in the will to power and of it's expression through abstract causal forms.

The many talk much about equality, but equality of what sort? Equality implies *worth*, so in order for man to be regarded as equal or unequal, there must be a comparative base of evaluation whilst seeing eye to eye as to what kind, what sort of equality is being talked about.

A view.

Equality? Surely we, as humans, share base instincts, correct? If this is so, then we could make example of *fear*. Insofar as we all share a reaction to fear, whether a passive, or an active reaction, and with equality in mind, such a distinction is not as important as the common ground of which fear is found to be felt by all. And in this way are we equal? If this is affirmed as so, as a base nature being shared equally among humans, then what is there to differentiate us other than the expression of the individual will?

Surely it is the turbulent scales of nature that tips the weight of events against that of the will? In this sense we are all equally exposed to nature and causality (and of eachothers doings, impositions of wills). If such is so, then what is there to differentiate us other than the weight, the mettle of the individual will?

There a man with a will as whimsical of a feather blowing aimlessly in the wind of whims and influences of others, then is he equal to a man who's will is of the blackest iron deeply inherited in the earth? I would say yes he is. Why? Because the weak justify the strong and this "is" the balance and equality.

Are these two seemingly different men in fact equal but learned to respond to the ways of the world very differently? If this is so and man is equal with what he is faced with by nature, then I assert that it is up to the individual to do with what he has inherited to the best of his ability, and likewise if he desires to be wasteful of himself that is down to the individual, all have equal choice but the power of the will decides who goes first, both in life and death.

I ask: Why, if men are of equal worth, would one care if the other were to triumph where he would not? Surely there will be a reserve of future triumph for the one who has not yet finished expressing his will? "ah, you have triumphed where I have not, I shall be rest assured that I am still equal to you, simply having not put my will to it yet" I present this to mock the powerless and the fallacy of equality.

We are all equally set before the limitations imposed by the hylic civilisation. I propose that the greater the weight of events, the greater the will of the individual must be to survive on his own as if he were to tip on the scales with the rest of the beast of burden, his will is then not his own. There would be no opposition to balance against his will.

The fear of socio-anarchy can be observed in the animal kingdom and our own civilisation, and it is this anticipation of uncertainty that causes us to act pre-emptively towards gaining power. In fact there is no difference between man except for his manner of expression of the will to power and his accomplishments of it, some express directly through overpowering imposition of the will, whilst others, weaker, spread thinly in statute, are predisposed to express the disguised forms of the will to power, having no choice.

If one can see he is being subjugated passive aggressively then why not visit that clandestine subjugator around his equal share of imposition, directly? And surely the weak will act surprised and act with further attempts at moral malfeasance. If we look at Socialism and Communism as both ways of distributing goods and services, then surely the strong in nature's eyes (predators who live bare minimum) have no weight against the mass of human cattle. People don't like to play fair, they are either good at pretending whilst totally ignoring the rules, and both systems only work when everyone follows the same rules. So a Satanist would simply adapt to any political system and express the will to power either directly or in disguised forms, with only himself, his personal goals, within his short life in mind.

I hear talk that displays a genuine mundane envelopment in politics such as "Socialism is incompatible with Satanism". Does an evil, sinister or otherwise truly transgressive individual give a rat's ass about the causal form he is exploiting to exemplify his own personal honour through expressing the will to power.

"But it's not all about the will to power" yes, I'm afraid it is, and if you want to pretend humaneness is not subtle, disguised powerplay, then you aren't adept at how the human species works and are caught up in the abstraction of the mundanes.

The wolf doesn't care how many sheep there are, or what the fuck they're doing, as long as they're being sheep.
_________________________


Top
#56662 - 07/09/11 05:07 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Hegesias]
Aries9 Offline
temp ban
stranger


Registered: 05/14/11
Posts: 11
My first post, so I'll take this moment to say hello and now I shall comment on this.

I don't think you can say Satanism and any governing philosophy aren't compatible. By that token if we lived in a Marxist society one could no longer practice Satanism or be considered a Satanist?

You can practice Satanism in any system, and it will always be a superior philosophy. As for myself I've come to the view that all the systems are similar (identical as far as my views go) as they are all monetary based and corrupt. The only difference in those two factors is to what degree and by who's hand.

I offer a question,

Do most Satanists feel the need to seek monetary or social status to be effective at what he or she does or to find happiness in life?

I can say I do not.


Edited by Aries9 (07/09/11 05:08 PM)

Top
#56666 - 07/09/11 05:43 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Aries9]
assault_ninja Offline
Banned--Idiot
stranger


Registered: 06/14/11
Posts: 36
Actually there's two different questions to discuss here:
A. Can a satanist live within communist of other totalitarian society and exploit it?
B. Can a satanist honestly believe in Marxism, communism, etc?

Maybe even three:
C. Can a satanist struggle for Marxist or communist society, while not believing in it's ideals, just because he thinks that he can exploit it better than a capitalist society?

Top
#56690 - 07/10/11 04:06 PM Re: red satanism [Re: assault_ninja]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
A satanist can live in any sort of society, the rules only apply to him if he believes they do. But can a satanist truly believe in Marxism or communism? No, these political ideologies are at odds with the satanic view. Enforced equality is not what I'd call a preference. The third question would require me to ask why he would even bother? If exploitation is the sole purpose, why would anyone waste time promoting something they'd not see happen during their lifetime? If exploitation is the game, would you care about the future or its generations?

D.

Top
#57891 - 08/01/11 08:48 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Fist]
Ophelia Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/01/11
Posts: 9
Loc: Portland, ME
Personally I don't see a problem with integrating Marxism with Satanism. If that is what you wish to do. I have seen Satanists mix Neo-Nazism with Satanism, I don't particularly agree with that stance because Neo-Nazism requires one to obedient and follow Nazi tenets which isn't very Satanic after all ;\)
However, I integrate feminism with my Satanic path in such a way that fits me. Maybe you can do the same that would work for you.
_________________________
Yahweh is the only god I would have a party with.

Top
#57896 - 08/01/11 10:44 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
a. don Offline
pledge


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 60
You must take into consideration that in Satanism private property is cherished, that everyone get's what they deserve, that is, work for. Whereas in Communism, private property is abolished, everyone gets everything, not necessarily that they deserve it (although ideally, people would deserve it supposing everyone is a hard-working proletariat).

The parallel, maybe, is in how Satanism (LaVey-oriented) and Marxism demolish all forms of religious thought. But they are two things totally different and only this in common.

Top
#57897 - 08/01/11 10:48 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Ophelia]
a. don Offline
pledge


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 60
Marxism requires one to follow Marxist tenets. What would be the difference?? The idea is that Satanism is oriented for individualism, and Marxism for collectivism. Crucial difference.
Top
#57907 - 08/02/11 02:38 PM Re: red satanism [Re: a. don]
Ophelia Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/01/11
Posts: 9
Loc: Portland, ME
I don't agree with this 'Red Satanism' either. It isn't Satanism when someone integrates another system in it that directly opposes what the philosophy is about (and that includes Nazism). But I am not going to tell a person what to do either. I think it is acceptable to use some tenets in one's Satanic path but not the complete system itself. Mixing Marxism into Satanism in it's entirety doesn't make sense.
_________________________
Yahweh is the only god I would have a party with.

Top
#58764 - 09/01/11 09:26 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Ophelia]
Liane Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/21/11
Posts: 29
Loc: Germany
I just finished reading "Marxism unmasked - From delusion to destruction" by Ludwig von Mises. This gives you an interesting insight and facts about marxist philosophy.
http://www.fee.org/pdf/books/MarxismUnmasked.pdf

Sadly, in Germany the socialist/communist/marxist community is going to be very popular.


Enjoy!
_________________________
:) Autonomy without the State

Top
#58877 - 09/06/11 02:07 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Liane]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
I lived in red communism and I 'red communism' in general is nothing to do with Satanism... Communist’s ideology was Atheism, even religious or cult Atheism... In every town we had Lenin monument, every school has pioneers, in every workplace was activists and propaganda was everywhere.

I am happy that Baltic States get rid of SU and especially from red socialistic and communistic ideology.
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#58981 - 09/08/11 05:19 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Latvian]
Youngsilver Offline
lurker


Registered: 09/07/11
Posts: 1
 Originally Posted By: Latvian
I lived in red communism and I 'red communism' in general is nothing to do with Satanism... Communist’s ideology was Atheism, even religious or cult Atheism... In every town we had Lenin monument, every school has pioneers, in every workplace was activists and propaganda was everywhere.

I am happy that Baltic States get rid of SU and especially from red socialistic and communistic ideology.

Top
#59002 - 09/09/11 11:59 AM Re: red satanism [Re: Youngsilver]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
You right, Baltic states are out of SU and we have religious and political freedom and ourdays society in all 3 Baltic states - Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia accept 'Universal declaration of human rights' (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/)

It will be nice, that You, Youngsilver will introuduce yourself in New Members Introduction!
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#59207 - 09/18/11 10:48 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
Ashley Corinne Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/18/11
Posts: 36
Loc: Utah
That's an interesting idea, but Satanism and Marxism are diametrically opposed in many ways. First of all, Marxism can by all accounts be considered a Right-Hand Path philosophy--it embraces charity for the poor and mercy for the weak and infirm, which are not necessarily values that Satanism supports. Marxism is closer to Christianity than Satanism. I'm not exactly trying to shoot down the idea of Red Satanism, but in a practical sense I don't think it would work. It would be like "Satanic Buddhism".
_________________________
~Ashley

Top
#59243 - 09/19/11 03:09 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Ashley Corinne]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: Ashley Corinne
I'm not exactly trying to shoot down the idea of Red Satanism, but in a practical sense I don't think it would work.
K. Marx published many books during his lifetime, and two are quite important - 'The Communist Manifesto' and 'Capital'... Beautiful ideas, but in reality it doesn't work so brilliant...

I've born and lived in SU, even my father, who is free-thinker is born in 1944 (too in Soviet Union) and spent whole his life in Marxism system - communism, socialism... I discussed with him about red Satanism and he agree me - it's good theory, but in practice it will not work...
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#59310 - 09/20/11 08:42 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Ashley Corinne]
Liane Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/21/11
Posts: 29
Loc: Germany
 Originally Posted By: Ashley Corinne
It would be like "Satanic Buddhism".

Not at all. Buddhism is a very hard (not radical RHP like Islam) Right Hand Path. That is because on one hand it is quite save, but on the other hand it is only sweeping for the single individual and not for society. Just like the Left Hand Path. Even in the east/orient, Buddhism is too hard for the majority of people. So you will also don't find an attempt for proselytization.
Marxism is pure egalitarianism and not even a nice idea too.
_________________________
:) Autonomy without the State

Top
#59315 - 09/20/11 10:33 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Liane]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1638
Loc: Orlando, FL
Actually Buddhism has its own forms of the Left Hand Path, such as Vajrayana tantra and Drukpa.

 Quote:
Buddhism is too hard for the majority of people. So you will also don't find an attempt for proselytization.


Indian Buddhists, when spreading the religion in Tibet, took over by force and massacred the followers of Bon and other indigenous traditions, essentially forcing conversion. Older beliefs still thrived and influenced the dominant faith, which is why Tibetan Religion is a wacky pastiche of buddhism, tantra, and native polytheism... similar to the evolution of Catholicism. (The Dalai Lamas who took over were no better than the medieval Popes.)

Traditionally, Buddhism was considered "too hard" for the majority of people ecause they were poor and illiterate. That doesn't matter, though, because they deserve to be poor and illiterate because of their bad karma.

In modern days, Buddhists do proselytize. Maybe not by waving bibles on street corners, but all those ads for "enlightenment seminars" and "spiritual retreats" are there for an ulterior reason.


Edited by The Zebu (09/20/11 10:46 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#59391 - 09/22/11 07:11 PM Re: red satanism [Re: The Zebu]
dust-e sheytoon Offline
member


Registered: 08/23/11
Posts: 206
Loc: NYC
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu


In modern days, Buddhists do proselytize. Maybe not by waving bibles on street corners, but all those ads for "enlightenment seminars" and "spiritual retreats" are there for an ulterior reason.


Nichiren Shōshū Buddhists in particular proselytize, even door to door, as Tina Turner mentions here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOsr_ZOi-Jo . I knew several American jazz musicians who converted to that form of Buddhism, and they talked me into attending a meeting where they'd all be chanting. I attended with the intention of only sitting with them and observing, rather than chanting with them. A few minutes into the chanting, which they directed towards a scroll, all their focused energy seem to consolidate in the scroll and bounce back towards me in a very unpleasant directed beam of energy. I got up and left immediately. They were definitely working with some kind of energy, but it was coercive. Not something I wanted to submit to.

There is some irony in the fact that the original Buddha apparently shed materialism, at least for some time, in pursuit of knowledge and enlightenment--yet statues of him are stereotypically covered in gold, one of the ultimate material commodities.

Back to the topic, IMAO 20th century Communists sought to repress and redirect religious energies/veneration to the Communist State, in a somewhat similar way to the how the Third Reich transferred sexual energy towards the Fascist State.

If Red Satanists were to encourage the overt development of currently suppressed technologies with the goal of furthering intelligent life on this planet, rather than wasting them on the increasingly dubious "war on terror", they might find some enthusiasts.
_________________________
Fly for your lives! A great magician comes! He summons armies from the earth itself! ~ ArabianNights

Top
#59434 - 09/24/11 10:08 AM Re: red satanism [Re: dust-e sheytoon]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: dust-e sheytoon
There is some irony in the fact that the original Buddha apparently shed materialism, at least for some time, in pursuit of knowledge and enlightenment--yet statues of him are stereotypically covered in gold, one of the ultimate material commodities.


According to the story, Siddhartha Gautama (who you call "the original Buddha"), did try both extremes after which he realized that what is most giving in the quest is a Middle Way (or "madhyamā-pratipad"). Not a bad realization in and of itself - one I can definately share. Im not saying that the doctrines around this idea necessarilly fit me well but I do think Buddhism has its fair share of useful wisdom.

Top
#59465 - 09/25/11 02:05 AM Re: red satanism [Re: dust-e sheytoon]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1638
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:
There is some irony in the fact that the original Buddha apparently shed materialism, at least for some time, in pursuit of knowledge and enlightenment--yet statues of him are stereotypically covered in gold, one of the ultimate material commodities.


This sort of hypocrisy is rather common. The Buddha distrusted materialism, but lavish temples are erected in his name. Christ embraced asceticism, but the Pope wears expensive jewelry and lives in a palace. Marx preached fairness and a classless society, but Soviet states practiced totalitarianism and gross class inequality.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#59674 - 10/01/11 06:44 AM Re: red satanism [Re: The Zebu]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
Nothing new is in the world. People are animals and always we see our animal instincts and nature..., who are leaders of heard always want to gain incomes from herd and create illusions for herd. Ideologies and religious theories are beautiful and promising so much! The most disturbing is following – you have to lose your freedom and individuality for mystical utopia and herd happiness!

Interesting fact - religions and many ideologies strive to create ideal society… One good example it is described by Sir Thomas More for his 1516 book Utopia. Utopia is an ideal community possessing a perfect socio-politico-legal system. I don’t believe in ideal community – I see in all generations – the law of jungle is the only law, who really fits for mankind.
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#61386 - 11/14/11 12:34 PM Re: red satanism [Re: Meatl Gear]
ClayMan Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/09/11
Posts: 7
You can be a Red Satanist. I'm one. Being a Satanist means you want to empower yourself. Be that from gaining knowledge, spirituality (Theistic Satanists.), or practicing self-indulgence of all things taboo. That is all fine and dandy and can be done in an oppressive fascist society or a free flowing Communist society. You may want to empower yourself but you also may want to have the majority of things for free. Such as free health care, free education, and free food and you recognize the only way to do this is to ally yourself with the Communist, Socialist, or Anarchist revolutionists. You don't have to be so up front about your reasons for being a part of one of those political viewpoints. Just lie and say you want those things for everyone when really you just want them for yourself. Basically you just choose to follow whatever side you most benefit from.

Edited by ClayMan (11/14/11 01:00 PM)

Top
#61388 - 11/14/11 01:07 PM Re: red satanism [Re: ClayMan]
FemaleSatan Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/11
Posts: 552
Loc: The Dirty South
I have had nothing ever given to me, I didn't pay for on some level. Rather it was emotional, sexual, or financial. Even in a Communist society you are still paying for things like food, clothing, and shelter, it's just in a different form. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
_________________________
http://female-satan.blogspot.com


Top
#61390 - 11/14/11 01:36 PM Re: red satanism [Re: FemaleSatan]
ClayMan Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/09/11
Posts: 7
 Originally Posted By: FemaleSatan
I have had nothing ever given to me, I didn't pay for on some level. Rather it was emotional, sexual, or financial. Even in a Communist society you are still paying for things like food, clothing, and shelter, it's just in a different form. There's no such thing as a free lunch.


True Communism isn't that different from Anarchism. As a Communist you want the total abolishment of money and the class system. But unlike Anarchism you still want their to be State run control. Not national control. There would be no government controlling the states. The states would be governed by the people within the state. The people as a whole would vote on laws to be passed or removed. There would be no one leader or elected group of leaders. As for items and such. The state would provide whatever is essential for survival. If you want extra stuff you will need to work for it. If you work at least 40 hours a week. You will be able to request things at the next state meeting and most likely you will get said things if you have put your time in.

Anarchism is a more extreme version of that. An anarchist world would have no government, no leaders, no money, no states, and no laws. The people would just govern themselves.


Edited by ClayMan (11/14/11 01:40 PM)

Top
#61391 - 11/14/11 01:47 PM Re: red satanism [Re: ClayMan]
PrinceOfBabalon Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/27/07
Posts: 49
Loc: London
 Originally Posted By: ClayMan
you also may want to have the majority of things for free. Such as free health care, free education, and free food and you recognize the only way to do this is to ally yourself with the Communist, Socialist, or Anarchist revolutionists.


Ever thought of working instead? Developing abilities and traits that make you valuable?

As FemaleSatan as already suggested, nothing is free. Everything requires pay in some form or another. I would much prefer to pay using an artifical currency that I've earned through my own efforts and abilities rather than give up my personal freedom to live on the hand-outs of a national collective.

Top
#61392 - 11/14/11 01:54 PM Re: red satanism [Re: PrinceOfBabalon]
ClayMan Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/09/11
Posts: 7
 Originally Posted By: PrinceOfBabalon
 Originally Posted By: ClayMan
you also may want to have the majority of things for free. Such as free health care, free education, and free food and you recognize the only way to do this is to ally yourself with the Communist, Socialist, or Anarchist revolutionists.


Ever thought of working instead? Developing abilities and traits that make you valuable?

As FemaleSatan as already suggested, nothing is free. Everything requires pay in some form or another. I would much prefer to pay using an artifical currency that I've earned through my own efforts and abilities rather than give up my personal freedom to live on the hand-outs of a national collective.


I already stated you have to work in a Communist society as well. Just not for the basic things you need to live. You still work for the other crap that just makes life easier.


Edited by ClayMan (11/14/11 01:54 PM)

Top
#61395 - 11/14/11 04:15 PM Re: red satanism [Re: ClayMan]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: ClayMan
True Communism isn't that different from Anarchism. As a Communist you want the total abolishment of money and the class system. But unlike Anarchism you still want their to be State run control. Not national control. There would be no government controlling the states. The states would be governed by the people within the state. The people as a whole would vote on laws to be passed or removed. There would be no one leader or elected group of leaders. As for items and such. The state would provide whatever is essential for survival. If you want extra stuff you will need to work for it. If you work at least 40 hours a week. You will be able to request things at the next state meeting and most likely you will get said things if you have put your time in.

Anarchism is a more extreme version of that. An anarchist world would have no government, no leaders, no money, no states, and no laws. The people would just govern themselves.


Kid what are you rambling about? It might be good to think things through.

You talk about an abolishment of money and the class system but at the same time you talk about doing extra work for extra favors. So what's the difference if I have to work 10 hours more for cash or for a privilege?

Then you talk about no government controlling the state and people voting laws but who do you think is going to control if people obey those laws or not? Who is going to punish them when not? Who is going to hunt them down? Your state provides what is essential for survival? Who is, because you say there is no state?

No offense but this is Sesame Street politics.

D.

Top
#61402 - 11/15/11 12:51 AM Re: red satanism [Re: ClayMan]
Octavian Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 81
It is suggested that you can pursue your own rational self interest, or your own particular agenda through a political/social/economic arrangement which is supposed to be deliberately designed to minimise your own particular self interest or individual agenda.

Instead of the acceptance of stratification, anti-egalitarianism, difference, and will to power and pleasure as natural conditions for the successful pursuit of individual agendas and forms of rational self interest, we have yet another form of collectivism, levelling down, and binding of those who have the talent to forge ahead of the mass.

The fact that the capitalist class arrangement of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is replaced by the new communist class arrangement of the workers and the bureaucrat/party leadership is telling I think. Natural relations between human beings tend to win through no matter what sort of political/economic/social arrangements is adopted I would say.

I dislike Communism as I find it to be fundamentally alien to Satanism. Marx’s historical and dialectical materialism pretty much annihilates the individual under inevitable historical/economic laws. I do not appreciate the Hegelian notion of the historic inevitability of the idea, nor its fleshing out as material individual-less praxis under Marxism.

I also found the analysis of capitalism proposed in Das Kapital and the suggestion that the fundamental components of Capitalism are reflected in social functions and the consciousness of human beings, as highlighted most strongly by Lukacs, to be rather depressing on the one hand, and rather untenable when one compares how extraordinary some individuals can be, no matter which class they come from.

Anyway the thing is pretty much discredited now as a viable alternative for people I think, unless somebody can really ramp it up and give it some life, make some changes to the thing.

Hell, what Marx said and what the Soviet's etc. did look like two different things to me anyway!

Top
Page all of 7 12345>Last »


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

Generated in 0.11 seconds of which 0.008 seconds were spent on 106 queries. Zlib compression disabled.