Page 1 of 2 12>
Topic Options
#53836 - 05/01/11 06:30 PM Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal?
ModernPrimitive Offline
stranger


Registered: 04/01/11
Posts: 5
I'm liberal and I really think Satan from the Bible is a great metaphor[/i][i]
_________________________
The only ruler is you!
"Do whatever you want, don't complain when the consequences come!"

Top
#53837 - 05/01/11 06:49 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: ModernPrimitive]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
The title of this thread and the "content" don't flow together at all. Yours is a pointless post that should have never been made. Also, heartagram = fail.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#53844 - 05/01/11 07:49 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
ModernPrimitive Offline
stranger


Registered: 04/01/11
Posts: 5
What the hell?




Please read the rules and FAQ since you are new here. Also one line posts are frowned upon here.... Morgan


Edited by Morgan (05/01/11 11:23 PM)
Edit Reason: warning/information
_________________________
The only ruler is you!
"Do whatever you want, don't complain when the consequences come!"

Top
#53848 - 05/02/11 12:24 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: ModernPrimitive]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
Can a Symbolic Liberal be Satanic?

Every word you use is a symbol, a glyph for an imperfect abstract that only serves a greater purpose that cannot be named. With this in mind, you might ascertain that such questions only illustrate a want of purpose and an inutility of abstracts.


Edited by The Zebu (05/02/11 12:25 AM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ˇoh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#53871 - 05/02/11 10:55 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: The Zebu]
Lucifer Rising Offline
member


Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
Even though ModPrim didn't follow the rules, I would still like to answer the question posed in the title. I consider myself liberal in most respects, though I find such titles limiting. For a nation and its economy to be strong, a well educated and healthy populace is desirable. Of course I view that people should be able to take care of themselves, but I also think that there are times you can best help yourself by helping others. Part of Satanism, at least to me, is taking control of your environment. I wouldn't mind being surrounded by healthy, educated people. Nor would I mind going to a hospital and not worry about if my insurance covers it.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse

Top
#53882 - 05/02/11 01:58 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: The Zebu]
tuathacoagula Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/20/11
Posts: 24
Loc: Japan
The Zebu raises an interesting point. I have recently been reading about Pragmatics in communication so that I can consider touching on it in the language classroom. The main thrust of the piece I read was: "Who controls the discourse?" By this it is suggested that individuals engaging in communication exploit their language (sign system) to exert power over a narrative of communication. Symbols are powerful and their use can empower and be meaningfully used to aid the user.

Linking this back to the original post/lines by MP, 'Can a symbolic Satanist be a liberal?' My first question is 'what is a symbolic satanist?' Is this someone who dresses themselves (figuratively or literally) in the trappings of a system to exploit its uses? If that is the case, then perhaps is this the way Modern primitive would like to use the works of Satanism? Or is it perhaps more a case of using the trapping of Liberalism to exploit their uses? I believe there is a subtle difference held at the core of the individual.

As Lucifer Rising has mentioned, there is a control element linked to the environment around an individual. For myself, I see that there is a benefit from using symbolism or labels that I would not necessarily define myself with at the core. Does this mean a 'satanist' can be 'liberal'? I think yes, if it serves them. If it does not then the satanist may perhaps find other social tools benefit themselves.

Top
#54710 - 05/19/11 03:08 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: ModernPrimitive]
Ringmaster Offline
member


Registered: 04/07/08
Posts: 205
Loc: Salem Oregon
While I "boo" your post the topic seems decent enough...

Yes a Satanist can be a liberal. Matter of fact he/she can have any political views he/she wants. I’m sure there are Satanists who disagree with abortion and some who agree with it. Being that Satanism is a belief system that revolves around the individual it all boils down to what the individual likes and dislikes. I personally think my countries gun control laws are way too strict; there should be a flat rate tax; decisions on abortion should be left up to the individual couples; and so on and so forth. I can venture and guess that many people would disagree with me who call themselves Satanists just as I would disagree with some people.
_________________________
Get off the cross and save yourself, I feel no pity for the cries of a weak man.

Top
#54806 - 05/20/11 07:25 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Ringmaster]
mabon2010 Offline
member


Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...
"Can a Symbolic Liberal be Satanic?"

Symbols, like words, are mere wrapping paper to cover ideas. Can one go beyond words to the nature of the idea they represent? I love ripping away the words and symbols to see what is underneath - is it a meme, an archetype and egregore? What does it make me if I go beyond the symbols to that behind the symbol?

Liberal - a word for a person who takes a number of positions in political situations - does that make them a Satanist? No. What is a Satanist but one who seeks to manifest their potentiality via the agency of what Satan means to them. So to me Satanist is a tool to personal growth, but Liberal is a mere position taken on an issue. Being Liberal or Conservative is irrelevant to the overall expression of the tool that is Satanism, which will exist with or without Liberalism.
_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

Top
#54955 - 05/23/11 09:22 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: ModernPrimitive]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
I suppose it would depend on how much emphasis you put on your beliefs.

If you were to try to live as a staunch leftist then those beliefs might require that you embrace an egalitarian world view.

Wiki(I know) begins its definition of leftist politics as such:
In politics, Left, left-wing and leftist are generally used to describe support for social change to create a more egalitarian society.

Satanism is the direct opposite of egalitarianism as it is the embodiment of personal, individual power over what's commonly termed 'the greater good'. In general, Satanists see putting the needs of others over one's own needs/desires/wants as anathema.

That said, I can see how it would be possible for a Satanist to support leftward politics (or rightward) if doing so would serve a specific personal goal.

To try to live a lifestyle of combined idealistic egalitarianism and Satanism would, in my view, be confusing at best and would require heavy compromises of one set of ideas or the other.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#55182 - 05/29/11 05:27 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Fnord]
SerialKeller Offline
stranger


Registered: 05/29/11
Posts: 19
Loc: Scotland
Do you want to live in a society where other people are accepted too?
I understand that the ideal leader who actually cares about his/her people might just be a good dream, but I don't think politics are for people like me, who really just want to enjoy ourself. That doesn't define Satanism all the time because maybe you enjoy helping people, but that is the general idea.

I support the party that will give me the least problems, or that I can easily fight back against.

Top
#55242 - 05/31/11 08:57 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Fnord]
Lucifer Rising Offline
member


Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
It is true that the left tends to follow a philosophy of "what's best for the group" over what is best for the individual. I certainly do not agree with all the ideals of the left, but I do think, which I've tried to stress many times before, that what is best for the group is often best for the individual. Just a few examples:

Environmental issues - The right tends to ignore or deny environmental problems. Environmental controls help create a better place to live for myself.

Healthcare & Education - Both of these are issues the right believes are best handled on an individual basis, but a healthy and educated work force is good for employers and the economy as a whole. By forcing these issues on individuals puts greater strain on individuals. For these reasons, doing what is "best for the group" is also best for the individual.

Abortion and gay rights - Something the right once again oppose, and thus restricts personal freedoms of choice. These are fairly minor issues for me, since I am neither gay or female. However, holding personal choice and responsibility in as high regard as I do, I recognize both of these as something the individual should have right to pursue.

No one party represents all of my views, but these key issues are what often lead me to consider myself liberal. I may not be in favor of welfare, or heavy economic regulation, but on certain issues I am in favor of "what is best for the group", albeit for mostly selfish reasons.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse

Top
#55258 - 05/31/11 11:46 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Lucifer Rising]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
Some of that stuff certainly sounds good on paper but when analyzed carefully (well, not even that carefully) it all begins to unravel.

With regard to the environment, certainly one should avoid defecating where one eats and should take every precaution to be as environmentally friendly as possible. However, there is no proof that the environment is currently in danger. I'm not going to (again) go into detail about all of this as it's readily available in another thread here in this forum. The environmental types want to impose sanctions on 4% of the world population (the US) and enforce 'green' behavior while India, China, Russia etc are belching all manner of filth into the environment completely unchecked. One could argue that our economy is complicit but if that's the case then so are our political parties and those within that benefit from it all. It's a game. Who (specifically) profits most might surprise you.

Healthcare... privately 85% of people had it (US Census) and the other 15% could use it and not pay. Now, we have the middle class suffering by paying even more of the associated costs which is causing a downward spike in employment. Sure, it needed to be reformed, but not the way it happened. When the rubber hits the road in 2014 it's going to be nothing short of ugly.

Your points make sense, idealistically. In the real world of corruption, greed and politics though they are pie in the sky.

"and thus restricts personal freedoms of choice" = Egalitarianism = liberal politics.

You can't have it both ways. Which is oft recognized in Satanism across a wide spectrum of issues. Twice today I'll use the term 'third side'.



_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#55312 - 06/01/11 02:57 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Fnord]
Lucifer Rising Offline
member


Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
 Quote:
You can't have it both ways.

Who says? If I want both chocolate and vanilla ice cream, I'm going to have both damn it. Who's going to stop me?

 Quote:
However, there is no proof that the environment is currently in danger.

Does it have to be in imminent danger for prevention? I do not think there is enough evidence to be without doubt that the environment is currently in danger, but I do think there is enough to at least show we are not exactly doing a great job keeping it that way. Greenhouse effects are a scientific fact, and greenhouse gasses are being put into the atmosphere by humans at an ever increasing rate. If it isn't causing a problem now, there is good chance it will in the future if it continues much longer.

 Quote:
The environmental types want to impose sanctions on 4% of the world population (the US) and enforce 'green' behavior while India, China, Russia etc are belching all manner of filth into the environment completely unchecked.

Translation: Russia and China get to do it, so it's okay.

I don't see your point. Just because everyone else shits where they eat doesn't mean we have to.

 Quote:
Healthcare... privately 85% of people had it (US Census) and the other 15% could use it and not pay. Now, we have the middle class suffering by paying even more of the associated costs which is causing a downward spike in employment.

I want to know what fantasy world you live in where 15% of people don't have to pay for medical care and the rest have insurance. I've not had insurance just recently and had to go to the hospital. I had to pay for it.

 Quote:
Sure, it needed to be reformed, but not the way it happened.

I think we're in agreement with that.

 Quote:
"and thus restricts personal freedoms of choice" = Egalitarianism = liberal politics.

I did say I did consider myself liberal in many respects. Is liberal automatically incorrect by default because you don't like it? People can only be held responsible for the choices that they make. What harm is it to you if a woman chooses to have an abortion or two guys want to say they're married and go butt-fucking in Hawaii for their honeymoon? You have no reason to stop people from making those kinds of choices. If it somehow caused you harm, I could understand. It doesn't though.

 Quote:
Your points make sense, idealistically. In the real world of corruption, greed and politics though they are pie in the sky.

This may actually be true, but not because of corruption, greed and politics. I view this to be true because of complacency. Even those that are able to see the benefits of such policies don't do anything promote them. If enough people were greedy enough to push for policies that would benefit them, then our corrupt politicians would have to do something to appease them to stay in power. Most likely that would be outwardly supporting these policies, and this is where we find most Democratic politicians. Actually getting things done would take people unwilling to accept a facade of compliance.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse

Top
#55320 - 06/01/11 09:13 AM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Lucifer Rising]
Fnord Offline
senior member


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

Translation: Russia and China get to do it, so it's okay.

I don't see your point. Just because everyone else shits where they eat doesn't mean we have to.


Wrong. My point is that the American middle class gets to be the scapegoat (ie fiscally responsible) while the rest of world escapes criticism (and financial responsibility though they do reap financial reward).

 Originally Posted By: Lucifer Rising
I want to know what fantasy world you live in where 15% of people don't have to pay for medical care and the rest have insurance.


The US health care system relies heavily on private and not-for-profit health insurance, which is the primary source of coverage for most Americans. According to the United States Census Bureau, approximately 85% of Americans have health insurance; nearly 60% obtain it through an employer, while about 9% purchase it directly.

It's wiki, but it's sourced fairly well. Go to the Census Bureau if you doubt it.

As for the 15%... by law emergency rooms are required to treat people regardless of whether or not they can pay. Most don't. If you hadn't, it wouldn't even have shown up on your credit report and if it did it wouldn't be as a negative that factored into a lending decision.

 Originally Posted By: Lucifer Rising
Is liberal automatically incorrect by default because you don't like it?


As I've repeatedly shown, liberalism by definition is equivalent to egalitarianism. Egalitarianism is, by definition, the limiting of personal freedoms and choices to benefit the greater good. For those who are a cut above the norm, leveling the playing field is nearly always a bad idea. It's not at all rocket science.

Also, I've repeatedly said that I'm more or less socially laissez-faire. As long as people can support themselves in their activities and choices, I could care less about what what they do (ie gays, abortion, and every other social issue you'd care to bring up).
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#55341 - 06/01/11 02:35 PM Re: Can a Symbolic Satanist be Liberal? [Re: Fnord]
Lucifer Rising Offline
member


Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
So the middle class might have to pay a bit more to get the gears rolling, in the long run it will be cheaper. The longer we wait to do anything, the more it will end up costing. China, Russia, and India are far from exempt from criticism. The international community criticizes these countries all the time for their lack of environmental policies.

 Quote:
by law emergency rooms are required to treat people regardless of whether or not they can pay. Most don't.

I hear people say that about the emergency room a lot. You can't use the emergency room for everything. Many times, when a person can use an emergency room in such a manner, the problem they go there with could have been prevented or helped far more cheaply with early detection. It is under the current (and past) system that the middle class has to "split the bill" for the people that go into the emergency room and do not pay. If healthcare was nationalized, it would be cheaper on the middle class. They might still have to split the bill, but the bill would be cheaper.

I have never promoted restricting personal freedom for the greater good. I'd like you to explain how anything I've presented reduces personal freedom. What freedoms are being lost that are so important as to screw yourself out of better, cheaper health care and a cleaner environment?
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse

Top
Page 1 of 2 12>


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

Generated in 0.022 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.