Loading...

The Process of Normalization In Satanism | Forum

Albert
Albert Mar 27



The sociological structure of any group of humans is shaped like a diamond. In the big fat middle region of this diamond is where the Majority of people can be found. Incidentally: it's also where obese people are found also, since here in America, the average person [70-80% of the population] is fat to some degree.


The Majority in this case being what constitutes the Average, Normal, Mundane, Every-Day person. Those with an Average level intellect and capacity of mind. Those with Average outlook on life, average values, average tastes, average likes, and average base of knowledge. An example of someone who is situated in this fat part would be the bald headed Frater Lucyfairy. Venus Satanis is situated in this fat area too.


As we go to the Bottom of the diamond of social order, the number of people decreases. The lower region are those people who are Below-Average. People with below average intelligence and so on. The very bottom point of this triangle is where you will find the very, very few who are clinically mentally retarded. An example of someone who is situated somewhere in this bottom region of the diamond would be EdMe, for obvious observable reasons. 


The same pattern applies to the top region. As we go up the diamond, the number of people decreases. The top portion is populated with those of Above-Average intellect. And since this upper part is beyond the jurisdiction of the Average, the few individuals who are found in the top parts have "eccentric" elements in their personality and psychological make up. The higher up you go, the more eccentric and unconventionally intelligent the person will be.


The word "Eccentric" here actually meaning "Unconventional," where unconventional simply means beyond Convention, where Convention here simple means: what is acceptable, practiced, agreeable, and/or likable for the Average person. 
The very tippy top of this diamond is populated with the very, very, very, few people who are clinical geniuses. Such as members of Mensa, some scientists, and so on. An example of someone here who has the traits of a person who is situated somewhere in the top region, would be AK. You can see his eccentricism, and he's also very intelligent, mentally and computerly. 



What's happing to Satanism, is what happened to Wicca, the Golden Dawn, the New Age movement, etc. 


It's called "Normalization."


Normalization is when a lot of the people from the fat part of the sociological diamond - the average, normal, bland people - becomes the Majority of any group or organization or institution.


The institution becomes Normalized, Conventionalized: made acceptable to the average person, to their average level intellect, to their conventional - agreeable, acceptable - likes and tastes. It's like niggers moving into your neighborhood: it devalues property. But with Satanism, it's house niggers that are moving into Satanism. A house nigger is a nigger who doesn't do field work: they don't do shit, they think, they have emotions, they have opinions, they talk a lot; but they ain't field niggers.


It's inevitable that an institution whose Majority is the Average Mediocritin, will become goofy, average, and mediocre. 


The unfortunate thing about Satanism is that it has no mechanism to keep out the average people. 


Especially when you have groups like the CoS and TST working and competing for big numbers of new members. It just so happens that if and when you are seeking large numbers of people for your group, that the bulk of people will come from the fat part of the diamond. It can be mathematically no other way.


And to attract such types of people, groups such as the CoS and TST must use ideas, imagery, and stuff that appeals to the average, normal, people.


And it just so happens that the bulk of people who populates the fat part of the diamond Conventionally share certain dislikes and likes in common.


For example, most of the people in the fat part of the diamond dislike things such as: drug use, crime, racism, offending people, fighting, violence, discrimination, murder, war. Conversely these average mediocritins like things like: Liberalism, Leftism, social justicism, gay rights, Black rights, women rights, feminism, open door immigration policies. 


And so, to market your institution to the most number of people, to attract the most number of people, you have to sell them shit like liberalist ideas and notions, be attractive to social justice warriors, be polite to obese people, be all into fag rights and women rights, and be all into the "Black Lives Matter" thing, and also never to discriminate against Jews. 


So, it's a Process of Normalization we are seeing taking place in Satanism. This process starts with the big groups and organizations in Satanism that are simply trying to draw in the biggest number of members/adherents. Because they are fishing for large numbers, they must by default market their organization to the Average Majority. And so, over time, Satanism as a whole becomes increasingly populated with Average, Conventional people, who end up pussifying Satanism, as they did with Witchcraft, turning it into goofy Wicca. 


Unfortunately, there is no mechanism in Satanism to stop this process. Zach correctly points out that even 10 years ago, Satanism wasn't like what it is today. Think about what will become of Satanism in another 10 years, if this process of Normalization continues. No group in Satanism is safe, not even the ONA, which year by year is becoming Normalized.


The problem is that nobody gives an actual shit about the Quality, Nature, and Ethos of the Individual. What we actually care about are the belief-sets of a person. What I mean is that a group of people in Satanism - or any institution for that matter - cares more about what you believe, your opinions, and views, rather than your actual Quality, Nature, and Ethos as a person. It doesn't matter if you are a low quality person: as long as you believe and can agree with what is taught and promulgated by the institution.




The Forum post is edited by Albert Mar 27
Share:
fnord
fnord Mar 27
Enjoyed this post, thank you. <br />
<br />
Normalization is something I work with daily (big data) Removing inconsistencies, redundancies streamlining etc are all par for that course... and I like the parallels you’ve drawn here (though in my world the middle would be an (as yet) non hierarchal mess that’s awaiting normalization but I get the point. <br />
<br />
That said, I’ve been looking at various organizations for quite a bit of time (I’m old) and recognize that many have a public face and a private face. The ones that exist with only a public face are more likely to fall victim to your scenario than those with also a private face. <br />
<br />
Despite the sometimes desperate attempts to defang Satanism by the middles in your example there are smaller subsets who feel that all that exists in the public eye is carnival - farce. For me, your model works well in the macro but is only partially applicable in the micro. <br />
<br />
Still, many points well made.
The Forum post is edited by fnord Mar 27
Anna
Anna Mar 27
I understand you're not being serious but, for the sake of a conversation, please explain what an average outlook on life means and what average values. tastes and likes are. Personally, I think not everyone even likes the same kind of food but I could be wrong. Also explain how you would evaluate an average level of intellect. Would you employ IQ tests, consider the person's diplomas, general knowledge, specialized knowledge or what?

Historically speaking, house niggers stood higher in the slave hierarchy than field negroes. The same goes for ancient Greece, Rome or Egypt. Wherever slavery existed, house servants had a higher status than the field workers. They were also better treated and had higher chances of gaining freedom. They were selected because of their superior skills like singing, playing instruments, reciting poetry, cooking, dancing etc to not only help the master or mistress in daily activities but also entertain guests. Besides, Satanism is not about following orders so it's not a very good metaphor.

There is nothing extraordinary or elitist about crime, drug use, violence, murder etc. They are pretty common.

It's not that institutions become normalized. The people with exceptional talents, skills and charisma are always in minority. An organization is also not able to evaluate the nature and ethos of an individual as that would require some kind of a more intimate relationship in order to know someone better. So in general, they rely on the information you give them in questionnaires or interviews. Since a personal development is an individual business, I wouldn't make so much fuss about the quality of groups and organizations.

On a side note, it must have flattered AK's ego to be called a "clinical genius." 
Dark Enlightenment
This seems like a segue for reclaimation.


The Normalization is just the effect.  

The cause is a world devoid of autodidacts and critical thinkers (which is its own human centipedal cause, domestication). It needs idea proliferation and an effective advertising campaign.


And "Satanism" has been rebranded. It has been rebranded by consensus. 


The reason the CoS and TST get recognition is because people defer to their bias. If society is Christian and they all have churches/doctrine; then satanists must have as well. It becomes another chosen "faith".   


There is never even a shread of recognition of an underlying behavior. 


All it took was Secular humanism masked as dark individuality and before you know it the essence isn't needed anyway.  When the first thing someone looks up is TST's 'satanic' commandments it's fucking over in terms of mitigating influx from the bulk of society. 


You can now choose it from the identity rack  and convince yourself you "get it" . Zarthustra's Ape is a prime demographic.  Most get lost forever at the impulse displays.


The Forum post is edited by Dark Enlightenment Mar 27
T. Volt
T. Volt Mar 27
There is always going to be a normalization. Take for example, people don't like murder.

I don't like murder either, but, if things get shitty, its a must. There's only one law of nature, and that's do or die. I don't like seeing people get hurt a lot of the time, and then other times I do. It is a matter of circumstance, some violent crimes disturb me in a very real way, it isn't just like "oh, that goes against what I was taught, that's breaking the rules!" or some bullshit. If I am pleasured or disgusted by something, its a real chemical/emotional reaction, because I consider maybe a lot more detail and reality about what something is and what it means.

The problem is, that people have become saturated with so much living convenience and distractions, its easy to let yourself go and allow one's self to be moved along with a neutral frequency.

I was talking some time ago about a similar model, that there is a general middle ground of control limit, like a middle point/white noise frequency a lot of people are moving on. For some reason or other, many of us were raised closer to a higher or lower frequency (lower as in different, not like the 'moron/lowlife' example in the diamond model above). Some of us get a little sample of one of those frequencies, and sort of trail off low or high, to another one, and seek people on those other dials.

On the whole, people have become so pussified by convenient distraction and pampering they continue to allow themselves to remain as putty, fat, dull, incompetent and hopeless. This, to the point that people actually believe that all violence is wrong, or that hurting anything at any time is wrong. No other creature that crawls on this Earth would agree with you if you said that and they some how magically understood. None! NOTHING! Down to the smallest of cells! Nothing would agree with "passive non-violet approach only at all times"! Its a fucking idiot bubble.

Here's what I think. Ultimately, most people know what I'm talking about. Even the fucking idiot-derp-tards. They know full well. Its just that people don't want to face it, because they haven't pushed one ounce of their capabilities, they're just afraid, and ultimately, useless. For themselves, for anything really. Scared dumb animals. Fools.

I don't waste too much time on it, its frustrating, but ultimately you just have to live for whatever it is that you like, as long as you are pushing your limits in some way, if we're talking about being Satanic. Using all you've got now to get more, instead of just sitting on it and wasting away. Breaking rules, facing fears, all that. The thing itself hasn't been "pussified." There's just pussies.

Keep your frequency range wide, and your voltage high.
The Forum post is edited by T. Volt Mar 27
Albert
Albert Mar 27

Quote from AK 


Let me ask you this: something along the lines of "a broken clock is right twice a day" meets "better to be used than useless" I have no issue exploiting the fat part of the diamond for fun and profit; in your opinion, do you think that's a detrimental thing to a "movement"? 


I don't see a problem with exploiting people from the fat part of the diamond either. I don't hide the fact that I manipulate people. 


Is exploitation detrimental to a [bowel] movement? It would depend on the "movement." Like if we're talking about the New Age movement: Amazon even sells dream catchers and crystals. What is that but exploiting the beliefs of a people? 


But if we're talking about "Satanism" which is a religion that insists on the concept of individualism: then it's every man for himself. If Satanists insist that group identification is bad and unsatanic, then fine, let's play ball because, who are these other Satanists to you or me? They ain't part of your tribe or family or list of friends? They don't owe you nothing. 


Besides, regarding Satanism: I thought we all liked the concept of Might Is Right? What does that mean in reality if not Exploitation of the weak? Originally, Might Is Right was written back in the day when the British Empire was falling apart and losing its global supremacy. And the "anonymous" author wrote that book, lamenting the Might of the British Empire, the White race in general, and the British race(s) in specific. 


What exactly is Empire and Colonialism if not mass exploitation of people?


But what kind of exploitation and Might? You might ask, regarding Empire and Colonialism. [General you].


Well first there is political exploitation, where you force the vanquished people to submit to your British government and laws for your people's own benefit. Secondly there is Cultural exploitation, where you force the vanquished people to adopt your own people religion and culture, to the benefit of your own Church of England, and the Monarch that is head of that church, and the benefit of your own people in general. Third there is Linguistic exploitation, where you force the vanquished people to talk your language an not theirs. Fourthly there is the financial exploitation where you force countries you have conquered to pay tribute, and you tax your colonized subjects, for your own people's benefit. 


What are all of those things, if not Exploitation, manipulation? 


Might, doesn't always mean muscle strength. Might can be Intelligence, where humanity is intelligent enough to manipulate our environment and dominate the world and exploit its resources: to the detriment and extinction of other species.


If you or me can out think a person, then that's Might. If I can start a family business and you [general] work for me, that's financial Might: I'm your boss, I own you. If I go to college and get a higher paying job then you, that's Might. And if you can do all these things by using others to your private benefit, then that's exploitation and manipulation.


If LaVey can come up with an idea for a new religion, and you became an adherent of his idea: that's Might. And when as a LaVeyan Satanist you spend your time and energy debating and trying to get people to see things the LaVeyan way, then guess what: you got exploited and manipulated to be LaVey's meme-monkey, cuz your not distributing your own ideas are you?


When a group of politicians manipulate hundreds of millions of people to vote them into positions of power, what is that if not manipulation: and we even know politicians lie. But yet everybody loves democracy. And when these same politicians live the life of a fat cat, on your tax money, what is that if not exploitation. But yet everybody loves democracy. 


When the corporate sector invests in colleges, then tells people that you can't get good jobs in their corporations if you don't have a college degree, and you do what they tell you, and you get a job with them and you spend your money buying shit they manufacture: what is that if not manipulation and exploitation? But yet everybody loved Capitalism and Consumerism. 


Without the Average Common People, there would be no democracy or capitalism or consumerism. Everybody exploits the Common Person. The Common Person is not significant. How so?


When was the last time anybody here heard any good or cool news about a local mom and pop shop? But the media talks all the time about Amazon doesn't it. And we buy shit from Amazon all the time don't we? And Amazon causes mom and pop shops to go extinct, isn't that right? All the brick and mortar bookstores in my area are gone. That's Might Is Right in action, and it's also exploitation of the weak [smaller businesses], and its also manipulation [mass advertisement]. 


The thing is about manipulation and exploitation is that, its actually cool and fine if you are among tens or hundreds of millions being exploited and manipulated. It's when you single out a person and exploit or manipulate them that you become a bad guy, that it becomes socially and morally unacceptable. You're vilified by the "victim" as being bad. But Jeff Bozo of Amazon is a hero and an idol to many people. People say: "Oh I want to be a billionaire like Bozo from Amazon!" How the fuck are you going to be a billionaire if you ain't going to exploit and manipulate a billion people out of a dollar, or 100 million people out of 10 dollars, or 10 million people out of $100?


Mother Nature exploits the Average Common person/people: they are good for breeding, to Nature. They fuck and get pregnant, thus continuing the human species. 


Intelligence isn't the primary functioning principle of evolution. Survival is. If a beast was charging a group of intellectual cave men, and the cave men commenced to have an intellectual debate about whether or not is or isn't intelligent to expend energy to run away or stay [fight or flight], they'd be dead before the debate is over. The average person, when charged by a mad beast would just scream and run to save their lives. 


It doesn't even have to be a beast. A kid with a gun at school produces the same affect. One kid with a gun, is logically out numbered by dozens of staff members, and thousands of kids. Logically - intelligently - it makes sense to have a big group of staff and students charge the kid with the gun to save lives. But we see the entire opposite where everybody runs and hides for their lives. I was watching a video of a guy who committed suicide by jumping in front of a train. It's interesting to watch how everybody around that suicidal guy reacted: everybody screamed and ran away. The question is WHY? Why run away? Because of survival instinct, not intelligence.


Average people exist for a reason: they continue the human species, and serve as a resource of exploitation for those with the Might to do so. Might Is Right.



Quote from fnord 
Normalization is something I work with daily (big data) Removing inconsistencies, redundancies streamlining etc are all par for that course... and I like the parallels you’ve drawn here (though in my world the middle would be an (as yet) non hierarchal mess that’s awaiting normalization but I get the point. <br />
[...]
For me, your model works well in the macro but is only partially applicable in the micro. <br />
<br />
Still, many points well made.


Hi Fnord. Nice to see you around again. Yes... streamlining! That's exactly what Normalization is!


There are 3 forces in the Cosmos: Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva.


Brahma is the Creator. Vishnu is the Maintainer. Shiva is the Destroyer.


It takes all three forces - Creation, Maintenance, and Destruction - to keep the Cosmos going and developing. To keep everything in it, like our planet going and further developing. 


Normalization is when something has been Created, and the force of Maintenance comes in to maintain what had been created/established. 


And so, with something like Satanism. It was created decades ago. Back then it was new, unorthodox, unconventional, to the society and mindframe of that era. Then the Average people migrate into Satanism, and they iron all the kinks and wrinkles out of it... streamline it, as you equated. Make the place tidy and comfy for them and their tastes, if you will. 


Normalization is when what has already been created enters its phase of Maintenance, Continuity; janitors coming in to clean of and polish the floor. 


Normalization is like when people work at transforming a sexy pair of red lacy thongs into comfy granny panties. I personally like the kinks and wrinkles in Satanism. 


You're very right about the Macro and Micro. I didn't think about that. To run with that idea: on a personally level - me, myself, and I - my "Satanism" is mine and how Satanism as a whole beyond me changes, really doesn't affect/effect my Satanism. But I'll drop the label, when Satanism gets too goofy. 


 

Quote from Anna I understand ...

No you don't. You have serious reading comprehension issues. You can't even tell if I'm being serious or not. 


In my Opening Post, when I talked about AK, I used specific language and generic language for a reason. First I said "Tippy top" of the diamond. That's specifying a specific location on that diamond. Like if I were to say: "The tip of the Iberian peninsula." 


When I talked about the tippy top of the diamond, I also said that the number of people there were very, very, very, few. I used the word "very" redundantly three times for a reason: to emphasize just how few people there are at that specific point. I even names the types of people found there, mensa people and some scientists, who would constitute a mere 1% of the entire human race. At no time in my OP did I say that AK was amongst that 1% at the tippy top. 


When I mentioned AK, I used a general term of placement. I said "Somewhere in the Top Region."


In the English language of California, the word "somewhere" is so general, it means nowhere in specific. And in the same California English, the word "region" does not indicate a specific place. If I were to say: "Somewhere in the European Region" it indicates no specific spot or country or location in Europe. 


I speak only California English, not Polish English. To be specific I speak the English spoken in The Valley and in Orange County [cool people English]. I don't know how to speak Polish English or European English, and so I'm sorry you have trouble understanding my English being a foreigner to Southern California. Everybody else in this thread seemed to understand the gist of my OP fine enough to write cool replies. You Anna... you seem to be tripping and stumbling.


Average Outlook on life:


In California English, an "Outlook on life" is how you View/Perceive your world and environment and how you interpret meaning and valuate the same: Sentimentally, Intellectually, Religiously, Morally, Politically, Socially, Economically, and Culturally. 


And so, if you lined up 10 people here, and asked them the question, "Do you believe in Evolution?" And 7 out of 10 guys say that they do: then in context to those 10 guys, the belief in evolution - statistically - is Common, Conventional. And so I used the words "conventional" and "unconventional" for a reason. I even defied those words for everybody in my OP.


Now if we were to ask a Theologian or the Pope if he believes in Evolution, we might get an "unconventional" answer. Unconventional relative to what? Relative to the 10 guys we originally asked the same question to. Likewise, if we were to ask a scientist or someone who really pays attention to details this same question, they might answer: "Do you mean Darwinian Evolution of pop-culture or the concept of Developmental Evolution?" Which is also an unconventional answer. Unconventional relative to what? To the answer the original 10 guys gave. 


If you were to line up ten men here and ask them: "Do you believe hitting girls is wrong?" What do you suppose the Majority would say? What ever the Majority says is the conventional outlook. Conventional relative to what? Relative to the 10 guys being asked. And if these 10 guys created an institution, their conventional outlook regarding the treatment of girls will dominate and influence that institution. 


If you were to line up 10 people here and ask them: "Do you believe faster than light travel is possible?" What do you think the Majority of the 10 people will answer? Whatever the Majority answers, is the Majority outlook. It's all simple really. Simple English. Simple Math. Simple statistical analysis. 


Now, to give Contrast. Conventional versus Unconventional:


There was a time in olden days - Christendom - when everybody believed in Creationism. And then one day Darwin studied a bunch of Finches and came up with a very Unconventional idea...


There was a time in old times when the technological means of entertainment was the radio, radio shows and radio music. And then someone invented the Television. It was an unorthodox idea, an unconventional concept. So unconventional that most people didn't like the TV idea and poo-pooed it saying that it'll never catch on. But guess what...


There was a time not long ago, in the late 70's or early 80s when some company had this unconventionally idea to make Computers for people to use in their homes! They called this thing the "Personal Computer" or PC for short. Nobody liked the idea, and everybody said: "Pshaw... who'd buy that when you have a typewriter?" That's how unconventional and unorthodox a thing the PC was back then. But guess what...


Nothing Conventional ever Creates. Convention by its very Nature and Ethos: Maintains. 


It's the new, the nouveu, the outre, the Unorthodox, that first Destroys the Old and become the New. 


There was a time long ago during what was called Old Regime or L'Antient Regime, where the rule of Church and Crown was a fact of life. Where it was a crime to think, an alien concept for serfs and peasants to elect their leaders. 


But there was this group of people with very Unorthodox, Unconventional ideas: they believed in secularism, in democracy, in the separation of the Church and State. At the time, such ideas were actual criminal offenses, punishable by death. Guess what happened?


Normalization is a natural process in of Anicca: Impermanence. That all things are in a constant state of Flux, of Change, of Development, of Becoming. And for that change to happen, the old must be Destroyed, for the New to take root. And what has taken root must be Maintained for a while, before the cycle of Creation, Maintenance, and Destruction turns again.


And so in life, we humans generally fit into one of those three groups or forces: Creation, Maintenance, or Destruction. We either create stuff. Maintain what has been established. or tear down the Old. 


When the janitors have fully come into Satanism to streamline it, to make it comfy for their conventional tastes: the Unconventional, the Unorthodox, will have long vacated it, to Create something New.

The Forum post is edited by Albert Mar 27
LuciferCrow
LuciferCrow Mar 28
let's make butt babies AK
Albert
Albert Mar 28

lol @ butt babies. That's funny. You have some funny homo-innuendoes Crow. I had to look up "tummy sticks game." 


For those foreigners who don't really understand written English: the word "some" in the above statement refers to a thing or an amount of things which is not specific or definite in nature. The word "homo" doesn't reference "Homo Sapiens" it references "Homosexual." The usage of the word "Crow" does not refer to an animal in this specific case, it is being used as a nickname or pseudonym of a person, to whom I am speaking, or attempting to speak with. 

Anna
Anna Mar 28
@Albert
"You can't even tell if I'm being serious or not."

Dear, you're not being serious most of the time. I asked you how you understand an average outlook on life and you gave me a set of beliefs, views and opinions. On their basis you divided people into those better and those worse. Yet, at the end of your OP, you wrote that the problem with the Satanic organizations is that they evaluate the beliefs, opinions and views of the candidates or members instead of caring more for their character, nature and ethos. Let me quote it for you:

"The problem is that nobody gives an actual shit about the Quality, Nature, and Ethos of the Individual. What we actually care about are the belief-sets of a person. What I mean is that a group of people in Satanism - or any institution for that matter - cares more about what you believe, your opinions, and views, rather than your actual Quality, Nature, and Ethos as a person."

So summing up, what you do in this very thread is exactly the same thing you criticize Satanic institutions for. You evaluate personal beliefs, views and opinions.

Now, I'm asking you a serious question: How is an organization counting let's say 500 members evaluate the "Nature" of its members and potential candidates. 500 people is not a lot but is it possible to know them so well as to say who they really are when stripped of their beliefs and opinions?

Not that I expect an answer. Since you keep writing walls of text without actually saying anything, I bet the ONA suits you best.

"When the janitors have fully come into Satanism to streamline it, to make it comfy for their conventional tastes: the Unconventional, the Unorthodox, will have long vacated it, to Create something New."

Like what? Please elaborate how you imagine the new cool image of Satanism. From what I gather it's a personal path. Other people, organizations and the "ism" itself are irrelevant.


Albert
Albert Mar 28

Anna, you have two main problems that inhibits you from comprehending stuff.


Your first problem is that you learned and know literal and literary English. Whereas people here in America, we use spoken vernacular American English, which is heavily spiced with metaphorical words and references that are rooted in America culture and history.


And so, we're over here talking about house niggers metaphorically, and you're over there by yourself arguing about historical slaves working in houses like a college professor. It just so happens that here in America, the idea of houseniggery has had 400 years to develop metaphorical shades of meaning. and you just simple don't get it. Your Europeanized brain learned institutional English.


Your second problem is that you don't know how to have an actual con-versation. CON meaning together/with and VERSE meaning to turn. If I go in one direction, you turn with me in order for mutual understanding to occur. What you are having Anna is a Con-frontation, and one with your own misunderstandings. 


Your con-versational problem is one I have seen you do for a good 5 years now: You don't understand the flow, structure, and movement of conversation. Here's what I mean as an example:


1. I make the statement: "Of the 7 billion of us humans, the belief in God is common."

2. You step into the conversation and say: "I don't understand, can you elaborate."

3. I say: "Sure. Lets take 10 people. We ask the 10 if they believe in god. 7 of the 10 say they do. Thus, the consensus is that the belief in god is common."

4. You say: "That's retarded, a consensus of 10 people is not a real fucking consensus, get real."


Another example of your conversational issue:


1. I use the idiomatic expression: "Comparing apples with oranges..."

2. You say to me: "Sir, I don't understand American idioms, can you explain what you mean?"

3. I say to you: "Sure Anna, it's like if you were to compare cats and dogs. They are not the same stuff."

4. You say to me: "Get fucking real! Both the cat and the dog are mammals!"


You see Anna, your issue is that when you don't understand something, people give you examples to help you understand the main topic of conversation, and you commence to treat the examples given as actual topics of conversation.


They only are provided to help you understand the main subject matter, and are not the subject of conversation in and of themselves.


I gave you several examples regarding "average outlook." Your supposed to just get the gist of that and think to yourself, "okay, that's what Albert meant... maybe regarding people's quality, nature, and ethos, different groups of people share common qualities, natures, and ethics which influences their outlook in life. I get the OP now."


I'll tell you what I'm going to do with you Anna: This will be the last time I directly or indirectly talk and interact with you here or anywhere online, until such time when you have learned to understand vernacular American English, and until you learn how to have an actual con-versation. 


In all honesty Anna, and I'm being serious, I believe that although you are indeed intelligent, that you may be mildly autistic, because you have a very hard time interacting with people around you in a meaningful and organic way like normal people do. 

The Forum post is edited by Albert Mar 28
Anna
Anna Mar 28
@Albert


Since you mentioned field niggers and field work as well, I decided to give you a lecture on the actual roots of the word "house nigger." I also wrote it was a poor metaphor so it should be enough of a clue for you that I don't take that literally. You also wrote in your original post that the majority of mediocre people have largely leftist views. You can blame my ignorance of the English language but I think it's you having problems with your memory. You simply don't remember what was written in previous posts, both yours and mine.


What I'm trying to point out to the brick wall is that the "Nature" of a person is something well beyond political and religious views, beliefs, tastes, likes, proclaimed values and even the level of intelligence. You can meet a non-educated, not very original person with leftist views and average interests who might prove to be someone of a quality character, someone you could trust and rely on in difficult times. This is why it's not that easy to assess and this is why no Satanic institution can evaluate people's characters.


And last but not least, Satanic groups and all the trends in Satanism are merely props at the stage or stage masks or costumes pointing at something beyond. This is what you're focusing on; the appearances, the theatrics. At the end of the day, all of this, other people and groups and their attitudes have no relevance to your personal life.


You don't have to talk to me at all. It's a public thread. My posts are directed at the general audience. I'm debating you because your post, while not entirely wrong, is extremely superficial.

The Forum post is edited by Anna Mar 28
Dark Enlightenment

Goddamnit, it's still cute isn't it? 


The Forum post is edited by Dark Enlightenment Mar 28
Anna
Anna Mar 29
Awesome. I like it.
LuciferCrow
LuciferCrow Mar 30
I simply don't like the word Nigger because of who it offends, what it can cause and what it implies.  That's that.  My personal opinion, etc.  It really at this point has nothing to do with the "roots" (no pun intended), African Americans find it offensive, and some don't, some could give two shits less.  People have called me a kyke, and Im part Jewish, oh fucking well *shrugs shoulders* I'm horrible with money, my swedish genes are dominant and I"m tattooed from head to toe, sorta.  People are gonna be dicks, and be offensive, I get it, but I try to avoid the word all together unless it's included in art or education. 

*just my opinion*


Anna
Anna Mar 30
From now on, I will be calling you a nigger since you like it so much. No problem. :-) 
Don Luciferi
Don Luciferi May 15
The problem is not normalisation. The problem is that after Gilmore turned CoS into a fascist organisation then the CoS actually died and other organisations was created by people who take elements of the character of Satan they want to identify with and refuse the rest. TST is an example of that. TST is a group of SJW who have made Satanism into fluffy bunny. The character of Satan is indeed an individualist and free thinker but he has also a lust for power and revenge. Lust for being his own god. Satanism is meant for normal intelligent people but it does not mean it's meant for anyone.
AK Mod
AK May 15
To think the fate of Satanism as defined by LaVey was intended to hinge solely upon the competent stewardship of one brick and mortar C/S presumes its founder was oblivious to the sort of thinking that turned Christendom into the loathsome monstrosity that it is today in its down-playing the sanctity of the temple of the indwelling holy spirit in favor of the construction of buildings and the maintenance of hierarchical strata. 


Inasmuch as one's Christian-ness is measured by their inherent spirit of righteousness, fellowship with and compassion for one's fellow man rather than attendance and tithes, one's Satanic-ness is also measured by one's own inherent Satanesque qualities and worldview rather than by membership and ranking within an organization. 


LaVey simply named the quoi for that certain je ne sais quoi the devil's advocates of the past had - the what or essence - which preceded the organization and which will continue to survive just fine without or even in spite of it. Perhaps this is one of the things demonstrated by selling membership to the priesthood. Maybe leaving the organization to Gilmore amplified the same underlying message - yet another filtering mechanism for those far too concerned with serving a satanic organization and appeasing an ideal master for approval and merit rather than they themselves manifesting the satanic in any meaningful way.

The Forum post is edited by AK May 15
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Donate

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps.

Like and Share