Path: shell.portal.com!usenet
From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (mordred)
Newsgroups: alt.satanism,alt.magick.tyagi
Subject: Satanism and Herd Elitism
Date: 21 Dec 1994 05:50:11 GMT
Organization: Portal Communications (shell)
Lines: 153
Message-ID: <3d8fmj$ba6@news1.shell>
Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (mordred)
NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com
Summary: This is a review of an article from 'The Black Flame' by J. Deboo.
Keywords: Satanism, Conformity, Herd, Elitism, CoS, Deboo
Xref: shell.portal.com alt.satanism:12911 alt.magick.tyagi:1647

Kali Yuga 49941220


I have a few things to say about 'organized Satanists' while taking the
opportunity to review a very nice article by Jeffrey Deboo in 'The Black 
Flame' 4:3/4.  The article is entitled 'Herd Elitist Ideologies, A Field 
Guide', to be found on page 41, and I shall omit the bulk of it to 
emphasize a few very important points.

It seems ludicrous and somewhat self-contradictory to me that this
article appears within 'The Black Flame', given the typical elitism and
the obvious bias of its overall content toward the Church of Satan.
In this way it is a clear note amidst a somewhat cacophonous blast,
though some of this noise was interesting. :>

And yet even the author fails to completely exemplify the apparent point
of his article, placing seemingly self-deprecatory references to what I
can only call 'slams on membership categories'.  Let me quote for you
his main thesis, which I think is quite sound and I support it strongly:

"What distinguishes a herd-elitist ideology from a Satanic one is its
criterion of superiority: rather than judging each individual independently
as superior or inferior on the basis of that individual's unique qualities,
the herd-elitist assigns superior or inferior status to people based on
their *membership in a category*."

Now this assertion may imply a self-deprecation (something similar to 
which I attempted to squirm my way out of when Mr. Scratch recently accused
me of dividing people into two groups -- those who divide people up into 
two kinds of people and those who don't), in that the implication is that 
'Satanists are better than herd-elitists', and by generating and using this 
theory about herd-elitist ideology I am in fact engaging in a type of 
herd-elitism myself.

Bypassing this logical, semantical problem (since I can just state that the 
principle will apply to all OTHER circumstances than that of my primary),
I see this as a very important criteria to separate true Satanists from 
pseudo-Satanists.  In fact, I'm rather fond of the opinion that in the 
SAME way that there are no 'chaotic organizations', there are also no 
'satanic organizations'.  Perhaps 'Chaos (Magick)', Thelema and Satanism
share a very important quality in this regard.

Later in the article Mr. Deboo separates himself (and me, the 'real 
Satanist' reader) from racists.  I like what he has to say here, but what 
struck me as most important was his language.  Towards the end of his 
anti-racist rant, he wrote: "the assumption, presumably, is that *we 
individualists* will fall for [the race-supremacist] identity just because 
it happens to be socially unacceptable."  My emphasis.

I suppose it is fairly commonly assumed that Satanism is very close to or
identical with Individualism.  Rand, Nietzsche, Crowley -- some of the more
individualistic writers -- are associated with Satanism as well as are 
their philosophical movements (e.g. Objectivism, Existentialism, Thelema,
respectively).  Yet seldom do people take it one step further and look
into the implications that this may have with respect to ORGANIZATIONS.

I've been looking at organizations for a while now, sometimes inside them,
sometimes from the outside, sometimes on the edges.  I've come up with a few
postulates and one of them is that organizations, orders, groups of people,
inherently function as a herd.  It is a natural response to a density of
population, and this influences physical, emotional and intellectual realms 
of conformity.  If this is true, and if Individualism is a very important 
aspect of Satanism (or Thelema for that matter), then 'Satanic group' is 
an oxymoron.  By its very nature it runs directly counter to Individualism.

Thus if I try to separate out 'real Satanists' from 'pseudo-Satanists', then 
the first thing I'll look for is whether or not they are officially part 
of a group, the second is how involved they may be in that organization
and who is calling the shots within it.  Mr. Deboo has a LOT to say about
this issue when he begins to describe CULTISM:

"Members gather together to reassure one another of their superiority
and to sneer at those who are not members of the Cult.  The strongest
disdain is aimed not at the social mainstream but at those who, instead
of belonging to the Cult, belong to some rival cult which in fact is
hardly different."

I can't imagine a more accurate description of the insipid feuding between
the members of CoS and ToS, and it describes perfectly to me the type of
herd-mentality which I see in this newsgroup half the time, squabbling
about what past Nth Degree Member did what to whose lover during what Aeon.
'No, let me correct you.'  'No, you are merely biased.'  'No, you just
don't understand.'  'No, you are just trying to spew your propaganda.'
'No, it is YOU who are trying to spew the propaganda, ours is based upon
social documentation.'  Etc.   Two groups of Satanic Cultists duking it out.

If this was all that Mr. Deboo had to say on the matter I would be very
pleased, but he goes ON, and most adroitly!

"Most pseudo-Satanic groups fall into this category; each a small, insular
knot of people with little in the way of a philosophical stance except
repeated assertions that they are the Real Thing and that all the other
similar groups are phonies."

Sure he is being extreme here, perhaps to cover his ass and maybe to get
his article accepted by a publication edited by CoS cronies.  But I think
that his point remains in its germane form: pseudo-Satanists are the ones
who portray themselves as the Real Thing and fight with other Satanists
about what makes a Satanist and what constitutes disqualification.  As far 
as I'm concerned, the only opinion that is important is that of the 
*individual*, me, and I can make up my mind any damn way I please.  
Anything more than this is CULTISM, which it seems organizations may 
naturally inspire.

Skipping the discussion of another potentially self-deprecatory statement
("...herd-elitist ideologies have a natural appeal to inferior people."), 
I'd like to focus on Mr. Deboo's closing paragraph:

"The Satanist identifies fellow members of the elite by their individual
qualities and achievements -- not by their race, nationality, group
affiliation, descent, or any other categorical criterion.  There is no
form of 'hypocritical self-deceit' more insidious than thinking oneself
Satanic merely because one has joined a small herd which is out of favor
with the big one."

What marvellous words.  I would emphasize these words and posit further
the notion that group affiliation indicates a COMPROMISING aspect to an
individual's Satanism.  I don't mean to suggest that anyone within a
group is ipso facto a pseudo-Satanist, only that they'd be engaging a
very dangerous type of activity (joining a potential herd), and should 
therefore be dealt a more healthy dose of skepticism.

Just as 'lone Christians' are seen with some trepidation by those who
frequent the Masses, so also should those from 'Satanic groups' be
scrutinized carefully as to the calibre of their awareness, individuality, 
and self-respect.  Are they following right in step with group doctrines 
and philosophies?  Do they wear all the appropriate accoutrements of the 
'faith'?  Have they submitted themselves to the lowest common denominator 
of the group for some reason?  Do they perpetually talk up the founder
and/or central figure or deity of the group?  If so, beware.

I started off this article with a slam on 'The Black Flame' and its
contents.  Let me qualify my criticism by saying that I enjoyed a number
of the articles within it and felt very inspired by its content.  However,
my job as a Satanist is to be on my toes with respect to groups, whether
or not they are given some sort of name (but especially those which come
with identifying labels).  I look critically at the weaknesses and
stengths of any organization and the people within it.

In fact, I contend that there is only one kind of true Satanist and that
is the Lone Satanist.  Sure, I might be affiliated with a group or two, 
but ultimately I have my own ideas about things, am not all that 
concerned with whether I am 'in sync' with others who use similar 
terminology, and tend to be VERY critical of organizations, *especially*
any with which I may associate.  

That's right, a REAL Satanist organization will be composed of people who
level as much criticism toward their *own* membership and organizational
structure as they would about anyone else's.  It is the nature of the
Individualist Beast that she must keep to this practice diligently else
become part of one more Cult, slowly corrupted by the pseudo-Satanic herd.

nagasiva, tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (The Order of K@s Under Satan)