Satanism

[High School Marxist]

What are your thoughts on Anton LeVay's Satanism? If you're not familiar with it I suggest you at least wikipedia it.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

A terribly reactionary religion which Anton described as simplified objectivism and Americana personified. Taken away from Anton is can be rather progressive; I know of several comrades who adhere to a modern form of such satanism which stands in opposition to Anton's. Yet under him it was thoroughly reactionary.

Such reactionary gems include: banning of homosexuals, ultra-nationalism, endorsement of antisemitic conspiracies, and association with known fascists.

Anton himself was rather heinous as well with him being an animal abuser, wife-beater, liar and cheat, opportunist, queerphobe, and, in the end, sell-out.

For a hisotry of his church see Michael A. Aquino's "The Church of Satan (https://xeper.org/maquino/nm/COS.pdf)." ( wrote a short review here (http://popculturecoup.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/the-church-of-satan-by-michael-a-aquino/))

[UO_Sadie]

Quelques détails vraiment intéressants que vous avez written.Aided m'a beaucoup, juste ce que je cherchais: D.

[Zostrianos]

I don't know about Lavey espousing reactionary views, but the Temple of Set certainly did. As I recall, Aquino has an unhealthy fascination with the SS.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Such reactionary gems include: banning of homosexuals, ultra-nationalism, endorsement of antisemitic conspiracies, and association with known fascists.

I was unaware that LaVey was the least bit patriotic or nationalistic. Further, he, himself was born a Jew so I don't see why or how he would be anti-Semitic. The Church was also known for embracing and accepting homosexuality as just another sexuality to be enjoyed and not restricted or maligned, pretty progressive for the time actually. Plus, the whole Fascist thing was just aesthetics and shock, though silly. He did hold some reactionary views, ie. his beloved Objectivism.

Did you get all that from Aquino?


Anton himself was rather heinous as well with him being an animal abuser, wife-beater, liar and cheat, opportunist, queerphobe, and, in the end, sell-out.

A lot of that was just bullshit to malign him seeing as he was the Black Pope and all that.


or a hisotry of his church see Michael A. Aquino's "The Church of Satan (https://xeper.org/maquino/nm/COS.pdf)." ( wrote a short review here (http://popculturecoup.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/the-church-of-satan-by-michael-a-aquino/))

Aquino is a highly biased source for info on Anton and the Church, imho. Me, personally, am totally down with Satan as noted by all my entries in this subforum.

[Zostrianos]

Here's another thread that might be of interest:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/theistic-satanism-t168007/index.html

[Zealot]

To my knowledge homosexuality is accepted by Satanists. However, it emphasises individuality over collective action and is a thoroughly reactionary religion in all respects. The first "rule of the earth" states that you should not give opinions or advice "unless you are asked."

Their "High Priest" Peter H. Gilmore has said (http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/Politics.html) with regards to politics:


“As has been said many times before, one’s politics are up to each individual member, and most of our members are political pragmatists. They support political candidates and movements whose goals reflect their own practical needs and desires. Our members span an amazing political spectrum, which includes but is not limited to: Libertarians, Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Reform Party members, Independents, Capitalists, Socialists, Communists, Stalinists, Leninists, Trotskyites, Maoists, Zionists, Monarchists, Fascists, Anarchists, and just about anything else you could possibly imagine. It is up to each member to apply Satanism and determine what political means will reach his/her ends, and they are each solely responsible for this decision. Freedom and responsibility—must be a novel concept for those who aren’t Satanists. We take it in stride. Members who demand conformity from other members to their particular political fetish are welcomed to depart.”

On the same page, the writer makes the claim that "...idealism (such as changing the world) is less important than the principle of getting what you want for yourself." This "idealism" to change the world is supposedly a common phase in humans that ends at the age of 24.

He rambles elsewhere: (http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/Feared.html)


"Let us instead look at contemporary Satanism for what it really is: a brutal religion of elitism and social Darwinism that seeks to re-establish the reign of the able over the idiotic, of swift justice over injustice, and for a wholesale rejection of egalitarianism as a myth that has crippled the advancement of the human species for the last two thousand years."

The Satanic code of behavior is supposedly "based on human nature". There are apparently "provable biological differences between the races and statistically demonstrable performance levels in various activities". They unashamedly declare their love for "fostering the practice of eugenics" by mating "the best with the best."

Here is their view on the future police force they want to create: "we would be pleased to see the institution of an elite police force, of men and women in peak physical and mental condition, trained in advanced techniques of crime fighting who would be truly equipped to handle the vermin that make so many of our cities into little more than concrete jungles."

I could go on but their reactionary views are clear. They claim to be uninvolved with promoting political views but as you can see they actually do promote some very strong and completely absurd politics and pseudo-science. In conclusion, leftists should stay well away from this right-wing, anti-human religion.

[LordAcheron]

a pathetic attempt at rebellion. Pretty much everything they view as rebellious (and therefore worthy of the symbol of lucifer) upholds the status quo. following Jesus is probably the most rebellious religious (I know, I know, modern satanism isn't a religion) act of all if you really look at what Jesus stood for.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

a pathetic attempt at rebellion. Pretty much everything they view as rebellious (and therefore worthy of the symbol of lucifer) upholds the status quo. following Jesus is probably the most rebellious religious (I know, I know, modern satanism isn't a religion) act of all if you really look at what Jesus stood for.
Jesus stood for what the author of the Biblical political thesis etched him out to be. He still supported undying and absolute authority from the sky.

On topic, smoke meth heil satan. 666. /METAPHYSICALTEENAGER

[LordAcheron]

he opposed the accumulation of wealth and he opposed the rule of humans; the kingdom of man. The bible is littered with anarchist ideals. Not in the "no gods no masters" sense, but in the sense of non-hierarchical organization and such. Even the early church was a primitive form of communism.

[znk666]

Didn't Levay himself said that his version of satanism is technically ''Ayn Rand's ideology with a ceremony and a ritual added''?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Homosexuality was publicly accepted in the Satanic Bible but it wasn't accepted within the Church after a certain point prior to the founding of the Temple of Set. Due to several controversies within the church, and Anton's narrow world view, homosexuals were secretly banned from attaining membership. And though Anton might have been born Jewish it evidently did not stop him from promoting the whole "jews control the world media" nonsense. It is all really too much for me to go into right now but Aquino made a splendid history of the church of Satan comprised mainly of letters.

I wrote short review of the book...


Chronicled within Michael’s book The Church of Satan is a comprehensive history of the so-named organization. In such a highly Judaic-Christian society any mention at all of such an organization is taboo, yet, for the persons who were on the front lines of such a movement nothing is off-limits.
To call Michael’s work the definitive edition of the Church of Satan’s history would not be an understatement. Indeed, coming from someone who attained the Second Level of the Fourth Degree within the Church-Magister Templi IV-II- as well as the founding High Priest of the Temple of Set (The Church of Satan’s spiritual successor) nothing less than perfection is to be expected.
The book is comprehensive, to say the least. With over 800 listed sources and over 530 pages of Appendixes, the author’s coverage of the Church’s rise and decline is extensive. Starting from Anton LaVey’s early career, leading to the formal founding, and enduring the painful growths of being noticed by the sensationalist public, the book only ends with the Church’s gruesome demise.
Throughout the length the reader is treated to every secret, obstacle and reactionary tirade regarding the Church and Anton LaVey’s activity. Among the masses list of such “dirty laundry” is Anton’s animal cruelty, domestic violence, homophobia, opportunist lying tendencies, as well as, by the end, his material lust thus becoming a sell-out and obscure cultist.
From a genuinely progressive viewpoint one cannot excuse any of the uber-reactionary tendencies of the church; the American nationalism and mystifying anti-communism, the latter policy to expel and bar homosexuals, along with the personality cult as well as the cowardly, elitist manners in which he handled church attacks and events, hardly constitutes anything worthy defending even minutely on the part of any Leftist.
While Michael’s ignorant tendencies occasionally reveal themselves throughout this memoir his own beliefs are largely pushed to the background instead leaving most of the pages devoted to unraveling Anton’s crazed world.
Still, though drowned in unforgivable worldviews the concept of “worshiping one’s innate needs through the use of melodramatic ritual” seems to be something to stay for a while more and this text is as detailed as any scholar on the subject could ask. Though bias, unsurprisingly, I believe it to offer a glimpse into not only Anton’s mind but that of the larger religious history of Western society.


One can find the full version of the history for free here: https://xeper.org/maquino/nm/COS.pdf

The Church was very nationalistic, I really do not think this is a point for contention. Looking at any of the histories and attitudes will reveal that (as Anton himself did numerous times within his works). The Temple of Set was descended from the CoS so if you say that the Temple was nationalistic than surely one would realize that the Church was nationalistic as well; after all, one doesn't simply gain ones views from nowhere, especially when the Temple was an "evolution" and "pure restored version" of the CoS.

[Anarchocommunaltoad]

Satanism in general is either
A) a weakly thought out acceptance of a douchy at best symbol of rebellion
or
B) extremely reactionary and all around evil form of thought process
and even
C) Degenerate acolytes of the nemesis of mankind who must be eradicated:laugh:

[LordAcheron]

Didn't Levay himself said that his version of satanism is technically ''Ayn Rand's ideology with a ceremony and a ritual added''?
he did, but it has progressed significantly since then. There are even strands of socialist satanism because socialism allows for more individuality and freedom than capitalism does. I know tons of satanists who aren't objectivists at all.

[hetz]

It's reactionary bullshit.
That's all there is to it.

[Let's Get Free]

I don't know too much about it, but this is what Anton Lavey said; "My religion is just Ayn Rand's philosophy with ceremony and ritual added."

[bots]

Homosexuality was publicly accepted in the Satanic Bible but it wasn't accepted within the Church after a certain point prior to the founding of the Temple of Set. Due to several controversies within the church, and Anton's narrow world view, homosexuals were secretly banned from attaining membership. And though Anton might have been born Jewish it evidently did not stop him from promoting the whole "jews control the world media" nonsense. It is all really too much for me to go into right now but Aquino made a splendid history of the church of Satan comprised mainly of letters.

Wasn't Kenneth Anger one of the founding members in the Order of the Trapezoid? Aquino really is mostly full of shit.

[statichaos]

An incredibly silly and fortunately non-influential group of would-be rebels who seem to think that they're somehow superior for buying into LaVey's brand of bullshit rather than more socially acceptable brands of bullshit.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Wasn't Kenneth Anger one of the founding members in the Order of the Trapezoid? Aquino really is mostly full of shit.

I don't know bur regardless of whether he was or wasn't the council was a consultative body, not a democratic administrative body. It existed to give Anton advice but not pass and overrule his decisions. The members sexual orientation wouldn't have much to do with the direction the church would later take; gay members were accepted in the beginning but not after some disruptive events where Anton gave into reactionary bias and ban them out of frustration (a bigoted action as Aquino describes equally as many scandals with heterosexual members).

[GoddessCleoLover]

Adherents of Satanism seem to accept the premise that religion is something more than "the soul of a soulless world".

[ClassLiberator]

he opposed the accumulation of wealth and he opposed the rule of humans; the kingdom of man. The bible is littered with anarchist ideals. Not in the "no gods no masters" sense, but in the sense of non-hierarchical organization and such. Even the early church was a primitive form of communism.
Jesus condoned slavery and sought to torture those who did not believe in him for all of eternity. There may be some quotes attributed to Jesus condemning the dominance of the bourgeoisie but equally malicious quotes can be found.

1 Peter 2:13: Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men.

1 Peter 2:18: Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

Matthew 10:34: Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Luke 12:47-48: But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.


Need I go on?

[ClassLiberator]

It's just an appallingly violent and selfish form of atheism practiced by pseudo-rebels.