Author Topic: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?  (Read 501 times)

Hapu

Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« on: August 28, 2019, 09:38:48 pm »
In case anyone doesn't know what I'm talking about:
https://www.churchofsatan.com/pentagonal-revisionism/

Do you actually care about (or ever really think about) the five points?

Stratification
This happens naturally unless artificially subverted. The welfare state would be an artificial subversion so in theory the CoS opposes the welfare state. (In practice the CoS can't do anything about it.) Not something that keeps me up at night.

Taxing Churches
Not something that keeps me up at night. Increasing the federal government's tax revenue would simply give politicians more money to use comically or tragically.

Religious Beliefs Made into Law
This one is important to me. The Lex Talionis rant leaves me cold but laws that restrict the freedoms of the LGBT+ community would fall into this category, and despite the fact that I'm not a member of that community, I'm in solidarity with their cause, as Satanists have been from the beginning.

Artificial Human Companions
I totally want one. For sex. There, I said it.

Total Environments
This one has always baffled me, since nothing stops anyone from building a total environment right this minute. Does the CoS want money from the welfare state to help fund this? Not something that keeps me up at night.

So sexbots and no laws against sexbots and no anti-LGBT+ laws... yeah, that about does it for me.

How about you?



 
 

Xepera-maSet

  • Guest
Re: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2019, 01:19:15 pm »
Yeah, welfare states are not something I'm for. I'm down to help people, but we go about it all wrong. Here in AZ I know people who can't even get FMLA for their real problems while trying to work, but the heroin addict who neglects her children and just doesn't feel like it makes more just off the government! Help people, but fairly and reasonably.

Yes, tax churches. So much would be solved with that massive income. If the O.S. made any money we'd happily avoid tax exemption status.

Secularism all the way.

I don't have any opposition to the idea, but I'm not sure the sex robots are for me personally. You enjoy if it's your thing!

I don't really get the "total environment" thing? Do they mean like a self contained biome?

Beleren777

Re: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2019, 01:30:11 pm »
Gilmore talks sex robots and artificial environments in this older interview. I think it sounds a bit insane personally, ymmv:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5IOv7HAPao&list=PL0cMbacaB0JYwgpep0FED2O65pD9L1p7W


Hapu

Re: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2019, 05:16:46 pm »
Gilmore talks sex robots and artificial environments in this older interview. I think it sounds a bit insane personally, ymmv:

That was a good video. Thanks for posting it.

Capsule summaries of what Gilmore said about the Five Points:

1. "No guaranteed equality of outcome."

Seems like a repudiation of Marx's dictum from 1875, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

A society such as Marx envisioned doesn't exist anywhere on Earth and doesn't seem likely to emerge, so here again, this is not something that keeps me up at night.

I'll note, however, that some of the earliest members of the CoS were Marxists. In the 1960s the Marxists were very definitely seen as the Adversary.


2. "Satan represents law and order, not misguided leniency."

So it really isn't about the separation of church and state at all. I had thought Lex Talionis was merely an example of what they were getting at. Apparently it's the whole point. If I lived in an urban locale where I had to fear getting mugged, I guess I'd care more about this.

I suppose it fits the Old Testament archetype of Satan the Accuser. But even more so, it fits the Old Testament archetype of Jehovah.


3. "Satan represents bot abuse, not child, animal, or spouse abuse."

I actually kind of like that. Incidentally, Japan is leading the way here.


4. "Taxing churches will force them to stand on their own two feet."

I think it's true that some Christian congregations would fold if they suddenly had to pay taxes. This would force the congregants to travel to more distant locations for Sunday services. I don't get any pleasure out of that prospect. I simply don't care what these people do. Except to the extent that they try to meddle with the rest of us. And most of them don't. They sit there daydreaming through the Sunday service and then they go home and stuff themselves with spaghetti and meatballs.


5. "Disney World times a hundred!"

So the CoS wants more theme parks. OK. I personally don't, but whatever floats their boat.










 

Cabshear

Re: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2019, 01:42:55 am »
I like strict taxation of churches and eradication of the welfare state. Churches, like the welfare state, want something for nothing. Everyone else has to pay their taxes, Jesus doesn’t get a free pass.

First step to removal of the W.S. is to put an indefinite hold on voting for those who aren’t net taxpayers.

Artificial Human Companion doesn’t directly translate to sex robots. The Den of Iniquity was a working involving AHCs. They can be sexual and I don’t see it being forced on anyone. Honestly, I can understand why so many people would turn to sexbots/dolls in this day in age. LaVey was very much ahead of his time.

Also pleasure domes, in a simple sense, are ritual chambers. Using the ritual chamber to emulate the archetypal person or desired situation you wish to become or be apart of. Examples can be found in the Satanic Warlock, the Mammon ritual in the Dracomeroth, or Die Elecktrican Vorspiel.

Even using demonic looking sexdolls within the ritual chamber would combine the sexual side of ACHs and pleasure domes. A Lilith ritual could be developed to summon a succubus or mistress of darkness to enjoy within that space.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2019, 04:17:33 am by Cabshear »
I...The Aethyr of my Self as Dreamt in Perfection,
a Solitary and Nomadic Path, the Starlight to the Prism of the Mindstar. Not is my Name known.

-Variation on Andrew Chumbley's Azoetia Invocation

Kapalika

Re: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2019, 12:08:07 pm »
Unfortunately a lot of what is suggested to encourage a meritocracy (when it comes to extreme economic liberterianism) in reality usually leads to nepotism and corporatism. Look at the coal towns in West Virginia's history for how this plays out... a company sets up a literal town, and the next thing you know they are paying you in store credits but intentionally don't even give you enough to make ends meet so you end up in debt to them.


Unions helped change that, but essentially lack of regulation doesn't lead to meritocracy.


Any person who's family is wealthy can invest in them or give them certain advantages. A poor person who started from nothing has more merit by pulling it off without money from family. But since the ones with money are making the rules in a corporatism, they can crush any potential competition not based on merit but through shady practices to establish monopolies (ever notice how quality of products fall whenever there is a monopoly?).


Without some kind of limits in place, those in power will secure the power for their own family and shut out anyone they personally don't like. I can point to India's caste system as an example of how a system of stratification once based on ability and meritocracy was corrupted by nepotism. Priests wanted to centralize that power so made it hereditary (although a lot of this was made much worse by British occupation who used it to help subjugate the populace).


I mention the lack of regulation and extreme economic liberterianism because as far as I know, it's what is espoused by the CoS. The outcome isn't that the "strong" excel in the arts or business, but that those with money do. Just because your grandfather was smart and founded some company doesn't mean you are nearly as smart or hard working as he was and yet you reap those advantages without having done anything to actually earn or deserve it. It's familial welfare.
https://kapalika.com

My religion is Satanism & Kashmir Shaivism via Vāmācāra

"We have none but evidence for the prosecution [against Satan] and yet we have rendered the verdict. To my mind, this is irregular. It is un-English. It is un-American; it is French." ... "We may not pay him reverence, for that would be indiscreet, but we can at least respect his talents." - Mark Twain
"God and the individual are one. To realize this is the essence of Shaivism." - Swami Lakshmanjoo

Cabshear

Re: Pentagonal Revisionism, anyone?
« Reply #6 on: September 20, 2019, 04:13:49 pm »
Keep in mind, if only net taxpayers vote when it comes to money changing hands, if unethical things happen such as voting themselves more money, using nepotism or crony capitalism they will almost instantly disenfranchise themselves. The people put most of the money into the system are the one's who need to determine where that money goes. Because, the people who don't have it will vote themselves all the forces necessary to take that money by force. All they will need is some moralistic reason to take that money. I can think of one:

Quote
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." -Karl Marx

here's another!

Quote
So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen. St. Matthew 20:16

Democracy always devolves into mob rule. Communism always results in people starving to death. The people start realizing they can vote themselves the keys to the kingdom, then they start being generous with other people's money.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2019, 04:20:00 pm by Cabshear »
I...The Aethyr of my Self as Dreamt in Perfection,
a Solitary and Nomadic Path, the Starlight to the Prism of the Mindstar. Not is my Name known.

-Variation on Andrew Chumbley's Azoetia Invocation