Mundanes, RHPers, sheep, and the like.

[1137]

How should our in-groups treat out groups. While I like the O9A I don't agree with their stance on mundanes - at least as far as I understand it. Many individuals and orders treat the out-groups in normal, psych 101 ways. To me this is just acting the same as the act towards us. With the exception of true harm to another's will, I couldn't care less what other groups are doing. Likewise, outside of certain cases, I couldn't care less what they're not doing. It used to be different even with other members like Adramelek where we'd debate subjective preference - usually it was my own fault even. I no longer see any benefit. All of us would like a "better" world I'm sure, but there's a fine line between "enlightened individualism" and treating out-groups the way they treat us.

In my long relationship with the "LHP" I've seen as much hate as from the "RHP". Obviously I have no desire to speak for or reform anything other than my own paradigm, but I'm just asking those this applies to to possibly reevaluate what exactly we stand for. Must elitism breed aggression? Must individuality breed contempt?

This doesn't apply to many of us here but it's a point I feel all seekers on these paths should consider.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

For starters, the clique names have to go.

 

[1137]

For starters, the clique names have to go.

I'd certainly have to use less quotation marks.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

In my long relationship with the "LHP" I've seen as much hate as from the "RHP".

Hate is neither a LHP or a RHP thing. Hate is human. In fact Hate has been a part of our human make up since we were Homo Erectus and perhaps long before. Which I safely assume predates a LHP & RHP.

If politics, religion, LHP, RHP, girl scouts, gangs, share things in common such as Hate, it is because the common denominator in all groups is: Human.

The best place to start to learn how Hate plays a role in social groups: I'd highly recommend a book called "The Lucifer Principle."

The Telling question to ask oneself would be: Knowing that Hate is human, am I comfortable with being human. Or is something wrong with me?

Edit: Hate & out group fights pre-date humanity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7XuXi3mqYM

 

[1137]

Very true that hate is a natural human emotion. However there is no need to let base emotions control us. Mainstream religions try to shut out these things all together while - ironically - being controlled by them and promoting them. Just because we don't see human nature as bad does not mean we need to let these fundamental emotions control us.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

Very true that hate is a natural human emotion. However there is no need to let base emotions control us.

"Base emotions?" As opposed to? Higher emotions? My friend, the dichotomy you may be implying is a false one. Human emotion is human emotion. All are primal, and all action are influenced by them.

Mainstream religions try to shut out these things all together...

Understood. Hence why religion will always lose the battle between primal human emotions.

Just because we don't see human nature as bad does not mean we need to let these fundamental emotions control us.

Well, like I rhetorically asked in my first response: the telling question to ask oneself is: Knowing that hate is human, am I comfortable with being human, or is something wrong with me.

 

[1137]

If it's a human trait - which we agree it is - then there's nothing wrong with you for feeling hate. It's unavoidable. But again, that's not the point. My point is not that hate is bad but that it shouldn't control us. We can be logical instead of purely emotionional. The way is see the "left hand path" is we try to rise to a higher level, kind of a further stage of social evolution. Other groups are built up things like fear and hatred, I don't think we should be. Yes, fearing our emotions and our human nature, trying to deny it, is certainly a bad thing. Your question is definitely applicable to those who believe is sin and that humans are in some sort of "fallen state", but not here.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

If it's a human trait - which we agree it is - then there's nothing wrong with you for feeling hate. It's unavoidable. But again, that's not the point. My point is not that hate is bad but that it shouldn't control us.

I don't disagree. We should be masters of our emotions, and not be mastered by them.

If, I were to have absolute control of my hate and anger, and one day I were to focus that hate and anger masterfully at a single target, such as an ex-boyfriend, or a Jew. Did I do something bad?

If, say, Hitler was a master of human emotions such as Hate, and controlled it; and he focused his people's hate at the Jews: did he do something good since he controlled it?

If I were ONA, and I had a masterful control of my hate, and I used my control to focus it on Mundanes: is that good or bad?

We can be logical instead of purely emotionional. The way is see the "left hand path" is we try to rise to a higher level, kind of a further stage of social evolution.

See now we're moving into murky waters. You first mention "Base emotions." Then you mention "higher level."

Here's the question: What arbitrary criteria are you using to differentiate between that which is "Basal" and that which is "higher?"

Other groups are built up things like fear and hatred, I don't think we should be.

"Think" is the key word in your statement. It is an opinion yes? Thing is, you and I wouldn't be here if it weren't for hate, fear, etc. Our species didn't get this far holding hands and signing Kumbaya with one another. Even such things as the American revolution, wouldn't be possible without the drive of hate, fear, discrimination, blood-thirst, etc. You and I owe what freedom and liberty we enjoy to people who weren't afraid to hate and kill.

 

[1137]

I don't disagree. We should be masters of our emotions, and not be mastered by them.

If, I were to have absolute control of my hate and anger, and one day I were to focus that hate and anger masterfully at a single target, such as an ex-boyfriend, or a Jew. Did I do something bad?

If, say, Hitler was a master of human emotions such as Hate, and controlled it; and he focused his people's hate at the Jews: did he do something good since he controlled it?

If I were ONA, and I had a masterful control of my hate, and I used my control to focus it on Mundanes: is that good or bad?

You seem to believe I'm saying mastery over emotion is the one and only thing that matters. If that was the case then your questions here would put me in quite the pickle. However, mastery over one's emotions is just a piece of the puzzle.

See now we're moving into murky waters. You first mention "Base emotions." Then you mention "higher level."

Here's the question: What arbitrary criteria are you using to differentiate between that which is "Basal" and that which is "higher?"

The two terms were used in completely unconnected contexts which may have caused your confusion. When I say base emotions I'm talking from a very simple stand point that we've all learned in low level psychology courses - emotions that other emotions grow out of. For example, anger and hate are base emotions whereas vengefulness is an emotion that springs from them. What I was talking about with a higher level of social evolution is as simple as it sounds - moving about the base line. When humans don't fling poo at each other over a banana we are showing higher social evolution than a monkey. If you look around you'll see religions and philosophies based around fear, arrogance, and the like. When I say we should evolve to a higher level I mean we can - in theory - act in ways that can create entire new cultures. If we base our religion around advancement instead of fear of death, it brings humanity farther than a religion like christianity.

"Think" is the key word in your statement. It is an opinion yes? Thing is, you and I wouldn't be here if it weren't for hate, fear, etc. Our species didn't get this far holding hands and signing Kumbaya with one another. Even such things as the American revolution, wouldn't be possible without the drive of hate, fear, discrimination, blood-thirst, etc. You and I owe what freedom and liberty we enjoy to people who weren't afraid to hate and kill.

"Think" is all you'll get. If you want strict knowledge and fact you I'll have a very limited amount of room to work with. Most of what anyone discusses is based on inference, opinion, etc. I'd like one quote of me saying we should hold hands. I think you're incorrect when you see someone like a soldier as one who hates and kills. Some? Of course. But talk to a soldier and they want to protect. Hate and killing breeds the countries that early Americans wanted to leave and as we have less hate and blood lust we become more free. Countries like Iran run on hate and bloodlust and have much more limited freedom.

Either way, you're still going on as if I've said there's anything wrong with hate - or any other emotion for that matter. It's a straw man.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I do hold grudges for the right hand path itself, but as a libertarian I'm not going to enforce it beyond conversations explaining or debating why.

It's not indecent to care about what the other path does. I personally don't like the thought of humanity remaining a right-hand dominate thing, and I can't help but see the RHP as a plague sweeping across and infecting man. Human civilization has always been lenient to the right, but I think it could do much better if it were based around left-handed principles. It would not only strengthen humanity, but it would produce something very similar to natural selection.

A world without herd conformity would eventually come, as the masses would remain up until the ground crumbles beneath their feet, that is the time of judgement day. Either it will catch them by their tail of their weaknesses (they'd fall with it, refusing to move on from their principles) or it will reveal their true hypocrisy to themselves and after the look in the mirror they will see a brighter light than even their God cannot bear. They will naturally be granted knowledge of what is so great about using yourself as an energy source.

This is all wishful thinking though, and I doubt it'll ever happen. It's just as likely to happen as world peace, and that is why I do not act on this belief, but remain fighting for my ability to self empower myself and I could care less about humanity anyway. But trust me, when the topic shows up, I try to recommend people to trying on these shoes, and try to move them away from the herds... herd conformity is probably one of the biggest issues with society. Without it there would never have been Nazis, group discrimination, advertising of cults, censorship from the extremists, or any wars meant to prove who is more peaceful than the other.

 

[1137]

When you get the right interfering with the wills of others then of course we should step in. Hell some basic beliefs interfere with the wills of other such as sins against harmless human desires, and we are right there to fight it. Groups like the Nazis very much interfere with the will of individuals, it's something important to care about. On the other hand, without the ideas of the right our species may not even exist. It starts as working together and evolved into governments and stable systems. Everyone would have to accept individualism before we could lean the world left. The problem with that is what was once good has become bad. Even so, I'm not sure the world would survive without many right ideologies. Have you never talked to those who think without heaven or god there can be no morality? Imagine the insanity people would be driven to without objective reasons to exist and nothing awaiting them. These things are all human fears, they are natural, and not everyone can over come them. This is why is see it as two paths towards the same goal - all that dictate right vs left is the means.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

Either way, you're still going on as if I've said there's anything wrong with hate - or any other emotion for that matter. It's a straw man.

It may very well be a straw man.

Have you read your OP?

For example, what is wrong with ONA's stance on mundanes? Why don't you agree?

What do you mean to imply or suggest when you make a comment like: "In my long relationship with the "LHP" I've seen as much hate as from the "RHP"?"

That we should be different from the RHP and not hate?

You also said:

"I'm just asking those this applies to to possibly reevaluate what exactly we stand for."

Re-evaluate what? And what exactly do "we" stand for in your opinion? Who is this "we"? The LHP? What are you suggesting here?

Must elitism breed aggression? Must individuality breed contempt?

That aggression and contempt aren't things "we" stand for?

These also might be straw men.

 

[1137]

It may very well be a straw man.

Have you read your OP?

For example, what is wrong with ONA's stance on mundanes? Why don't you agree?

Stance on mundanes? I don't have a problem with where you place yourself relative to others. Sacrificing them, harassing them, trying to shock and offend them - these are what I personally find unnecessary. You're more than free to disagree.

What do you mean to imply or suggest when you make a comment like: "In my long relationship with the "LHP" I've seen as much hate as from the "RHP"?"

That we should be different from the RHP and not hate?

We can't "not hate". We don't have to act out that hate or build our beliefs on that hate. Hate was just one example also. In context that statement is tied to my point of the "LHP" acting the same way towards the "RHP" as they do towards us. The difference in paths is in the means. If the means are the same it's more likely the paths are the same.

You also said:

"I'm just asking those this applies to to possibly reevaluate what exactly we stand for."

Re-evaluate what? And what exactly do "we" stand for in your opinion? Who is this "we"? The LHP? What are you suggesting here?

Reevaluate how you act. If you're just out there causing things like aggression and hate in the name of your religion then your achieving nothing different than other groups out there. I'm suggesting that if one is going to hold to this " left hand path" and hold the more elitist views we tend to hold, we should handle it in a more "evolved" way than those who essentially swing around their religions like a monkey flinging poop.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

Sacrificing them,

I can understand this.

harassing them, trying to shock and offend them - these are what I personally find unnecessary.

Harassing people... shocking people... and offending people are what you personally find "unnecessary" regarding ONA and Mundanes?

Really? Offending people? LOL.

We don't have to act out that hate or build our beliefs on that hate.

What is the difference in attitude between what you said here, and what one might expect a Christian minister, a Muslim, or a Buddhist [RHP] to say?

Reevaluate how you act. If you're just out there causing things like aggression and hate... I'm just asking those this applies to to possibly reevaluate what exactly we stand for.

Because such ways of action - aggression, hate, harassing people, and offending them are things you believe "we" [LHP] don't "stand for?" Did I get this right?

Says who? Who says what the LHP stands for and why?

we should handle it in a more "evolved" way than those who essentially swing around their religions like a monkey flinging poop.

More "evolved" way? As opposed to what exactly?

I'm interested in hearing more about this "evolved" LHP way of yours. Would you actually be kind enough to write a paragraph or two speaking about your ideal version of the LHP and what "we stand for?"

Do you realize how castrated your LHP sounds like right now?

 

[kerriscott]

While I like the O9A I don't agree with their stance on mundanes - at least as far as I understand it.

In respect of the O9A, 'mundanes' are just those who don't have - or don't have the potential to develop - the type of personal character that O9A folk have or aspire to have, manifest as this personal character is in the O9A logos, aka the code of kindred honor.

Thus, mundanes can be treated in a certain way (as outsiders, strangers, marks), while O9A folk have to be treated in a different way because they're considered 'family'.

It's not therefore a question of 'hating' mundanes, or interfering in their lives, or even of being interested in what they do or don't do in the outside world. It's only a question of how O9A folk personally interact with them on the personal level, and whether or not - given the opportunity - some mundane can be useful (like as in being a mark or an opfer).

 

[1137]

I
Harassing people... shocking people... and offending people are what you personally find "unnecessary" regarding ONA and Mundanes?

Really? Offending people? LOL.

Yes I find this all unnecessary. And yes, "lol" if you need to attempt to / go out of your way to offend people. As I've said elsewhere, I understand shocking and actively offending at certain stages. But when your ideology places focus on actively offending people it's probably time to start pulling from some other sources. If you offend people naturally just by doing what you do then it's hardly your problem. When you go out of your way or actively try to offend people you're pretty much still a slave to their views.

What is the difference in attitude between what you said here, and what one might expect a Christian minister, a Muslim, or a Buddhist [RHP] to say?

They speak, we act.

Because such ways of action - aggression, hate, harassing people, and offending them are things you believe "we" [LHP] don't "stand for?" Did I get this right?

Correct. I don't think a group based around individualism should be bound to other or slave to our own emotions.

Says who? Who says what the LHP stands for and why?

As said - personal interpretations. Welcome to religious forums.

More "evolved" way? As opposed to what exactly?

Less...

Cmon, you're just trollin now.

I'm interested in hearing more about this "evolved" LHP way of yours. Would you actually be kind enough to write a paragraph or two speaking about your ideal version of the LHP and what "we stand for?"

My version of the LHP is a Luciferian one, and I've written numerous paragraphs I've shared here.

Do you realize how castrated your LHP sounds like right now?

Yes, I'm castrated because my religion doesn't rely on shocking people, being bound to their taboos and norms, or needing to offend them and shake them up

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

personal interpretations. Welcome to religious forums.

LOL. Welcome to religious forums?? A place where your personal sentiments becomes something "we stand for?"

My version of the LHP is a Luciferian one...

So it is. Why does your model get to be the standard of the LHP, by which other models are measured and judged?

A version which your local girl scout troop can agree with and not find offensive? LOL.

Yes, I'm castrated

Indeed.

Serrated Edge was right about you.

 

[1137]

LOL. Welcome to religious forums?? A place where your personal sentiments becomes something "we stand for?"

If you're not even at a point to realize that each follower of any path has a general understanding of what it means to walk that path then I'm not sure why we're talking.

So it is. Why does your model get to be the standard of the LHP, by which other models are measured and judged?

Oh it doesn't, I'm just saying that beyond the basics of what it means to be LHP things start to vary. I'm discussing the basics, things that most of us here and elsewhere have agree are the core of the so called LHP.

A version which your local girl scout troop can agree with and not find offensive? LOL.

Oh good, I'm talking to a 16 year old.

Serrated Edge was right about you.

Ooohhhh I see, another one of you super spooky, shock rock Satanists. Rock on man.

 

[ScottySatan]

How should our in-groups treat out groups.

However we want. :yes:

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

harassing them, trying to shock and offend them - these are what I personally find unnecessary.

We don't have to act out that hate or build our beliefs on that hate.

Yes, I'm castrated

Reevaluate how you act. If you're just out there causing things like aggression and hate in the name of your religion then your achieving nothing different than other groups out there.

when your ideology places focus on actively offending people it's probably time to start pulling from some other sources. If you offend people naturally just by doing what you do then it's hardly your problem. When you go out of your way or actively try to offend people you're pretty much still a slave to their views.