a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.


Satanism and Social Darwinism, Logically Defended

To: (ZAZAS-L Satanist Elist)
From: (nocTifer)
Subject: (Z) Satanism and Social Darwinism, Logically Defended (was Q: COS...) 
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 21:00:59 -0800 (PST)

49971230 aa2 Hail Satan!                      (X-posted everywhere)

from alt.satanism: Nils Christian Framstad :
# These questions (and views....

many views omitted.  briefly, I find the analysis rather 
valuable and concur with the Wizard that LaVey's barking cannot 
really be taken for a sincere philosophical foundation.  with 
that I will try to salvage something of what he wrote, since 
so many of those contributing to forums in which this appears
are arguing contrary to it and those who support it fare so
poorly in their efforts (as is typical of the CoSatanic herd).

# ...I have no membership in any religous society....

I have membership in a few, but not (yet) CoS.

# ...take as given (for the sake of the discussion) that man is an
# animal, that the ethically correct thing for man is to behave 
# like one (implying the law of the jungle, the strongest's right 
# and the survival of the fittest), and that any human being's God 
# is the his/herself, implying that his/her will is his/her Law.

some logical problems here.  animals don't generally bother with
'ethics', doing what they wilt any time they wilt.  it is 
impossible for human beings NOT to 'act like animals', since the
entirety of human culture and behavior IS animal behavior, albeit
of a particular 'human' variety.  if you want to begin looking at
animal behaviors and suggesting, in an obviously human-type
manner, how humans should behave and that this is 'as an animal',
then I don't think you should be taken seriously -- there is too
much variety in animal behavior to provide a meaningful referent.

secondly, 'the law of the jungle' is an euphemism for 'lawlessness'
and cannot be used meaningfully except to contrast restriction
to 'civilized' human norms.  'the strongest's right' roughly
amounts to the same 'might makes right' mentality which promotes
a nihilism of morals.  I'm not criticizing this philosophical
position, but asserting it as somehow a 'requirement' or
'justified' enters into illogic.  might is its own justifica-
tion within this dominator-paradigm, and has all the problems
which you bring up in LaVey's attempt to co-opt it toward the
modern American norms.

'survival of the fittest' has little or nothing to do with
species interaction, being an adaptive genetic variation 
within specific environments that leads to proliferation and 
'successful reproduction'.  it is only vaguely and poorly
applied to human beings, some of whom have acquired sufficient
control of technology and resources to make terran 
environment a fairly negligible cheese-grate of 'survival'.

examining LaVey's the Rules of the Earth: 
# 3: Why show another respect in his lair? If I am the stronger, why
# should I show respect if I do not want to, and am not forced to? 
# Isn't _respect_shown_on_command_ a kind of herd conformity?

this is only directed to those who are weaker than the 'lair-owner',
since a 'lair' is a spatial expanse defined by the dominion of the
more powerful.  thus the suggested respect is of survival value.

# 5: Why should I wait for a mating signal to make sexual advances? 

with technology and the social support of the empowerment of humans 
(through legislation), it is of practical value to conform to the
will of others where sexual boundaries are concerned.  if there is
little to be feared as regards violation of these boundaries, then
'law of the jungle' would of course indicate that no such waiting
need take place.  'the mating signal' is, within such a perspective, 
defined by the more powerful of the participants.  if you are more
powerful (note that I'm not being sexist here), you may see the
mating signal wherever you like it to be.  of late power has begun
to include ability to wield legislative (and police) influence.

# 6: Why should I not take something which does not belong to me? 

due to the repercussions which are likely to ensue.  the location
and identification of 'property', like 'mating signals', is 
defined by the most powerful in the interaction.  if you are
powerful enough, everything belongs to you and you have no need
to fear exercizing your dominion.  organizations (e.g. states)
typically acquire more and more property, sometimes co-opted by
the powerful and priveleged.

# ...If man is just another animal, why should grown-ups _not_ 
# harm children?

you misunderstand the Law of Thelema as it supports the Jungle:
there is no 'should' and there is no 'should not' as regards any
sort of 'ethical persuasion'.  these are all merely rational
confoundings of simple statements about power-relationships.
it is valuable to respect children because of the rights that
children are likely to be afforded to bodily and psychological
integrity by the wider society.  so far this is of variable 
potence depending on geography and class standing.

# ...If my will is my law, why do I need rules at all?

if your will has been concealed from you.  if you have been
influenced to conflate social norms and personal will without
regard to contextual repercussion (human animals, like other
species, must take into consideration the variables of
action lest they be destroyed by the results).  'rules' and
such are only considered rigid by the immature.  the mature
human being understands that such systems are merely guidelines
with different modes and levels of enforcement depending on
what it is that constitutes the danger inspiring them.  the
immature will naturally accept it as rigid and without question.

part of maturation is learning the rationale behind the rules,
as these are typically the keys provided in initiation,
whether through knowledge and conversation with the guardian,
or direct encounter with any dangers supporting the guideline.
# 1: Complaining that stupidity isn't painful? 
# ...stupidity seems not to violate man's nature?

human society generally ameliorates the repercussions of
blatant stupidity through remediation (public schooling,
citation and fine, insurance, etc.).  the pre-historic
repercussions of stupidity (weeding of the gene pool)
have been tempered through the destruction of natural
(that is, wild, Satanic) hazards or sufficient buffer so
as to protect human nature from them.

it is impossible to "violate" human nature except to
violate an individual's will through acting contrary
to their consent regarding that of their previous 
dominion.  'violation' is merely a breakage of what
had heretofore been considered a stable boundary.

some of these boundaries are subject to negotiation,
as human personal, bodily boundaries, which can be
'violated' by another human being (or other mobile
object) and then 'restituted' through social legal
recompense or punishment.
# 5: Herd conformity a sin? Herd conformity is a way 
# of adapting. Did I hear "survival of the fittest"?

you misunderstand the nature of 'sins' as presented by
the cogent Social Darwinist (he says, not having ever
read any but making it up while trying to defend LaVey,
whose text on the subject he has not yet read ;>).

a 'sin' is merely an assertion which the speaker would
care to dissuade, whether this speaker is the agent
of a religious organization, a political machine, or
just expressing hir personal preferences.

herd conformity is dangerous to the individual in key
points -- as when its will and power coincide to remove
hir liberty.  this is the danger of purely democratic
social systems, and was one of the reforms attempted
by the founders of the US (a democratic republic, 
regardless of its possible success).
the fittest human doesn't generally exhibit herd-
characteristics, as these are more often than not the
members of the class of the ruled, the dominated and 
programmed.  there is benefit to herd-conformity in
the human species only when the herd is achieving
some sort of group boon by which each individual will
somehow profit (thus describing behavior outside
'unconscious conformism').

# 9: Lack of Aestethics a sin? Hmmm - aestethics is 
# only for pleasure, isn't it? Shouldn't anyone choose 
# for him/herself what pleasures to enjoy, and what to reject?

refinement of aesthetic taste and cultivation of skill in
the selection of media of beauty ensures the proper
education necessary for excellence.  absolutes aren't
generally a necessity of aesthetics, though there are
some commonalities based on shared social acculturation
and shared biophysical structure (human biases).
# > It is the practice of encouraging people of talent andability to 
# > reproduce, to enrich the gene pool from which ourspecies can grow. 

# > Satanists seekto mate the best with the best. Satanists who know 
# > that they aredefective refrain from reproducing.
# Isn't reproduction a major part of human nature? Doesn't this mean 
# that Satanists who know they are defective, refrain from behaving 
# like the animal Satanism says they are?

'reproduction' has outgrown the mere biological encasement within
which normal progenation takes place.  mimicry, assimilation of the
memes expressed by a specific organism, and association with the
physical remnants of a human being are all means by which a human
is capable of 'reproducing', albeit less physically than 

in fact genetics have become less of an important factor for the
Satanist, who sees that familial lines of authority are more often
than not shams, class distinctions and 'blood' arguments are just
masquerades by which to convince disoriented humans to conform
to being dominated by an elite.

anything humans do is covered by 'human nature', including sex
and the generation and killing of progeny.  'defectiveness' is
a meme which becomes tautological.  those who deem themselves
'defective' are automatically so.  typically those who
consider themselves, within any paradigm 'defective' refrain
from giving energy to additional 'breakage' and 'waste' or
'the dead end'.

# > Satanists are particulary disgusted by the extraordinary 
# > level ofcriminal activity which abounds today and thus 
# > advocate a returnto the Roman "Lex Talionis"; let the 
# > punishment fit in kind anddegree the crime. To achieve 
# > this, we would be pleased to see theinstitution of
# Return to Roman law? Isn't this a return to the Holy Bible?

absolutely not.  at least the Christian scripture advocates
a turn away from 'an eye for an eye', instead suggesting that
we 'turn the other cheek' (you decide what this means).

# > an elite police force, of men and women in peakphysical and mental
# chickening out? 

# > To achieve this, we would be pleased to see the institution of 
# > an elite police force, an American Schutzstaffel as it were, 
# > of men and women in peak physical and mental condition,"
# American Schutzstaffel? Maybe the Nazi retorics weren't suited 
# for the web site?

the police protect the property, boundaries and interests of the
elite political or social class who rules over them.  the Satanist,
by this rhetoric, maintains laws over the herd so that they will
not destroy their resource and labor force interests.  this need
not include any sort of National Socialism.

# ...Why should COS advocate _punishment_ and _police force_ when 
# they advocate _vengeance_ (instead of turning the other cheek 
# etc.)? 

the police and legislative systems are modern tools for the
achievement of revenge where personal action cannot win out.

# Police, court, prison and electric chair are collective means, 
# meant to protect those unable to seek their own vengeance - 
# the weak. 

traditionally the legislative systems favor the upper classes
and those with wealth.  liberty is minimized except to those
who have the proper social influences and can manipulate the
system itself to their advantage.  e.g. the US legislative
system's consistent destruction of native American rights and 
culture through the disregard of the US Constitution for the 
purposes of serving a predominantly Christian upper class at
the expense of minority religious.

# Besides, taking part in the punishment of someone who hasn't 
# done _you_ any harm, isn't it herd conformity?

no, individual participation in group activity is not, by virtue
of such participation, ipso facto, herd conformity.  the herd
is not only a group behaving alike but maintains a certain state
of consciousness (or, more accurately, UNconsciousness).
# > condition, trained in advanced techniques ofcrime fighting who would
# > be truly equipped to handle the verminthat make so many of our cities
# > into little more than concretejungles. Man is by nature a social
# Did you or did you not support the law of the jungle?

the 'concrete jungle' operates by a different set of laws than
the human 'might makes right' perspective can support.  it
favors those who countravene the will of the elite that support
the police and legislative systems.  typically this is a kind
of 'eddy' wherein power has been diverted by virtue of insane
prohibition schemes (becoming organized crime and black markets) 
and insubstantial punitive consequences ('protection' of the
criminal's rights at the expense of societal harmony).

# > creature and makes his socialcontract with his fellows, 
# > thus rules of
# These speculations on what human nature is, are most probably 
# correct - but are they compatible with the strongest's right?

'rights' are defined by the exercise of power, whether in the
sense of domination or protection from said domination.  they
have no real meaning otherwise.

# > conduct are establishedto allow maximum freedom for individuals to
# Definitely. But you can hardly call rules of conduct 
# "anti-Christian", can you? And again, isn't obeying 
# social rules of conduct herd conformity?

the objective is not necessarily (except in those who are prone
to adopt social rules) to instill conformity.  it is the act
which *depends* on social rules that is most attuned to herd
conformity standards (be that in opposition or support).  the
conduct recommended by knowledgeable Satanists may or may not
conform to Christian historical standards (these have varied
over time), but would seem to arise from a very different
identifiable motivation (less doctrine-driven and more self-
originated and selfish in a very general sense).

# > interact. Disobeythose rules and punishment must be swift 
# > and sure, and mostprobably public as well. This does not 
# > mean the incarceration
# Isn't public punishment a way of advocating herd conformity?

no, it is a means of putting fear into those who are ruled
by fear and generally already being herded, making clear the
rules and the consequences of breaking the rules.

# > Man is an animal, and must go
# > back to acting like one--notsoiling his own lair as only twisted
# > humans do. The Church of Satan pursues a five point plan to move
# "only twisted humans"? Is man the only animal acting this way?

this is a valuable question, one which I am not capable of
answering.  I suspect that humans are not alone in this regard.
the question of what constitutes 'soiling' is an important
facet of this question, since the hazardous waste and destruction
caused by human beings is likely of immensely greater proportion 
in comparison to other species.

# >...The stupid shouldsuffer for their behavior.
# Why? 

to install less artificial boundaries between stupidity and
repercussion inspires faster learning and generally works
toward increasing the quality of human activity and experience
while weeding out those incapable of versatility and genius.

# If religious societies have managed to _survive_ as parasites 
# on society

this is a meaningless presumption, since religious groups are 
part of the greater society.  only if 'society' is elevated to 
somehow exclude the religious can we really answer it with 

# - well, then they have adapted in a successful way. 

and as such they constitute a successful ORGANIZATION/HERD, yes.

# This is _strength_ in a Darwinist interpretation of the word. 

as the Social Darwinist of my persuasion sees it, herds are not
capable of evolutionary refinement in the Satanic sense.  they 
are naturally parasitic of the INDIVIDUAL and therefore 
dissolutory of the human culture.  only with the protection of 
the individual and the dessication or restriction of herds may 
human excellence be achieved in any relevant measure.

# the "vampiric nature" Christian Churches have so far proven 
# superior to Church of Satan, true? 

I'm really not sure how this is being measured.  it seems to me
that such a question could only be answered over a good deal of
time and with alot of supplementary data.

# How can one advocate the survival of the fittest
# principle without supporting the Catholic Church? 

by restricting the survival of the fittest to a principle that
is engaged by INDIVIDUALS, not organizations.

# Without supporting _anyone_ who has been able to live on 
# the expense of others?

this is ridiculous of course.

# > Fourth, Satanists advocate a new industry, the development
# > andpromotion of artificial human companions. These humanoids will
# > beconstructed to be as realistic as possible, and available toanyone
# > who can afford one. Recognizing that the human animaloften raises
# > himself up throught the denegration of another, thiswould provide a
# > safe outlet for such behavior.
# Recognizing that the human animal often raises himself up through the
# denegration of another, do you really want to build this industry to
# protect that weaker "another"?

it is not offered as general protection from stupidity, but instead
protection against the influence of those who would impede the
individual's exercise of private self-enclosure and self-knowledge.

# > Would the average person be able to spot a member of the Churchof
# > Satan? Since Satanists cover the total spectrum of economicand
# > professional achievement, unless someone is sporting a sigilof
# > Baphomet medallion, or wearing the Baphomet lapel pinsignifying an
# > official representative, you really can not pindown a Satanist by
# > appearance and behavior alone.
# Due to herd conformity?

no, due to diversity and concealment within an ostensibly hostile 
social environment.

# > Satanists cherish theirindividuality and do not try to conform to
# > others' standards ofnormality.
# And so you "can not pindown" them?

by skim of surface behaviors and appearance, correct.  there are
certain underlying values and ideals within which these lie as
individual and unique combinations of application or expression,
however, and these may be understood by the observant.

# > Finally we advocate the construction of total
# > environments,technologically up-to-date but theatrically convincing,
# > to beliteral pleasure domes and places of amusement and delight. [...]
# > Here you will be able to indulge in whateverenvironment you can
# > imagine.
# versus
# > Those who wish to lead a drugged existence, whetherthe addictive
# > element is chemical or media, shall be recognizedfor the slaves that
# > they are and held in contempt.
# need I comment it?

yes.  a defined environment is not equal to an addiction.
# ...May I ask that anyone replying in defense of Satanism states 
# any relation to COS?

no official relation to the CoS, though I have networked on its
behalf, assaulted and defended its expressions for the better
part of 5 years.  I admire the behaviors (not written) of church 
members and think that their ability to defend rational analysis 
and cogent criticism needs serious support, so (as here, where 
there are so many opponents), I lend it.

blessed beast!
nocTifer:  ---
TOKUS-COE Office: 408/2-666-SLUG --- Emergency Contraception:18005849911
To unsubscribe send "unsubscribe" to
To unsubscribe send "unsubscribe"
To subscribe send "subscribe" to

The Arcane Archive is copyright by the authors cited.
Send comments to the Arcane Archivist:

Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small
donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site.

The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories,
each dealing with a different branch of
religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge.
Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit:
interdisciplinary: geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism: enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness
occultism: divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells
religion: buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo
societies and fraternal orders: freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc.


There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):

Search For:
Match:  Any word All words Exact phrase


Southern Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo, including slave narratives & interviews
Hoodoo in Theory and Practice by cat yronwode: an introduction to African-American rootwork
Lucky W Amulet Archive by cat yronwode: an online museum of worldwide talismans and charms
Sacred Sex: essays and articles on tantra yoga, neo-tantra, karezza, sex magic, and sex worship
Sacred Landscape: essays and articles on archaeoastronomy, sacred architecture, and sacred geometry
Lucky Mojo Forum: practitioners answer queries on conjure; sponsored by the Lucky Mojo Curio Co.
Herb Magic: illustrated descriptions of magic herbs with free spells, recipes, and an ordering option
Association of Independent Readers and Rootworkers: ethical diviners and hoodoo spell-casters
Freemasonry for Women by cat yronwode: a history of mixed-gender Freemasonic lodges
Missionary Independent Spiritual Church: spirit-led, inter-faith, the Smallest Church in the World
Satan Service Org: an archive presenting the theory, practice, and history of Satanism and Satanists
Gospel of Satan: the story of Jesus and the angels, from the perspective of the God of this World
Lucky Mojo Usenet FAQ Archive: FAQs and REFs for occult and magical usenet newsgroups
Candles and Curios: essays and articles on traditional African American conjure and folk magic
Aleister Crowley Text Archive: a multitude of texts by an early 20th century ceremonial occultist
Spiritual Spells: lessons in folk magic and spell casting from an eclectic Wiccan perspective
The Mystic Tea Room: divination by reading tea-leaves, with a museum of antique fortune telling cups
Yronwode Institution for the Preservation and Popularization of Indigenous Ethnomagicology
Yronwode Home: personal pages of catherine yronwode and nagasiva yronwode, magical archivists
Lucky Mojo Magic Spells Archives: love spells, money spells, luck spells, protection spells, etc.
      Free Love Spell Archive: love spells, attraction spells, sex magick, romance spells, and lust spells
      Free Money Spell Archive: money spells, prosperity spells, and wealth spells for job and business
      Free Protection Spell Archive: protection spells against witchcraft, jinxes, hexes, and the evil eye
      Free Gambling Luck Spell Archive: lucky gambling spells for the lottery, casinos, and races