Episode 198: Satanic Justice

SHOW LINKS

• • From The Republic, Plato, Fourth Century BCE: But speaking of this very thing, justice, are we to affirm that it consists of truth-telling and paying back what one has received from anyone–or may these very actions sometimes be just and sometimes unjust? I mean, for example, as everyone I presume would admit, if one took over weapons from a friend who was in his right mind and then the lender should go mad and demand them back, we ought not to return them in that case—nor yet would he who chose to speak nothing but the truth to one who was in that state be just. Justice is rendering to each what befits him; to do good to friends and evil to enemies is this justice? Let us consider this point: Is not the man who is most skilful to strike or inflict a blow in a fight, whether as a boxer or elsewhere, also the most wary to guard against a blow? Is it not also true that he who best knows how to guard against disease is also most cunning to communicate it and escape detection? The very same man is a good guardian of an army who is good at stealing a march upon the enemy, and anyone who is a skilful watchman is also a skilful thief? So justice, according to Homer and Simonides, seems to be a kind of stealing, with the qualification that it is for the benefit of friends and the harm of enemies. It is likely that men will love those whom they suppose to be good and dislike those whom they deem bad. Do not men make mistakes in this matter so that many seem good to them who are not and the reverse? And all the same is it then just for them to benefit the bad and injure the good? So you would have us qualify our former notion of the just man by an addition that it is just to benefit the friend if he is good and harm the enemy if he is bad? When horses73 are harmed does it make them better or worse? And do not also dogs when harmed become worse? So men, my dear fellow, must we not say that when men are harmed it is in the virtue of man that they become worse? And so men who are harmed become more unjust, and by justice then the just make other men unjust, and by justice the good men make the bad men evil?”
  • From Euminedes, Aeschylus, 6th Century BCE: Alack, alack, O sisters, we have toiled, O much and vainly have we toiled and worked! And everything we wrought, the gods have foiled, and turned us to scorn! He hath slipped from the net, the one whom we chased, he has escaped us, the who should be our prey! Thou, child of the high God Zeus, Apollo, you have robbed us and wronged us; Thou, a youngling god, have spurned the right that belongs to gods more ancient than you, and you have cherished the freedom of an accursed man, a fugitive, the murderer of his own parent, and by craft from out of our grasp you have stolen him; you, a god, have stolen from we, the sacred avengers, a mother-murdering son–and who shall consider the deed and say that it was just? Shame on the younger gods who trample justice while sitting on thrones of might! Woe on the altar of earth’s central tempel! Behold, the guilt of blood, the ghastly stain! Woe unto Apollo, reckless god, you who, without being called upon, have stained the prophetic shrine with wrongful blood! You show a heinous respect for mortal men but care not for the will of gods! But you will not forever shelter this man from us; if into the jaws of Hell he should flee, there too will we be! If a man can show his hands and prove that they are clean, no wrath of ours shall lurk for him–unscathed he walks through this lifetime. But one like this man, with bloodstained and hidden hands, shall find us always there beside him. Hear me, mother Night, who gave birth to us to avenge                                               the living and the dead: Let this song of ours fall upon our victim’s head, our sacrifice, our curse of madness to weigh always on his mind. Remorseless Fate gave us this work to carry on, and these rights are ours by birth. Even gods may not divert us; we share no feasts with them, and their pure white robes are no part of our destiny.
  • From Satan: The Early Christian Tradition, Jeffrey Burton Russell, 1981: Christian tradition has interpreted the saving work of the crucifixion in three main ways. According to the first interpretation, human nature had been sanctified, dignified, transformed, and saved by the very act of Christ’s becoming man. In the terms of the second, Christ was a sacrifice offered to god in order to bring about reconciliation between man and God. The third, the ransom theory, says that since Satan justly held the human race in prison because of our corruption by Original Sin, god offered himself as ransom for our freedom. The price could be justly paid only by god. Only god could freely submit. No mortal being could choose freely, because original sin had deprived us all of our freedom. By submitting to Satan’s power of his own free will and choice, Christ liberated us from the Devil’s authority. The theory of sacrifice, the chief alternative theory in Irenaeus’ time, argued that Christ, man as well as god, took all the sins of humanity upon himself, and by offering himself to death of his own free will he made compensation acceptable to god; in the one theory, Christ is offered up to Satan, but in the other, god demands the victim for himself. The ransom  theory, although sometimes crudely expressed, did reflect the emphasis on the cosmic battle between Christ and Satan and in general fitted the moderately dualist assumptions of early Christianity well enough: Christ was the second Adam, who lifted the chains of death laid upon us because of the weakness of the first Adam. The notion of “recapitulation,” of Christ the Second Man undoing the damage done by the First Man, was central. Ransom theory sprang from his controversy with the Gnostics, who claimed that the Devil had rights over man because the devil was the creator of our bodies and world. Ransom theory explained evil as a necessary part of the god’s cosmic plan, so radical that god himself must die in order to draw its sting. So on the one hand god is the source of everything; on the other, he is opposed to evil.Later Christian writers usually failed to grapple with this inconsistency. Some of the fathers went so far as to call the ransom a trick that god played upon Satan, since Satan did not know that Jesus was god when he seized him: Christ was the bait and the hook upon which the old dragon was landed. But later writers rejected this, considering it unfit and unjust that god should triumph over evil by deception.
  • From the Federalist Papers, James Madison, 1788: It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. Justice is the end goal of government. It is the goal of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be induced to wish for a government which will protect the weaker as well as the more powerful. In the extended republic of the United States, and among the great variety of interests, parties, and sects which it embraces, a coalition of a majority of the whole society could seldom take place on any other principles than those of justice and the general good; whilst there being thus less danger to a minor from the will of a major party, there must be less pretext, also, to provide for the security of the former, by introducing into the government a will not dependent on the latter, or, in other words, a will independent of the society itself. In all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule, and the power would suddenly be transferred to the minority. 
  • From The Hypocrisy of Thomas Jefferson, John Horgan, Science Curmudgeon, 2016: I once admired Thomas Jefferson, seeing him as a great man with a tragic flaw: The writer of the inspiring words “all men are created equal” owned slaves. Now, I see Jefferson as an egregious hypocrite, who willfully betrayed the ideals he espoused. I reached this conclusion after visiting Jefferson’s famous Virginia estate last summer. Previously I didn’t realize the extent of Jefferson’s slave ownership, and I lazily—and ignorantly–excused it as a common ethical blind spot of his time. Below are facts I learned from my tour: First, Jefferson often denounced slavery. He wrote in 1774, “The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those colonies where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state.” Yet over the course of his life he owned a total of 600 slaves, who worked on his farm and other holdings. Second, Jefferson was a “brutal hypocrite” even when judged by the standards of his time, according to historian Paul Finkelman. He notes that “while many of his contemporaries, including George Washington, freed their slaves during and after the revolution–inspired, perhaps, by the words of the Declaration–Jefferson did not.” Jefferson also “dodged opportunities to undermine slavery or promote racial equality.” For example, as a Virginia state legislator, Jefferson blocked consideration of a law that might have eventually ended slavery in the state.” Third, Jefferson was not a kind slave-owner, my guide at the estate said, because that is a contradiction in terms. Although there is no evidence that Jefferson beat slaves himself, he employed those who did. Fourth, DNA testing and other evidence have convinced most historians that Jefferson fathered six children with Sally Hemings, believed to have been the daughter of Jefferson’s father-in-law and one of his slaves. That means Hemings was the half-sister of Jefferson’s wife. Some writers, grotesquely, have romanticized the relationship between Jefferson and Hemings, but a relationship between a master and slave cannot be consensual, let alone romantic. Four, Jefferson freed only two slaves in his lifetime and another five in his will–all members of the Hemings family. One man freed by Jefferson’s will had a wife and eight children, who remained enslaved and were sold to four different owners. This country still falls far short of its professed ideals of peace, equality, justice and liberty for all: Perhaps if Jefferson had set a better example, we would have come further by now. 
  • From Justice In Revolution & In the Church, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, 1858: The pantheistic concept of the universe, or of a best possible world serving as the expression of the Absolute absolute, is illegitimate: it comes to conclusions contrary to the observed systems of things. Liberty, or free will, is a concept of the mind, formed in opposition to the Absolute absolute and to the notion of a preestablished harmony or “best world.” By this, man raises himself by the sublime and the beautiful outside the limits of reality and of thought, makes an instrument of the laws of reason as well as those of nature, sets as the aim of his activity the transformation of the world according to his ideals, and devotes himself to his own glory as an end. According to that definition of liberty, one can say, reasoning by analogy, that in every organized or simply collective being, the resultant force is the liberty of the being. Free will shows itself more energetic as the elements which give rise to it are themselves more developed in power: philosophy, science, industry, economy, law. This is why history, reducible to a system by its fatal side, shows itself progressive, idealistic, and superior to theory. There it is: That revolutionary liberty, cursed for so long because it was not understood, because its key was sought in words instead of in things. In revealing itself to us in its essence, it gives us, along with the reason of our religious and political institutions, the secret of our destiny. I understand that many do not like liberty, that you have never liked it. Liberty, which you cannot deny without destroying yourself but which you cannot affirm without destroying yourself still, you dread it as the Sphinx dreaded Oedipus: it came, and the riddle of the Church was answered; Liberty, symbolized by the story of the Temptation, is your Antichrist; liberty, for you, is the Devil. Come, Satan, come, slandered by priests and kings! Let me embrace you, let me clutch you to my breast! I have known you for a long time, and you know me as well. Your works, oh blessed of my heart, are not always beautiful or good; but you alone give sense to the universe and prevent it from being absurd. What would justice be without you? An instinct. Reason? A routine. Man? A beast. You alone prompt labor and render it fertile; you ennoble wealth, serve as an excuse for authority, put the seal on virtue. I have at your service only a pen, but it is worth millions of ballots. And I wish only to ask when the days sung of by the poet will return
  • From Frequently Asked Questions, Global Order of Satan, 2023: If you don’t worship the devil then why do you call yourselves Satanic? Wel, Buddhists don’t worship Buddha, but they follow those teachings. In the Christian mythos, Satan was the first to speak out and voice rational inquiry to an authoritarian god that demanded blind obedience, and for this he was cast out. Of course we don’t believe this actually happened, but historically, we know that those who speak out against the injustices committed by religions, dictators, and corporations are often imprisoned, killed, or branded as incendiaries. So we believe the allegorical teaching of Satan is the need to use one’s own voice as an honest tool of evidence-based dissent and to speak up against corrupt or unjust power structures. Using a name with such emotive associations also requires individuals to think about what it is that they actually believe. To its detriment, much of the world’s cultural experience is informed by religious dogma and institutional influence, and it can be hard to disentangle what one actually believes from what one has been told to believe. Associating with something typically seen as forbidden and characterised as evil, when evidence shows that thing to be ethical and charitable, requires a level of rationality and critical thinking that we encourage. As we like to say: if people and governments and leaders can do horrible things in the name of god then we can most certainly do beautiful and inspired things in the name of Satan. It is the lessons of the literary Satan that we follow –the importance of dissent, rational inquiry, vigilant self-assessment, and the continuing struggle for justice. And like anyone else who calls themselves religious, it’s our commitment to these deeply held convictions that our organisational identity represents, and activism is just our way of doing the devil’s work. Every movement towards social equilibrium requires those on the forefront. If the world would take steps to shift its collective approach to differences away from defensive and protective, making an intentional movement towards vigilant integrity in our approach to truth, understanding, and self-awareness, then we might realise we’re capable of great adaptability. https://www.globalorderofsatan.com/about-the-global-order-of-satan/frequently-asked-questions/ 
  • From Speak of the Devil, Joe Laycock, 2020: James Lewis notes that there are three types of “legitimation strategies” available to new religious movements: claims of revelation or the supernatural; traditional appeals; and rational appeals to reason. The Seven Tenets are an example of a rational appeal—they are presented as self-evident and rooted in common sense rather than superhuman authority. In interviews, many described the tenets as articulating—and in some cases sacralizing—the values they already held. The tenets do not provide a logical argument as to why compassion, justice, and the authority of science should be guiding principles: Members take the importance of these values as self-evident. At a public black mass, black comedian and political candidate Steve Hill stated, “To invoke Satan is to invoke the struggle for justice and equal rights for everyone.” Bel Citoyen, who left TST Los Angeles in 2018, also felt that Satanism is fundamentally about striving for equality. Satanists make these kinds of distinctions all the time: For example, Peter Gilmore, high priest of the Church of Satan, declared the film Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) to be a “Satanic” film. There is nothing objectively Satanic about this adaptation of a children’s story, but Gilmore feels the film depicts the Satanic value of justice. There is a certain logic to this assessment: if Christianity emphasizes forgiveness, then a film where misbehaving children are punished could be “Satanic.” Malcolm Jarry stated that “justice” is the closest thing in TST’s philosophy to a metaphysical belief. “Justice exists only as an ideal,” he explained, “Laws bring us closer to justice, but it can never be fully attained.” In a subsequent conversation, he went further and described the pursuit of justice as a search for transcendence.
  • From Compassionate Satanism, Lilith Starr, 2021: The modern Satanic ethos echoes that of the revolutionary Satanists of the Romantic era. Those revolutionaries desired justice in their societies and were willing to fight for it in their writings and art against traditional institutions like monarchy and church that demanded submission on the basis of authority passed down from god. Extreme inequality between classes, the inflexible doctrine of the church, and the outsized punishment for small offenses against either church or monarchy were all signs of an unjust society, but the church decreed that god so commanded it. Even today, we see myriad examples of law being unequally enforced or unjust laws being created, in harsher sentencing and higher incarceration rates for people of color while the rich get off consequence-free. Many people subscribe to what is commonly called the Just World Fallacy: In this fallacious mindset, people believe that there is some cosmic force of justice (usually god) that ensures good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people. In this belief, everything happens according to some set of fair laws. Thus, if someone is suffering, they must deserve it. This leads to complete complacency, since no one has any obligations. Not surprisingly, those with strong Abrahamic beliefs are among those most likely to subscribe to the Just World Fallacy ─ it’s in the very teachings of those religions that everything happens according to god’s will. Matthew 10 states: “Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father’s will.” The Prosperity Wing of fundamentalism in particular teaches that in return for obedience and monetary donations, god will bless his righteous followers with riches and good fortune; being poor or sick simply means someone is not godly enough. But the world doesn’t actually work like this: There is no all- powerful force doling out divine justice. We need to keep in mind the unjustness of the world if we are to exercise our compassion to the fullest.
  • From Secret Life of a Satanist, Blanche Barton, 1992: We will evoke many, many centuries of bloodshed before we approach the terror that Christianity has loosed on humanity. There will undoubtedly be more Satanically-motivated murders and crimes in the sense that The Satanic Bible tells you ‘You don’t have to take any more shit.’ But if Judeo-Christian society hadn’t encouraged this immoral succoring of the weak and made it laudable to buoy up the useless, then there wouldn’t be this intensive need for a reaction against it. Of course, this extreme counter-swing of the pendulum, this vigilantism, will be interpreted as ‘mere anarchy loosed on the world,’ but in reality it will be, for the first time since cave days, justice.The Satanic Bible says, ‘I will create justice in my own way. I feel an injustice has to be righted and I feel the strength to carry it out.’ Satanists are true reformers, as we are true ecologists. We believe in the preeminence of the laws of Nature. The epitome of the film noir antihero — the Green Hornet, the Shadow, Batman — is the perfect manifestation of the Satanic ethic. These are the heroes who work in the shadows, doing what officials cannot do or will not do. The Satanic Bible teaches you to not wait around for outside intervention from god or the state. Satanism advocates personal justice, personally administered. LaVey points to [mass shooter] James Huberty as a textbook example of anti-Christian reaction. Huberty was laid off from a high paying job; trying to get work, he traveled down the coast of California, ending up in a little Mexico where he hardly heard a word of English spoken. Because of the crackdown on Valium at the time, only street-people and pushers could get it, so Huberty wasn’t able to get the one chemical that had leveled him out. And to top it all off, the crew at McDonald’s couldn’t get the fucking ice cream machine fixed. He was tired of incompetence; he was tired of foreign inundation; he was tired of being treated like a second-class citizen in his own country; he was tired of the weak getting everything for free. And I’ll tell you a secret: There’s going to be a lot more Hubertys reaching a breaking point in the next few years. We’ve got a long way to go. I’d rather be grouped in the company of killers than in the company of wimps. I don’t think you’d find the pretentiousness in people like Richard Ramirez, or Huberty, or Manson that all these puffed-up, empty barrel, supposed-Satanists make.