As promised, here is my analysis of this book. It was published in 1969 by Anton LaVey, the
founder of modern Satanism. I originally
read this in college (UMCP, 1986-90) at which time I was also reading another
author, Ayn Rand. The two authors are
very similar, and LaVey admitted being influenced by Atlas Shrugged,
Rand’s famous novel – which I’ve read three times. This is certainly shorter and more concise
than her book. I’ve noted earlier that
Satanism, as advocated by LaVey, could more accurately be described as a
deliberately provocative form of atheism.
Re-reading it again as a 50 year old with almost 30 years of experience
since finishing college, how does it hold up?
First Off, the Nine Satanic Statements.
1. Satan
represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
2. Satan
represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
3. Satan
represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-denial!
4. Satan
represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on
ingrates!
5. Satan
represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
6. Satan
represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic
vampires!
7. Satan
represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than
those which walk on all fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and
intellectual developments”, has become the most vicious animal of all!
8. Satan
represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or
emotional gratification!
9. Satan has
been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all
these years!
Bravo, huh? Here are
a few more tidbits…
Book of Satan, Chapter III, Paragraph 4 states, “Are we
all not predatory animals by instinct?
If humans ceased wholly from preying upon each other, could they
continue to exist?”
Chapter IV, Paragraph 2 states, “There is no heaven of
glory bright, and no hell where sinners roast.
Here and now is our day of torment! Here and now is our day of joy! Here
and now is our opportunity! Choose ye this day, for no redeemer liveth!”
In the next chapter, LaVey claims that “it is a popular
misconception that the Satanist dos not believe in God.” He then proceeds to describe a system best
known as “deism”, which means “I believe in God, but this God is passive and
does not interfere in – or care about – the lives of Men.” By this definition, the Founding Fathers were
Satanists. Go figure. In any case, we’re on our own to live, love,
fight, die, etc. with no expectation of forgiveness or salvation from any
higher power. Deism is, for all
practical purposes, another word for atheism.
Indeed, he says, “all religions of a spiritual nature are
inventions of Man.” That being the case,
why bother with Satanism? LaVey answers that “man needs ceremony and ritual, fantasy and enchantment. Psychiatry, despite all the good it has done,
has robbed man of wonder and fantasy which religion, in the past, has
provided. Satanism, realizing the
current needs of man, fills the large void between religion and psychiatry. The
Satanic philosophy combines the fundamental of psychology and good, honest
emotionalizing of dogma. It provides
man with his much needed fantasy. There
is nothing wrong with dogma, providing it is not based on ideas and actions
which go completely against human nature.”
I suppose you could call it hedonism wrapped in ritual, rational
self-interest provocatively flavored with historically taboo imagery but with
no actual belief in a dark lord of evil downstairs.
Sex. I’m too young
to remember when LaVey and his gang were more famous and notorious – presumably
this was during the late 1960s – but there is a chapter here about sex. And it’s fairly common sense. Satanism welcomes any and all sexual desires
and activities but exclusively with consenting sexual partners. This includes homosexuality, sadism-masochism, and group sex, but excludes children, animals, or partners who otherwise do not or cannot consent. Masturbation, which presumably does not
invoke issues of consent, is perfectly fine.
Overall, the gist of this is pretty much the same as Ayn
Rand’s Objectivism: what we do with our
80-odd years on this planet before we die is our own business so long as we don’t
hurt anyone else. Aside from his brief reference
to “preying”, which suggests deliberately abusing others, LaVey appears to echo
the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) which Libertarians center upon, which is “don’t
initiate the use of force on others, but if attacked you are privileged to
defend yourself appropriately.”
The second half of the book is absolute bullshit about Satanic
rituals and the Enochian Keys, which I recall from the half-assed Necronomicon
of days gone by. The sole element of the
book which makes any real, practical sense winds up, as I said before, being
simply rational self-interest provocatively dressed in anti-Christian rhetoric.
The truly stupid thing about this whole thing is
this. There are TWO possibilities on
this planet. #1 is that there IS a Good
Guy Upstairs and a Good Place, and a Bad Guy Downstairs and a Bad Place (as “The
Good Place” TV show seems to show us, with Kristen Bell and Ted Danson, among
many others). #2 is that there is NO
Good Guy Upstairs, no Good Place, nor any Bad Guy Downstairs nor any Bad
Place. When we die, whether we were the
nicest person on the planet who died saving children, or the nastiest bastard
who existed who murdered millions, is exactly the same: permanent oblivion.
Let me address the second scenario first. Classic Rock Magazine, up until 2018, had this
Q&A thing at the end of the magazine in which they ask rock stars a bunch
of deep questions. “What can you do better
than anyone else?” “Any regrets?” and 80% of the time, “do you believe in God?” A surprising minority flat out state that
they don’t believe in God. A similar proportion,
also a minority, state that they DO believe in God and identify as Christian. The rest tend to say something like “I believe
in a higher power, but not an old guy in a white beard, or organized religion
per se.” George Thorogood joked that “I
pray when I fly”.
One particular guy, who I can’t recall, said something
remarkably different: “Logically, I know
there is no God and no afterlife. But
emotionally I can’t accept a world without a God or an afterlife. So I’ll choose to believe in them anyway.” To me, that was the best and most honest answer
anyone gave.
If scenario #2 is the true situation, then all this nonsense
about Satanism, dogma, ritual, etc. is just that: nonsense. Ayn Rand, who essentially believed and argued
the same things as LaVey did – and as noted earlier, clearly influenced LaVey –
avoided all that and kept things real.
For all her arrogance and hypocrisy, she didn’t give us this idiocy. If there is nothing wrong with consensual
sex, with masturbation, with enjoying yourself while you live without hurting
anyone else, why accept the mantle of evil, of Satan? “If good’s on the left, I’m sticking to the
right.” Rand wouldn’t accept that. And neither should anyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment