DARK PARALLELS
A study by
Kevin A. Hayward
This is an explorative essay, mostly written to further my own understanding of two philosophies: Satanism, and Objectivism.
This is not to be a Masters' paper, so I will be making observations based upon the facts as I see them before me. I am new to Objectivism, and before I had started out on learning about it I had read the autobiography of Marilyn Manson, a man who has shocked many in his few years in the public eye.
In some places in the book he touched upon the subject of Satanism and the then-to-me, mysterious figure of Anton Szandor LaVey. When I began reading Ayn Rand's work I began to notice a few similarities in what little I had read of Satanism, and what I was learning about Objectivism.
I have read "Satan Speaks!" by LaVey, both for research and for personal reasons, and have read six of Rand's books, and the following observations are made upon the facts as presented to me, in both these books as well as in things I have seen in my lifetime.
From various parts of the book "Satan Speaks!" I have seen that LaVey is a man who, knowingly or not, held views and personal philosophy similar to that of Ayn Rand.
By this, I mean that he appears to be intelligent, rational, reasonable and objective, all in the proper sense of the words. I quote from Marilyn Manson's foreword to "Satan Speaks!":
"[Yet] despite his cynicism and apocalyptic view of society, he often hoped for a better world, or at least one in which intelligence and creativity are applauded."
This showed LaVey respected intelligence and creativity, but also was too familiar with the world around him, which he chose to avoid, and sometimes ridicule as a spectator, rather than a participant.
To most, it is obvious that the world is going beyond insanity, and as a result those same people seek a leader to save them. In their own minds, they equate glamour and fame with good morals, i.e.; these people could not have gotten where they are if they are evil, and some see philanthropy as the key and road to success and/or salvation.
Even bearing this in mind, people these days have no objective opinions, or evaluations based upon the fact of the matter, but constantly seek their neighbors opinion, believing their neighbor to be better than they, and they adopt that opinion. Thus the great circle of stagnation is complete, with no beginning or end, and with the media dictating to the masses and the masses dictating the very same thing back to the media, and so-on.
This whole process is driven by fear, each individuals fear of being wrong, of being different, and of not being approved of by those they consider their betters.
This is the evil that LaVey recognizes, and the very same which he despaired at in man.
I find that Rand?s philosophy of objectivism is very single-minded when presented to the reader as is, the characters having one drive, one love and one goal. An example of this is Dagny Taggart in 'Atlas Shrugged'. Her only drive, love and goal was the railroad, and she cared for very little outside this love, whereas I, and some who share these objectivist views, may have several loves in life, they may have a wife (I do) and they may love music, movies, sport, reading, art - the list goes on, but basically I think that Rand's work is an example which is intended to drive the point home. Very hard.
In that respect, the works of Ayn Rand serve their purpose (That purpose being the very same reason that they were written), to get the point across.
After reading 6 of her books I have chosen to apply these philosophies in a way that fits my life and my loves, which, I am sure, both Rand and LaVey would agree with me on, me being the most important person in my life.
A quote from Blanch Barton's Introduction to SATAN SPEAKS!
"One reason [Anton] LaVey has exerted the covert and overt influence on fashion, music, entertainment, politics and other popular culture arenas that he has over the past decades is because of his honesty.
Strange, perhaps even insulting, that the Devil's ambassador on earth should be considered 'honest.'"
This quote could be construed in many ways.
My take on it is that it shows society's altruism in considering an honest man evil, but also that it just goes to show another parallel between Satanism and Objectivism, or at least between Rand and LaVey; honesty.
Another poke at society by me; - LaVey, in being honest, would have been considered evil for not telling the ?people? what they wanted to hear.
The masses always need someone to tell them that they are good and moral and virtuous and just, and better than someone else.
I doubt that if LaVey ever gave them this that it was in no other respect than for personal amusement and to see their reaction.
A religious man would go to confess all of his sins to the preacher. The preacher then forgives him, thus the man feels better about himself, but was thinking about naked female flesh wrong? As far as the parishioner knows, it is, though he never seeks to know why it is wrong, or how it came to be wrong in the first place, he just accepts the word of his 'peer,' a man better than him by title alone, as fact.
The fact that the preacher sodomizes the parishioner's 6-year old son once a week after Sunday school is obviously notwithstanding.
This is where Satanism and Objectivism cross paths once more, on the subject of honesty.
The honesty not being just in words, but also in the removal of posturing and of title worship.
People worship the mystique of titles, not knowing that by the standards represented by the titles the holders are more depraved and immoral than the sinner whose worship they command.
In both Satanism (though implicitly) and objectivism, people are asked to judge a man by actions, proof, and facts, not by a word printed before his debased name.
Another form of dishonesty in existence is the way that people skirt around issues, hoping that by avoiding the obvious truth they will be spared pain or punishment. As in a courtroom where the defense will move to have a case dismissed upon the grounds that the arrest or search warrants were not correctly worded, totally avoiding the issue at hand, that the defendant is Charles Milles Manson and he was responsible for the deaths of several people.
This is a manner of dishonesty I am sure both Rand and LaVey could happily agree to disapprove of.
The Genesis of The Fuck-Up - Fake discrimination (Anton Szandor LaVey, SATAN SPEAKS!)
"Grievance committees for hearing claims of racial and sexual discrimination and abuse - and unfair practices of all varieties - ensure a forum for both the legitimate and the fake. Unfortunately, the forum is abused more than used.
It becomes a hand-in-glove opportunity for fuck-ups of all variety. The procedure is effortless: a worker displays apparent incompetence, is chastised or otherwise treated accordingly, then runs to the nearest agency to file a claim of "discrimination". Usually the outcome is a monetary settlement, and/or a return to the abusive job with preferred treatment."
This quote goes to further illustrate my point insomuch as the point was that the worker was incompetent, yet the workers concern is with getting as much as he can for as little as possible, on the basis that he 'needs' or 'deserves' a job, simply because he is incompetent.
Examples of similar behaviour are outlined in Rand's "Atlas Shrugged," and these points together go to prove the recognition and disapproval of the 'Second-hander,' as well as an open disapproval of incompetence.
The Monument Builders, Ayn Rand, The Virtue Of Selfishness.
England, once the freest and proudest nation in Europe, has been reduced to the status of a second-rate power, and is perishing slowly from hemophilia, losing the best of her economic blood: the middle class and the professions. The able, competent, productive, independent men are leaving by the thousands, migrating to Canada or the United States, in search of freedom.
They are escaping form the reign of mediocrity, from the mawkish poorhouse, where, having sold their rights in exchange for free dentures, the inmates are now whining that they?d rather be Red than dead."
In this excerpt, Rand aptly describes the slow death of my own homeland.
As incompetence and mediocrity have risen in stature (By a means of deals struck between friends, and by Socialist and Altruist values of what is virtuous and good), the good, able and competent men have left, most heading for bastions, countries which still value competence, the main ones being the U.S.A and Canada.
Once again, another parallel between the two philosophies, this one being that all three writers (myself included) despise the very nature of mediocrity, incompetence and under-achievement.
Charity, also, has fallen prey to altruism, and, in a roundabout way, so have those who give.
I have not read of LaVey advocating charity, though Rand has, in The Virtue Of Selfishness, stated that people are free to give to charity, but I take this beyond the simple ideal of helping people out of hard times, as a lot of charities prey on people they wish to receive donations from, they play on guilt, fear and other forms of self-doubt. The example below is a real one that has had many different forums.
There is one form of charity I can condone though, Thrift Shops, I am a big advocate of these outlets because they show some effort, some drive on the part of the administrators, rather than merely sitting in a corner and whining about the hardships of others, and on top of that I am actually getting something for the money that I put towards others' welfare.
I think charity begins in the home, but I also think that it should jolly well stay at home, where it belongs, and where it can be of best use.
I see many T.V commercials regarding the subject of the plight of those in Africa, with the broadcaster trying to foist guilt upon the masses at dinner time (a dinner which, by the way, they worked hard and paid for), because the poor East African peoples have no food and they live in a desert.
Well, my point; I paid for my food, I cooked it, I earned it. These people chose to live in a desert, and they choose to sit and wait for the United Nations to drop food, so if they starve or die of dehydration it is their own fault, not mine or yours. They managed for several millennia without the United Nations, they don't need it now.
People are welcome to give to charity, but in cases like this I think both philosophies would disapprove of people being tricked into paying for the choices of other people.
I have noticed over a long time that a large number of the advocates and philanthropists who give and work a lot for charities usually pick out the worst cases they can find. These people have generally, I think, at some point in the past been made to feel guilty about the fact that they have so much and others do not, I believe that it is this guilt that drives them to acts of charity.
Now to my conclusion.
The examples Rand gives are, I think, to express the fundamental nature, the basis, and that the reader will apply it appropriately to their life. This assumes that the reader is fairly levelheaded and not given to devoting themselves to philosophy, rather than devoting philosophy to themselves.
The same applies to Satanism, though it advocates pleasure, and fun, the enjoyment and fulfillment of life in a more open sense.
As far as the mystical side of Satanism goes, it appears to be highly metaphorical, and representative, and, as I understand it, the magic being spoken of is more a way to deal with and manipulate people and your surroundings, using the mind, to one's own ends, and on one's own terms.
In my short study, I have come to this conclusion; Objectivism is the pure, untainted theory of how things should be, the most basic of the fundamentals to be committed to the subconscious, and Satanism is one practical application of that theory by LaVey, and highly suited to the modern world.
Each new issue that has come up in his lifetime he commented upon with the same principles, never changing who he was or what he thought, Rand did the same, but she traveled in different circles to LaVey, and came from a different background, which explains a lot about the nature of her philosophy and beliefs.
I advocate both, they are both the same principles applied to two different lives, and many more lives since. Also, I think that Satanism is proof of objectivism at work beyond the person most famed for it. I think both are inextricably tied together by their very nature.
In closing, I would like to direct the reader to that which is at the top of the list of Satanic Sins: - STUPIDITY
Readers seeking another person's point of view in this matter should also check out Nemo's article on the subject at www.churchofsatan.com.
Information sources used:
SATAN SPEAKS! by Anton Szandor LaVey (Feral House)
The Virtue Of Selfishness by Ayn Rand (Penguin Putnam, Signet edition)
Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand (Penguin Putnam, Signet edition)
The Nine Satanic Sins by Anton Szandor LaVey, 1987 (Sourced from www.churchofsatan.com)
RETURN TO INDEX
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1