I recently wrote a political post comparing Trump, Brext and Islamic Terrorism which received some praise but also a lot of criticism. In fairness most of the criticism was respectful and well argued. Some reasonable points were made and scored. However, I still hold to the views I expressed and I think most of my critics are missing the point or are perhaps blind to the points I was attempting to make. Now that Trump has actually been elected which unquestioningly heralds some kind of new era in politics, I want to explain my views in a bit more detail and perhaps argue the points I was originally trying to make from a better perspective. I should add that I am doing this entirely for my own benefit in order to understand and express what I think is going on in the world. I welcome discussion but I don’t really give a fuck if other people disagree with my views.
I have three headings in mind. My Satanic perspective, the indisputable similarities between Brexit and Trump, and finally what it all means and implies.
My Satanic Perspective.
Some people who have landed here after following the political tags may be surprised to find themselves reading a blog which is primarily about Satanism. Do please stay a while and make yourself at home; you may be a bit surprised. And don’t worry, this is not the hotel California, you can leave immediately if you feel uncomfortable!
It has been said that I am a very left wing Satanist and some find it surprising that the views associated with the left can be compatable with Satanic principles at all. In fact there are quite a lot of us left wing Satanists in existence. To over-simplify (because this is not intended to be the main theme of this post) I believe in strong and supportive communities and societies which are very liberal in terms of equal rights for women, men, minorities of all sorts and all parts of the LGBT community because that actually improves the quality of my life and the opportunities I have to live as fully and freely as I want. I am a libertarian but interestingly this position is often seen as rather right wing in America whereas in Europe it is more often associated with the left. I am however not left wing in all things. I am very strong on personal responsibility which can be seen as a right wing concept. I am definitely to the right on matters of crime and punishment, I believe in taking vengeance where necessary and while I think guns should be more strictly controlled (particularly in America) my family and I are all now gun owners and we believe that until society has changed significantly we should have the right to own, carry and use weapons when necessary for personal protection. So yes, I am left wing, but not in all ways.
No two people will ever have exactly the same political views but my family and I are broadly in line with those who are internationalists rather than nationalists. We support parties and policies which promote acceptance of difference, which promote tolerance and to some degree multi-culturalism (although we disagree with the views of many if not all organised religions). We believe in cooperation rather than conflict wherever possible and we think that Europe and the EU for all its many faults and failings is a good example of how different nations working together can maintain their peace and security without loosing their regional and national identities.. Logically therefore we are antagonistic towards people, parties and policies which oppose the things I have just listed.
The indisputable similarities between Brexit and Trump.
There are many things about the Brexit campaign for Britain to leave the European Union and Donald Trump’s campaign to become president that can be disputed. I want to concentrate however on the things which are really not in dispute because of their implications for what happens next in societies which have changed and are deeply divided.
Both the Brexit and Trump campaigns succeeded in identifying a section of society who felt alienated and dispossessed by society as a whole and by the political elite in particular. In both cases this section of society was mainly comprised of an older, poorer and less well educated demographic; people who had not fared well under any political party for a long time.
In order to communicate with the less well educated and politically dispossessed classes, both Brexit and Trump campaigners threw the normal complicated and highly intellectualised language of politics and diplomacy out of the window in favour of very simplified and direct messages. Hanging innuendos were replaced by in your face insults and accusations.
Both campaigns decided to avoid any type of complexity. No problem was caused by lots of complicated factors, instead the focus of the blame was laid on particular individuals and groups of people. EVERYTHING that was bad in the UK was the fault of Europe pure and simple. Everything that was bad in America was the fault of The Clinton Dynasty, the black, immigrant, possibly not American, Obama and Mexicans.
Both Brexit and Trump were supported by elements of the press and media who recognised the demographic which had been identified as being the bulk of their own readership and viewers. Canny newspaper mogals recognised an opportunity to make money by stoking the flames.
To simplify the perceived problem even further the ultimate solution that was put forward by each campaign was simple and stark… Vote Leave and all your problems will be solved. Vote Trump and all your problems will be solved. No other way of voting will get what you need.
Other factors in both of these campaigns that are hard to dispute are that bare faced lies were spoken as truths, fears about immigration were highlighted, and xenophobia was exploited. Trump and the Brexit leaders were not typical politicians but media celebrities, regarded as outsiders and critics of “the system”. Trump in particular and some of the Brexit leaders were the antithesis of political correctness, making comments about race, immigration, gender (women especially) and sexuality which the middle classes and the so called political elite had ruled out of bounds decades ago. They deeply offended and frightened many people but those were people who were never likely to vote for them in the first place.
Finally within hours of claiming victory both campaigns did spectacular U-turns on some of their key policies. The Brexit campaign had promised to divert money from the EU (£350 million) to shore up the health service. Literally within hours they said this was not the case and that their advertisements claiming this had been misinterpreted. Donald Trump spent much of his campaign slating “Obama Care” and he stated repeatedly that he would repeal it completely. One of his first policy statements since becoming President Elect, is that he will in fact keep significant parts of Obama Care in tact.
It is therefore my contention that Trump and the Brexiteers successfully fooled that section of the electorate they had identified as being vulnerable to manipulation.
One more thing that cannot be disputed even if you disagree with everything else I have said is that the results of the EU referendum and the American Presidential election have left Britain and America bitterly and perhaps terminally divided. In both cases the final vote resulted in a virtual 50/50 split with one side claiming victory by a tiny margin. What is different between these results and the results of any comparable votes in Britain or America is that there is absolutely no room for compromise. For myself I can say that I voted to Remain in the EU and I think that leaving the EU will utterly destroy Britain and do significant harm to millions of people. I will NEVER change my opinion on this or compromise one millimetre. I am already a member of several groups and communities that are determined to stop Brexit happening. I do not and will never accept the result. However, I do understand that people on the other side of the argument feel equally as passionate as me. In America there are people who love Trump and there are people who hate and detest him and everything he stands for. There is no compromise between these two views. There are already significant protests about the Trump victory and #NotMyPresident is already viral.
In all election results in Britain and America in recent history there has been a respect for democracy itself which has pressured both the politicians and the voters to come together after an election, find some common ground and make the best of things until the next election. This time however that respect for the democratic process, that acceptance of the result, is missing completely. There can be no coming together of the two sides. This maybe because the election campaigns were carried out at such a base and debased level. But whatever the reason, the fact that thinkers and policy makers need to consider very soberly is that in both Britain and America half the population do not and will never lie down and accept the result. It is perhaps the biggest challenge and danger that our democracies have ever faced.
In conclusion I am aware that some of the people who voted for Brexit or for Trump don’t fit into the demographic I have described above (or don’t think they do). For them I would like to offer a little analogy which begins with the principle that the Brexit and Trump campaigns were both entirely correct in identifying a section of society who felt there was something rotten in society…
Imagine you have a pain in your leg which gets worse and worse. Eventually you go to a doctor. The doctor looks grim and diagnoses cancer. You are told the only solution is amputation. You take his advice and your leg is amputated…
Some months later you begin to get pain in your other leg. Reluctantly you go to the doctor, but this time you see a different doctor. This one tells you the pain in your leg is nothing more than a muscle cramp and that probably was the cause of the pain in your amputated leg as well. Moreover he tells you that even if you had had cancer in your other leg, amputation was not the only option…
Brexit and Trump diagnosed a problem in society and told people there was only one cure. Was their diagnosis correct? Are you sure? And was the cure they offered the only sensible option?
Your leg and your life deserve a second opinion.
Gun control is a question which taxes us to some degree. As a family our sentiments are generally against there being more and more guns in society but as Satanists we accept that ultimately we are all responsible for our own lives and our own security and therefore we can’t be totally against gun ownership. Indeed we have come round to the conclusion that in some societies, owning a gun is the wisest and most responsible thing to do. I think I have always had this view to some degree but Cassie has taken longer to come round to this way of thinking.
And yet every time there is another mass shooting we are reminded just how dangerous and crazy the widespread ownership of guns can be. Every such occasion is a tragedy and a pretty sad commentary on various aspects of society. Such things do happen in Europe and all over the world but they seem to happen much more frequently in The USA. Not just mass shootings, but murder by shooting is statistically much higher in America than in most other Western countries. But America is in denial (or at least the NRA and it’s supporters are). We think that America should admit to having a problem with gun ownership rather than trying to pretend things are not how they are. We think that America should seriously look at ways to deal with and reduce the number of deaths caused by guns. But we accept that gun ownership is part of American culture and that by this stage there are simply too many guns in circulation to make any form of reduction possible or meaningful. It would be nice if America didn’t have this almost religious fascination with guns and if American society was not so heavily addicted to weapons; but things are how they are, and the Satanic view must start from reality. Our conclusion therefore is that Satanists and all Americans who take seriously the concept of taking responsibility for their own lives, should be prepared to arm themselves when necessary. We would do so.
In different parts of the world the culture and history is different. In the United Kingdom, where Cassie is from, there are very few guns in circulation and fairly strict gun controls. Cassie thinks it would be stupid and unnecessary to relax the gun controls in Britain. Gun crime is rare there and in that culture it is still possible to reduce gun crime and gun ownership even further. Cassie thinks this would make serious gun crime and mass shootings in the UK even more rare. We would not need or want to own guns if we lived there.
Here in Switzerland the situation is a bit more complicated. Actually a lot of people have guns. When people do their compulsory military service they used to be allowed to keep the guns that were issued to them. It was seen as a continuing aspect of our country’s defence. I’m not sure if that is still the case and some Cantons are much stricter about gun control these days. But yes, there are quite a few guns in circulation and unlike in Britain the police here are usually armed as well. However we have a very low rate of gun crime. I think the reason is partly cultural and partly because the legal controls are quite strict and seem to be enforced successfully. Our conclusion is that really strict gun control makes the widespread public ownership of guns safer. That seems almost too clear and obvious to say and yet it does NEED saying. Most mass shootings and other gun crime are committed by people who are so mentally unstable that they should never have been let near a gun in the first place. We think that prohibition never works but that serious gun CONTROLS that are strictly MONITORED and ENFORCED are the way to have a safer future. Anybody who wants to be allowed to keep or carry a gun should understand that they will be required to have a full psychological evaluation at least once a year by fully trained and experienced psychologists who have the power to recommend confiscation of weapons and/or close monitoring by the police. We also think that the points of sale where guns are sold need to be much more strictly monitored and controlled. Safety is more important than profit and we think that any person who is caught having sold guns without doing all the proper checks should not only have their licence to sell guns permanently revoked, but they should also go to prison.
So to summarise, for us the most sensible way to avoid future shooting tragedies is through control not prohibition. And the Satanic stance must be that we have the right to defend ourselves by any means necessary.
A note from Cassie.
Having been brought up in Britain where gun crime is comparatively rare, and having seen on the news too many times the carnage unleashed by madmen with guns I have always taken the view that wide public ownership of guns is part of the problem and that all governments should legislate to reduce gun ownership as much as possible. I now concede that I was wrong and that both the problems caused by guns and the possible solutions vary greatly from culture to culture. Moreover I believe the essence of Satanism is about the individual being self empowered and not having to rely on others for protection. I think there are too many guns in circulation in America, but given that fact I think that responsible Americans should be able to carry guns for protection if they wish, and they should learn how to use them safely. It is simply too late to wish all the guns away. I like to practice what I preach so I have signed the three of us up to a sports shooting club and a course on safe gun handling. Perhaps in time I will apply for a licence to own one myself.