KILLING THE ANGENCY

Our most recent illiterate critic claims that either I and/or WSA has “destroyed the ONA.” Like I killed the ONA. This incompetent critic has a right to his/her opinions, and I don’t mind if this is how he/she sees things. After all what does it change? With or without this persons opinions, the ONA is still going to be the ONA, and WSA is still WSA.

But, what was said or brought up did make me think actually and question a few things: Can you kill the ONA?

I can understand it if I were a member of the Church of Satan, which had a rigid Satanic Dogmatic Religion that you had to follow to the tee; and I changed a few things about the religion. If that was the case, then, yes, it is quite possible to kill a dogmatic religion. It’s easy to.

Look at the Protestant Reformation. All it took to literally kill the power and authority the Catholic Church that gripped Europe back then was a man, his pen, a nail, and hammer. Martin Luther King just wrote out a few of his insights, nailed that shit to a door, and a decade or two later, Europe is ripped in half, millions of Catholics are being slaughtered, and Protestantism took over half of Europe. The bigger they are – the harder they fall. The more dogmatic a religion is – the easier it is to kill that religion. The same principle goes in politics.

What political institution is easier to kill off: 1) A totalitarian regime or 2) a democracy? It’s easier to kill off a totalitarian regime, because all you have to do is assassinate the dictator, and get the people to revolt for their liberty. How the hell do you kill off a democratic republic? Shoot the president? Poison Congress or the whole Parliament? That won’t work because of the political parties. They’ll just replace the dead officials. You can’t kill something amorphous like a democratic republic. AMORPHOUS is the key word here.

Those old world rigidly controlled nation-states, have/are dying off giving way to an unorthodox – heretical – style of civilization: the amorphous democracies. Time itself has proven that in rigid, dogmatic, control, there can be no progression of person or civilization. Has there ever been? People by natural law, grow and change with time. Civilization must be allowed to move and flow unimpeded. Science must be allowed to flow and progress unimpeded. This amorphous gradual evolution is the very essence of nature. It comes to no surprise that what stands against nature, science, and progression – Religion – is all that remains of our old world human institutions that still holds onto rigid orthodoxy. The very fact that no dogmatic religion; like Christianity; has changed or progressed for the hundreds or thousands of years of its existence attests to the very fact that there simply cannot be evolution/progression within the LIMITS of inertial stagnation; dogma; and orthodoxy.

So now the question is what is the ONA? Is the ONA a dogmatic religion? Is it like a totalitarian regime with a dictator grand master? Based on what little I know of the ONA, it’s neither of these things. I remember clearly in a few MSS  by Anton Long where Long tries over and over again to tell the initiate that the ONA is not a religion. I really hate to be the “bible thumper” and quote the Long-meister, but just for you idiots, I will because I want you to see, with your own eyes, what “edicts” I or this WSA is operating on:

[Quote Long]

Hard Reality of Satanism

II. What Satanism Is Not:

a)      Satanism is not, nor can ever be, a religion, nor just a ‘philosophy’. A religion means acceptance of authority, the rigid structure of a ‘Church’ or a ‘Temple’, and a unified dogma (with the consequent schisms and claims to ‘authenticity”). The religious attitude is the antithesis of what Satanism really is – for Satanism is a way of living, a way of experiencing, in the raw, whereas religion abstracts, limits endeavour, behaviour and moralizes. In short, a Satanist plunges into reality, without any supports (moral, psychic or human) whereas a religious person has that reality prescribed by dogma, authority and such like, and is supported by a `Church’, its members and their attitudes. Satanism is an ecstatic affirmation of existence – a taking of existence into new and higher realms, as well as a plunge into existing darkness and the creation of new darkness.

[End Quote]

Now I know our critics are illiterate and have a 3rd grade level comprehension reading level. So I’ll break that simple paragraph up there into really simple points of reasoning:

1) ONA Satanism is NOT a Religion;

2) ONA Satanism is NOT a Philosophy;

3) Because it is neither of these two it lacks:

a) Religious doctrine and or dogma

b) Philosophical theorems and convction

4) Therefore, there is nothing to kill or schism.

Four simple easy steps.

Well, if it’s not a religion or philosophy, then what is the ONA? Lets see what the guy who formulated it said it is:

[Quote Long]

Hard Reality of Satanism

I. What Satanism Is:

a)      Satanism is a quest for self-excellence, involving real danger, real challenges and requiring real courage. It involves taking your body to and beyond its physical limits of endurance. It involves real action, alone: without the support of friends, comrades, lovers, relations or anyone. It involves accepting challenges – physical, psychic, intellectual and triumphing solely by one’s own efforts. It involves the triumph of pure, individual will and desire.

b)      Satanism is, in part, an Inner quest, an exploration of the `hidden’ (and overt) aspects of consciousness: a discovery of the darkness within and beyond the individual psyche. This involves ‘magickal acts’ – such as rituals. This magick, however, is a means, not an end.

c)      Satanism involves ordeals, both physical and magickal. Those who are suitable triumph; the others fail. [One such ordeal is the Grade Ritual of Internal Adept - where the candidate lives alone and isolated, bereft of everything except the bare necessities for physical survival, for a period of three months.]

d)      Satanism requires the practical experiencing of all moral limits, and then a mastery of the feelings, desires, pleasures, terrors, pains and so on that these imply.

e)      Satanism involves the individual defiance of all subservience: a Satanist accepts guidance only, and refuses to be dominated or intimidated by anyone. This guidance is toward practical experience, and it by this experience that the novice learns and develops a genuine Satanic character.

f)        Satanism involves sacrifice – this is a necessary test of character [qv. the MSS, "Satanism, Sacrifice and Crime - The Satanic Truth", and "Satanism - The Sinister Shadow, Revealed" for more details.].

g)      Satanism is a means – a method, or way, and the purpose of this means, method or way is to produce a specific type of individual: the next stage of our evolution as a species. Satanism is thus an expression of evolutionary change – on both the individual level and in respect of `societies’ and ‘history’. The individuals so created often inspire in the supine majority a certain terror/awe/admiration/fear/jealousy.

h)      Satanism is elitist. It does not compromise – its tests, ordeals, methods and character-building experiences are severe and will never be made easier to make them acceptable to more people or easier to undertake.

i)        Satanism is esoteric by nature and intent: it is both a ’secret’ way, by virtue of its methods etc., and it is not nor probably will be suitable for the majority for many, many centuries.

[End Quote]

Now, I know that’s a lot to read for your common imbecile, plus Long uses some big and medium sized words in those 9 points. So I’ll break it down into baby talk again for our idiot brethren out their:

Satanism Is:

1) A quest for self-excellence… a quest means your ass is looking for something;

2) An Inner quest, an exploration… an inner quest means you’re looking inside for something. Exploration is that shit you used to do when you were a mentally growing kid out of curiosity; and it’s what Scientists do for a living.

3) Ordeals… this means when you are doing shit in the real world for the experience.

4)  A practical experiencing of all moral limits… in otherwords – Just Do It!

5) A defiance of all subservience… this means you don’t take shit from nobody or no group.

6) A means – a method, or way… of doing shit.

Those are the 6 basic easy to understand things outlined as what ONA Satanism is.

Now the idiot should be asked: How do you kill or destroy an experience? How do you destroy someone’s inner quest? How do you kill someone’s exploration? How do you stop someone from experiencing stuff? How do you destroy a way of doing stuff? You can’t! It’s personal. It’s inside each private individual. Your quest and experience in life, has nothing whatsoever to do with mine, and vise versa. Just because I change my mind and do something differently, doesn’t mean you have to change your method of experiencing and personal questing. There’s no connection. How do you let someone else’s life, thoughts, and opinions affect how you live, experience, explore, and quest life and thought? It’s weak.

The imbecile can say: Well you’re thinking different, and your writing about different things, and that’s not allow. Bullshit:

[Quote Long]

Hard Reality of Satanism

The second example concerns the formation and use of Satanic ‘Temples’ and groups by a Satanist. A Satanic novice, in order to gain experience of magickal rituals and people manipulation, usually forms a group to perform Satanic rituals The people recruited are for the most part used – and the novice often assumes a specific Satanic `role’ for this: the role of sorcerer/sorceress. He/she may dress in a certain way and so on, as he/she may use fables to impress and/or manipulate. This, however, for a genuine Satanist, is only a stage – and one which lasts a year or two. After that, experience and mastery of ceremonial and hermetic magick gained, they move on to new challenges and experiences, as all good Satanists should. Further, the individuals of this ‘Temple’ or group are not Satanists, although they may believe themselves to be – they are       simply being used to afford the novice pleasure/excitement/experience and so on. Had any of them any Satanic character or potential, they would rebel to undertake their own quest by forming such a group/’Temple’ and experience the limits of themselves.

[End Quote]

What’s that above quote actually mean, and imply? It means you’re a dumbass for belonging to a group you didn’t make. It means you’re a poser if you think your ONA because you are a member of some Temple/Nexion or whatever. Because if you really understood, or had the “spirit” of a genuine Satanist, you wouldn’t be a loser in a group. You would walk out, rebel, and start your own shit.

Why else do you think all these nexions exist? What better (more clever) way to make genuine Satanists go out there and start up Sinister groups then to say they suck if they belong to a group they didn’t make themselves. You can  belong to one to learn shit, but if you stay after you got what you need, you are a poser, and your ass is getting used by the real Satanists – the predators that put the group you belong to, or the predators that wrote the shit you think is authoritative dogma.

Why does WSA exist or why do those other nexions exist that do and teach things a little different from the Original ONA? Because we can’t help but do what the ONA actually teaches us to do. Learn the shit, practice it, apply it, go out and make your own shit, and if you stay any longer, you’re a poser and the ONA is using your dumb ass – which you deserve.

What’s the ONA using you for? In what way you ask? In the same way a virus uses people. Or to make it more better understood, I’ll paraphrase a parable Jesus once told: Behold! There was a farmer with seeds. One day the farmer cast seeds out. Some seeds fell on stone. Some fell on parched ground. Some of the seed fell on moist ground. The seeds on the stone and parched ground did not grow. Birds ate most of the seeds that fell on the moist ground. But one seed did grow. And it grew to bare it’s stalks of corn. And from that single corn plant that grew, the farmer had multiplied his seeds. let he who have an “eye” to “see” understand these mysteries.

Anton Long is the Farmer. His hundreds of writings are the seeds he cast out. Some of Anton Longs seeds fell on fertile people, who bore fruit. Most fell on dumb people. Who, rather than baring fruit, just carried it around, scattering seeds themselves. And the seeds that fell from the posers fell onto fertile minds, and those minds bore fruit also. All it takes is one fertile mind, to multiple the work and efforts of one Anton Long. This is something the WSA calls: Duplication of Effort. If I knew how to make $10 a day, and I taught someone else to make $10 a day, that’s duplication of effort. Now, if I charged 1% from every person I taught, that’s called Residual Income. That’s where the big money is at.

Of all the people that come into contact with Anton Longs “seeds” many follow, but few duplicate his efforts. Because they hold onto the outer shell and forms, and are afraid to wander to far away from “home.” They are too afraid to rebel and think for themselves to do things in a different and original way, thinking that if they change the outer form, they are no longer “ONA” when being “ONA” actually means you have come to an understanding that there shall come a point in your personal development and progression where you must leave “home” and be your own person, without the comfort of mama’s shadow. I look very different from my parents, but I know their blood flows in me forever. This WSA looks very different from the ONA indeed, but the ONA flows in our veins forever.

Maybe the problem is how I & 352 personally sees the ONA? We see the ONA as being something like a covert CIA of secret agent. Why not? It’s got all the proper tools and methods of a covert organization doesn’t it? Shapeshifing? Shrencing? Insight Roles? Glamour? Disruption? Strategy and Tactic? these aren’t the principles of a cult or religion. It’s the methodology of a covert organization that works and operates in the shadows doing shit for certain reasons.

How do you kill the CIA? How do you destroy the KGB or M15? Just because CIA operatives in Vietnam look different, think different, and do things different, from CIA operatives in Russia, doesn’t mean one set of operatives has killed or destroyed the CIA or the “CIA Tradition.” There is no god damn “CIA Tradition” to kill. There is only a covert/esoteric method of doing things to achieve certain end results; which expresses itself, or is used by its operatives in different ways according to the place, time, people, and conditions involved.

Does the birth of a child destroy it’s mother? If not then how does the WSA or the birth of any nexion kill the ONA, no matter how different they do things? How do you kill a covert organization of ONA operatives scattered across the globe doing – experiencing – exploring – ordealing – insight roling – manipulating – disrupting – in their own privately unique quest towards self progression? You can’t. We are each different. Each on our own private journey. Each on our own covert missions. Each on our own personal quest. We were meant to be different. To be unique individuals. What nexions emerges were meant to be different, unique individuals also. There was meant to be morphology, variety, spice, variations.

The ONA was meant to be amorphous, with many faces and tentacles; just like its maker was a man of many faces, whose influential tentacles stretched far and wide into many different organizations, institutions, Ways, ideologies, and even religions. Somewhere beneath the beard, the many names, and the many characters he becomes, he knows his true self. I personally see a beauty in the amorphous nature of Whatever his name is. The mystery of not knowing for sure what or who or why he is who he is. If we can admire Whatever his name is for this quality – his personal amorphous quest for personal enlightenment – then can we not see the same beauty and admiration in the variation of the ONA and it’s amorphous quality – its amorphous quest – the quest to bring us to our full potential? What does it matter what it looks like or is called, if in the end we end up fulfilling the same destiny set into motion long ago?

Chloe

Different angle: severancesun.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/one-key-to-one-abyss/

352:O9A