extracts from a conversation on conspiracy theorist’s fear of abortion and satanic elites:
One way they divide us is by making issues like abortion so polarized around extreme positions. When conspiracists rail against abortion or transgenderism, they are mostly railing against them as normative values. I wish they would more clearly highlight the way these things are framed in liberal political culture as values in themselves as opposed to traditional culture and values, and not make it seem like they are against them tout court. One could blame mainstream conservatives for pushing liberals to a defensive extreme position by attacking these things as basic rights, but I think it goes both ways and we are all being manipulated.
I would prefer to emphasize ways of approaching these topics that do not automatically subsume them under a medical model that makes using dangerous medical interventions the immediate response. It is the technocratic transhumanist trajectory in our culture that is making it more and more difficult for people to deal with their bodies without the mediation of medical authorities. Unlike the conservative capitalists, the techno-elite in the globalist faction have no need for consumers anymore, so it serves them to have a society that “tran”scends not just gender but sex, children, or even any human contact unmediated by technology.
In Steiner’s cosmology, this subservience to “sub”natural technology is what he associates with “Ahriman”, an older term for the demonic foe of mankind. The name Lucifer was a mistranslation of Venus the light bringer that got popularized in the late middle ages, but Steiner retains the occult association of Lucifer the light bringer with the light of occult knowledge which pulls us away from the body, which needs to be balanced with the darkness of Ahriman, which pulls down towards enslavement to the physical and the sub-physical technologies. For him, Christ is the the balance between the traps of both the light and the dark. We too often get caught in and caught between the opposing forces of the cosmic battle, which are also cooperating to fulfill their overlapping agendas. In the depths of our hearts is the impulse to be free from both sides. Call it Christ, call it whatever, but don’t mistake it for a side of an oppositional structure or one may find one’s self an unwitting pawn in someone else’s game.
What does Lucifer mean this day and age? It is important people know both history and the deeper topological layers of an idea. Communism might mean something horrible to many people but I think it important, if one wants to understand it, to know what it originally meant and how it functions in a space of possibility, as well as how people have misused it. Talismanic symbols are a bit different. If you are trying to brainwash people or create a mass movement, then education isn’t the point, you just want immediate and uniform associations. If one is doing one’s own private ritual then the deeper significance of a symbol or idea becomes important. If all one has is surface associations, it won’t be that magical anyway, unless one allows the deeper history to overcode the surface layer through intuition.Though often the associations aren’t as opposed as they may seem at first glance.
The semiotics of occult Christianity are case in point. People being really into Lucifer as a symbol of self-actualization is consistent with traditional Christian semiotics, where the name was coined referencing a proud Babylonian king, and then mythologized into a symbol of pride by Milton. Adolescents and people struggling with self-esteem find the confidence to break away from the collective using the symbol of Lucifer. He is always a symbol of the self against the collective, or the personal truth against the collective dogma and hypocrisy.In Sufi thought, he is called Iblis and is a symbol not necessarily of pride but more like a faithfullness to one’s emotions despite any consequences. So similar theme. Semiotic drift and transformation happens through history but there is always some kind of continuous (topological) connection beneath the discrete and disparate meanings people give to things.