By Laura Seabrook
The following six pages of comics might seem out of place in this otherwise word heavy booklet.
- So what do I mean when I say... Neo-Paganism?
- Hey then, so what;'s this about being SubGenius?
- Lies My Culture Told Me
I've included them to give a
better understanding of "Neo-Pagan" and
"SubGenius" concepts (bearing in mind that Paganism is a
“serious” religion and SubGenius is a
“humorous” one). These beliefs shaped the way in which
I reacted to QC 2001 and what happened at it. So, having
established that, here's my critique.
The Pagan Critique
It became obvious to me as the conference progressed that the ideas being pushed by what was known as the “national broad left” (NBL) were patriarchalones of domination. Within paganism, there are two main aspects of the divine, which are termed “The Goddess” and “The God”. These are similar concepts to Yin and Yang found in Taoism in that they are composite (though not opposite) ones. The nature of each is multiple and diverse, not singular.
The Goddess has to do with cycles, variety, diversity, creativity, and patterns of change; with all those qualities that connect us to more than just humanity, but with the rest of the world and our environment as we know it. Imagine if you will a symbol for The Goddess, as a Rainbow, all colours in one; or a circle, for wholeness.
The God on the other hand has to do with delineation, barriers, distinction, mortality; both the definition, maintenance and transgression of these. It is no accident that dying and resurrecting gods in general tend to be male, as that is an aspect of The God. Also, by the very nature of setting and breaking boundaries, The God is related to authority, and the idea of hierarchy. The symbol for The God might be the Taoist dyad minus the centres of each half (black verses white), or a vertical line (division).
Now the qualities of The Goddess and The God are complimentary, not opposite. As a metaphor, imagine a human eye, which has the rods and cones of the retina. Without cones, you would not be able to see any colour. Cones however only work well though, when there is sufficient light for them to work. Rods detect black and white, and that is why night vision is often in a reduced colour range. Take away either cones or rods, and you have incomplete vision. Rely too much on either The Goddess or The God, and you have an imbalanced view of life.
The systems of thought and action collectively known as the patriarchy are really an imbalance or exclusive attention towards aspects of The God. The idea of authority via hierarchy is very much in The God's domain. All the stories I list in “Lies my Culture told Me” are patriarchal tales, about judging and being judged, about authority which “legitimizes” those below it, and about a division of “with us” or “against us”. But all these stories, to me, are false dichotomies.
What such stories do is promote “power-over” (a.k.a. domination) as opposed to “power-within” (a.k.a. immanence). They have power when we don't realise that they are only stories, when they get so tied up with religion and culture that we take them for “truth” and the “natural” way of things. What the NBL have done is buy into all these stories without realising it.
The great man (presumably either Marx or one of his successors) has given them the true words and this has empowered them with “the” truth (which in fact is one of many). This makes them a part of “the good” or as they put it “the left” and anyone by definition who disagrees of opposes them becomes “the bad” or “the right”. It was clear that they believed themselves to have the “high moral ground” at the conference and because of this had no qualms about disrupting the it and intimidating anyone who got in their way. Hence they were saved and we were damned.
But from a pagan viewpoint, there's no difference between domination by someone else who is either “left” or “right” - it's still domination. It's still a way of depreciating you, your opinions and actions, while promoting their own ideas and agenda.
SHAME on the NBL for being so incompetent at communicating. If your intention was to raise the issue of CHOGM and organize an action against it, you failed miserably, and in fact “shot yourself in the foot”.
SHAME on the NBL for not only not respecting other people's points of view, but not respecting other people period. Intimidation as a method of control has a way of haunting its user eventually, as fewer people will take them seriously.
SHAME on the NBL for being bi- and trans- phobic, and discriminating against the disabled. Though you might say otherwise, your actions (by preventing events relating to these topics) show your true colours.
SHAME on the NBL for assuming that anyone not (by their definition) “the left” must be “the right” and assuming that the only “valid” activism is their own. There are other ways of being an activist!(12)
And finally...
SHAME on the 2001 organising committee, for not being able to maintain control of the QC agenda, and keep it on course, thereby allowing it to be hijacked by the NBL.
The SubGenius Critique
It's pretty clear from a SubGenius perspective that the NBL are a bunch ofConspiracy Dupes, buying into a line of false SlacK sold to them by “the Con”. See, the Con isn't just the establishment (or the known establishment) shaping things from apparent points of influence and control. It's also those elements that work behind the scenes, and it's also the opposition to itself.
Confused? Most non-SubGenius types are, because they buy into this idea or that idea, and all the ideas were thought by someone else for the benefit of someone else, not you. Or to put it another way - false slack is so damn common that it gets presented as “truth” and “reality” when it's no such thing.
If you can only be a “real” person by doing this, or doing that, or doing what they tell you to, then really The Con is doing something to you (and it ain't nice)! But it doesn't end there. If you buy into the idea that you can only be a “real person” by fighting the conspiracy, then you're still buying into a line of false Slack. So, the Con is not only the oppressor, it's its opposition as well!
What defines the Con is not the methods by which it seeks to steel your SlacK, but the fact that it does steel your SlacK. Dupes of the con just don't even realise this, and get sold on the idea. They actually want their SlacK to be stolen from them, and replaced with False SlacK! What's more, they go on steeling other people's SlacK just for the Con.
But the Con is cunning. It doesn't put it to people in such terms. Rather, it gives them an easy out, a way of thinking without thinking, called idealism. Idealism, when it's at home, is uncritically taking on someone else's values. It's easy to play the game; it's easy to fight the “good” fight, because others say it's the good fight. It's harder to hold onto your own SlacK and think for yourself. So how do you know a Dupe when you see one? Fortunately certain holy SubGenius readings have the answer:
- And you shall know them by their wankiness, for they shall claim the higher moral ground, when in fact we are all at sea. (Prescriptures 9:11).(13)
And I saw Dupes at QC 2001! They were called the NBL and stole everyone else's SlacK at that event.
FUCK YOU NBL for steeling my SlacK !
FUCK YOU NBL for being Dupes of the Con without realising it!
And finally...
FUCK YOU
NBL if you can't take a joke!
(Official Church
Slogan)