Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00767)

At 01:05 AM 5/13/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Alex,
>Chaos Magician refers only to the school of magick founded by A. O. Spare.
> It is merely a label and not to be taken too seriously.  I mention them
>because they tend to be as cynical about such things as I am.

Don't worry, I don't take either them or A.O Spare at all seriously.

>As you know, I have a different idea of responsibility than you do.  I
>believe that the more power is available, the less the responsibility because
>the more powerful one is the less accountable, in practical terms one, is
>because there is less available to hold one accountable.

No, you miss the point. The more power is available to you the more
accountable TO IT you are. The accountability is not towards those over whom
you have power, but to the power ITSELF. There certainly is far less to hold
one accountable, but what there is, is the SOURCE of the power. And THAT can
hold you to account in many ways, most of them very unpleasant.

A traffic cop is not going to do much good against an invading armored division.

Of course not, but the analogy doesn't hold. You liken yourself to an
armored division, well what good is an armored division against a flight of
MIRVs?

>Now, about this Sangreal business, is that anything like Sangria? (hic) :-)

I will ignore that.

>Seriously, one can make a very good case that the old families lost their
>position when they became too concerned about responsibility and not enough
>about power.

"Sangreal" has a connection with the royal bargain, the royal sacrifice, and
because of that, the royal estate,but that is it's least important meaning.
"Sangreal" refers to a genetic inheritance that is entirely non
Homo-Sapiens. The only word in human languages that comes even close to
defining it in any way is SIDHE. We are talking about those not descended
from Homo-Erectus. As to the Royal Houses, you're totally wrong, they lost
their power when they forgot what it's source was, and it's source was "The
Sangreal Bargain", and it's not the act of sacrifice itself, but the reality
which the act symbolizes, that is of such importance.

>The principle I operate under is that in nature (not society, that's a
>different matter) either something works or it doesn't and if it works, it's
>right.

So? But what does "works" mean? And two: How can you know if it "works", or
just "seems" to work in the short term?

>Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA
>Heretic
>Troublemaker
>
alexis, The Widow's son