The gates of Hell are thrown open...

An introduction for the uninitiated of the very often misunderstood belief of Satanism

Satanism. Even today, the very word strikes a note of avid concern and furrows the brow of even some of the most contemporary and supposedly unorthodox minds. And if anyone thinks I am writing this to allay any fears people might have they would be terribly mistaken. The fact is Satanism, for many, is indeed something to be feared. But it does not find its source of power in those laughable caricatures presented for public consumption by a variety of pious maniacs intent on filling their own coffers by preying on the paltry fears of the more feeble minded within society and a media that has, at times, been all too eager to spread the gospel of lurid, lascivious and nefarious tales of Satanic ritual abuse.

I simply do not have either the space or the inclination here to waste time demolishing the moronic claims that Satanism is an international conspiracy of evil psychopaths intent on destroying the planet and enslaving the masses through drug abuse and the sacrifice of children and animals. Those absurd charges have already been lambasted – no less than by the FBI, who in 20 years of investigations have publicly stated that they have never found a scrap of evidence to back up these claims. In fact, it’s rather a shame they had to waste such an inordinate amount of time foraging around in a quagmire of “evidence” born only in the minds of the mentally ill, when they could have been out doing what they are paid to do – locking up those less palatable members of the human race who’s business it is to thrive at the expense of everyone else.

So what is Satanism? Satanism is a religion that accepts man as he most naturally is. Our philosophy is one of elitism, whereby the strong rule over the weak and the productive over the wastrel through a process of Social Darwinism that occurs as a consequence of stratification. The compounding effect of egalitarianism has provided a firm foundation for the abysmal propagation of the parasite. Counter measures are long over due. Satanism espouses justice. And that extends to upholding the principle that only a meritocracy can truly serve the human race. In nature there is a pecking order and higher resources must not be drained by the wilfully less effective who are happy to sit at the bottom of the ladder and drain everyone else like a bloodsucker. No one is suggesting greasing the rungs. The strong stratify themselves, pull themselves up by their own boot-straps and pick themselves up again when they get knocked down – they seek to attain the sweet fruits of indulgence found on the higher plateaus of human endeavour.

Satan, to the Satanist, is an archetype symbolising the inherent nature of man and our acceptance of this brutal philosophy that governs us as a species. To this extent we are atheistic, adopting this mantel as the ultimate figure of pride, rebellion and human excellence.

So as you see, worship and sacrifice are not a part of our rationale; since we do not uphold a deity to bow down to. It has been said that we worship ourselves in the sense that our own egos provide the only bench-mark through which we seek to gratify our desires, pursuing our goals and furthering our own lives through the passionate application of our individual proclivities. For us, there is no hope of reward in some intangible afterlife - here and now is the only opportunity.

Dr. Elmer Gates (1853 – 1923), the eminent research psychologist made specific reference to the importance of individual development, referring to such persons as “a world worker.” He said: “a person whose genius or other predilection is contributory to the development of any science, art, philosophy or religion as a lifework, having accepted his mission and administering it for the world’s weal and his own happiness – he is a world worker.” Satanists are world workers. Satanists are people who can do things. You might be a factory owner, unbeknownst to you the young man who sweeps your floors might be a Satanist. He would certainly never bother you with the fact – but you can be sure you’d have the best swept floors in any factory you can think of. You’d better hold on to that young man because you can be sure he won’t be sweeping floors forever. And you can be just as sure he will apply himself effectively in anything he undertakes.

For those who haven’t yet read The Satanic Bible, Satanic philosophy can be encapsulated in The 9 Satanic Statements (copyright Anton Szandor LaVey 1969):

1: Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!

2: Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!

3: Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!

4: Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, rather than love wasted on ingrates!

5: Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!

6: Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!

7: Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development” has become the most vicious animal of all!

8: Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental or emotional gratification!

9: Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!

So there you have it. And if evil they brand us, then evil we are! But as you see, there is no element of Devil worship in our credo. Satan is quite simply a symbol of man living as his nature dictates and remaining the final arbiter of his own destiny.

Umberto Ray is predominantly known as a poet and his work has appeared in magazines and anthologies around the world. His first book, The Blood In My Veins, was published in 2005. He has been a CoS member for several years and was ordained into its priesthood on Walpurgisnacht, 2007.
Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

How the row over Jackie Walker triggered a full-blown war in Momentum

Jon Lansman, the organisation's founder, is coming under attack. 

The battle for control within Momentum, which has been brewing for some time, has begun in earnest.

In a sign of the growing unrest within the organisation – established as the continuation of Jeremy Corbyn’s first successful leadership bid, and instrumental in delivering in his re-election -  a critical pamphlet by the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty (AWL), a Trotskyite grouping, has made its way into the pages of the Times, with the “unelected” chiefs of Momentum slated for turning the organisation into a “bland blur”.

The issue of contention: between those who see Momentum as an organisation to engage new members of the Labour party, who have been motivated by Jeremy Corbyn but are not yet Corbynites.

One trade unionist from that tendency described what they see the problem as like this: “you have people who have joined to vote for Jeremy, they’re going to meetings, but they’re voting for the Progress candidates in selections, they’re voting for Eddie Izzard [who stood as an independent but Corbynsceptic candidate] in the NEC”.  

On the other are those who see a fightback by Labour’s right and centre as inevitable, and who are trying to actively create a party within a party for what they see as an inevitable purge. One activist of that opinion wryly described Momentum as “Noah’s Ark”.

For both sides, Momentum, now financially stable thanks to its membership, which now stands at over 20,000, is a great prize. And in the firing line for those who want to turn Momentum into a parallel line is Jon Lansman, the organisation’s founder.

Lansman, who came into politics as an aide to Tony Benn, is a figure of suspicion on parts of the broad left due to his decades-long commitment to the Labour party. His major opposition within Momentum and on its ruling executive comes from the AWL.

The removal of Jackie Walker as a vice-chair of Momentum after she said that Holocaust Memorial Day belittled victims of other genocides has boosted the AWL, although the AWL's Jill Mountford, who sits on Momentum's ruling executive, voted to remove Walker as vice-chair. (Walker remains on the NEC, as she has been elected by members). But despite that, the AWL, who have been critical of the process whereby Walker lost her post, have felt the benefit across the country.

Why? Because that battle has triggered a series of serious splits, not only in Momentum’s executive but its grassroots. A raft of local groups have thrown out the local leadership, mostly veterans of Corbyn’s campaign for the leadership, for what the friend of one defeated representative described as “people who believe the Canary [a pro-Corbyn politics website that is regularly accused of indulging and promoting conspiracy theories]”.

In a further series of reverses for the Lansmanite caucus, the North West, a Momentum stronghold since the organisation was founded just under a year ago, is slipping away from old allies of Lansman and towards the “new” left. As one insider put it, the transition is from longstanding members towards people who had been kicked out in the late 1980s and early 1990s by Neil Kinnock. The constituency party of Wallasey in particular is giving senior figures in Momentum headaches just as it is their opponents on the right of the party, with one lamenting that they have “lost control” of the group.

It now means that planned changes to Momentum’s structure, which the leadership had hoped to be rubberstamped by members, now face a fraught path to passage.

Adding to the organisation’s difficulties is the expected capture of James Schneider by the leader’s office. Schneider, who appears widely on television and radio as the public face of Momentum and is well-liked by journalists, has an offer on the table to join Jeremy Corbyn’s team at Westminster as a junior to Seumas Milne.

The move, while a coup for Corbyn, is one that Momentum – and some of Corbyn’s allies in the trade union movement – are keen to resist. Taking a job in the leader’s office would reduce still further the numbers of TV-friendly loyalists who can go on the airwaves and defend the leadership. There is frustration among the leader’s office that as well as Diane Abbott and John McDonnell, who are both considered to be both polished media performers and loyalists, TV bookers turn to Ken Livingstone, who is retired and unreliable, and Paul Mason, about whom opinions are divided within Momentum. Some regard Mason as a box office performer who needs a bigger role, others as a liability.

But all are agreed that Schneider’s expected departure will weaken the media presence of Corbyn loyalists and also damage Momentum. Schneider has spent much of his time not wrangling journalists but mediating in local branches and is regarded as instrumental in the places “where Momentum is working well” in the words of one trade unionist. (Cornwall is regarded as a particular example of what the organisation should be aiming towards)

It comes at a time when Momentum’s leadership is keen to focus both on its external campaigns but the struggle for control in the Labour party. Although Corbyn has never been stronger within the party, no Corbynite candidate has yet prevailed in a by-election, with the lack of available candidates at a council level regarded as part of the problem. Councilors face mandatory reselection as a matter of course, and the hope is that a bumper crop of pro-Corbyn local politicians will go on to form the bulk of the talent pool for vacant seats in future by-elections and in marginal seats at the general election.

But at present, a draining internal battle is sapping Momentum of much of its vitality. But Lansman retains two trump cards. The first is that as well as being the founder of the organisation, he is its de facto owner: the data from Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership campaigns, without which much of the organisation could not properly run, is owned by a limited company of which he is sole director. But “rolling it up and starting again” is very much the nuclear option, that would further delay the left’s hopes of consolidating its power base in the party.

The second trump card, however, is the tribalism of many of the key players at a local level, who will resist infiltration by groups to Labour’s left just as fiercely as many on the right. As one veteran of both Corbyn’s campaigns reflected: “If those who have spent 20 years attacking our party think they have waiting allies in the left of Labour, they are woefully mistaken”. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics.