mediapathic

Aug 31

And now, a dramatic interpretation of the last few minutes.

And now, a dramatic presentation of the last few minutes

"WOOO. FUCK YEAH! WE LOVE YOUR SHIT!"

"uh. Thanks guys. You know I’m the light guy, right?"

"YEAAAH! YOU FUCKIN ROCK!"

"and you realize that there is no one on this side of the club?"

"WOOOO"

"…because you had to go through that chain to get here?"

"FUCK YEAH"

"so… why don’t you go back over there where everyone else is?"

"WOOO FUCK YEAH! YOU THE MAN! KEEP IT UP" and they dance away

and, scene.

http://kushl0rd.tumblr.com/post/96207198558/dj-ghostatl-kushl0rd-my-history-of -

catvincent:

theheadlesshashasheen:

kushl0rd:

theheadlesshashasheen:

kushl0rd:

theheadlesshashasheen:

kushl0rd:

dj-ghostatl:

dj-ghostatl:

kushl0rd:

My History of Witchcraft teacher is just set on her knowledge that witchcraft and magick is utterly made up and entirely fabricated as a sociological phenomenon, with no basis in reality, and that there are no such things as true witches or real magick,

I’ve just never had much respect for academics that study anything magick-related for any culture but don’t practice it. How can they understand it with out doing it? There’s just so much that is missed, in my opinion, but that might be the tantric influences on thelema that I’m speaking from.

Join the club, my friend. Actually I’ve got very little respect for academic, the Occult aside. Like scientists, they’re incredibly afraid of what doesn’t fit into the schema of Western science, or at least what can’t be studied in a reasonably cut and dry fashion. They’re also incredibly dismissive of anything that may suggest otherwise—to the point of being malicious, condescending, intentionally ignorant, or socially exclusive of the perceived outlier. I ran into this problem when my paper was rejected from a philosophy conference because I had the gall to compare Heideggerian metaphysics with Thelema’s philosophy of Will. Not only was I the only major who submitted that was rejected from the conference, but the conference was both a philosophy and religious conference. 

Of course if they were less concerned with the map and more concerned with the territory we might have more Occultist-inclined teachers who are both factually correct and academically sound. But, you can’t go to a pauper expecting gold. And you can’t go to a muggle for any semblance of decency on a topic they believe is as dry and dead as the perception they’ve chosen for themselves. Not so much that a non-Occult narrative is worse than an Occultist one, but that the mere denial of pursual of the topic, or the failure to admit that one’s own method deserves critique from time and time again, especially when it continues to hold up a picture of the world as you’ve always known it to be true, is what makes their perception a failure.

The Occult doesn’t make a person perceptive—self-examination does. Academics however very rarely are honest with themselves, I find. It makes it easier for them to teach, when they cannot do.

I think the problem lies with fluid terms like witchcraft, or even magic. Given that the definitions of what is being done - or sought out, or feared - based on WHEN and WHERE in the world they are taking place, it’s easy to dismiss them as abstract psychological issues. And there is a certain amount of truth to such things -

Carlo Ginzburg begins his excellent Ecstasies: Deciphering the Witches’ Sabbath by establishing the fact that what became “witch fears” began as fear of immigrants/minorities (Jews), and plague victims (Lepers). A lot of accusations leveled at witches are precisely the same as those leveled earlier in history toward minorities or victims of circumstance. That doesn’t negate the rest of the book, of course, which increasingly leaps backwards into the past to establish that ecstatic cults (like the Benandanti) existed, or that folk practitioners of certain practices existed.

All of these things arose simultaneously, and fueled crazes. The problem is narrowing it all down into a single box and insisting that only one view can be applied. It just doesn’t work.

Of course. And I’m not denying that witchcraft accusations have to a certain extent been used to perpetuate a status quo by the big man—say at women or minorities—but to insist that is all of magick, that is the only history of magick there has ever been…

that’s just flat out wrong. To be more fair to the professor however the subject of the class is “the witch craze”, but the professor thus far has not gone to any lengths to discuss the philosophy of witchcraft, my certain groups practice witchcraft along with why they may have been falsely accused of doing so (say also as a defense against the Big Man, such as slaves practicing variants of hoodou and voodou against their white masters because no other way of fighting back was realistic) or that witchcraft itself is a broad term. 

There is something to be said about the psychology of witch-related things (and I follow a primarily psychological model of magick so I understand how relevant it is) but already the signs here don’t point to a course free of bumps in the road.

Right. It’s the “we have a box, so we’ll stuff everything in it” problem.

You certainly can’t understand Haitian Voodoo without understanding its origins; but most academics don’t have the internal capacity to write a book like Wade Davis (Passage into Darkness or The Serpent and the Rainbow). Instead they stick to what they feel are rational assessments of subjects that can’t be approached in an entirely rational manner.

So we end up with the “mental illness and mass psychology” explanations - “if you DID consider yourself a witch, it was because you were mentally ill, or if you believed in witches’ it was just being swept up into the madness of a craze.”

I don’t know if you caught it, but I passed on a link of a video from the BBC that was on henbane and witches a month or two ago. One of the academics - who had a distinctly “it never happened, because Patriarchy” mindset - insisted that entheogens were NEVER part of the witch trials and witch crazes. One of the individual given Henbane even had a pretty typical “flying ointment” style response to Henbane, and she still insisted there was no basis in history for it. Her arguments were FLAGRANTLY wrong. But she had a position staked already, and wouldn’t budge.

See but you’re just a plebeian than doesn’t know anything. She is the one with the true and honest keys to the city of wisdom, because she has a degree that you don’t have and that also makes her a better person than you

God, The Serpent in the Rainbow is one of my favorite books, how did you know :3

That’s okay. I’m a pragmatist. If her work is ever useful to me - which is doubtful - I’ll still steal it for my own, horrible ends. LOL.

And because The Serpent and the Rainbow is the shit!

The part of Serpent and the Rainbow that influences me to this day is the story of when Davis took the day off & went to see Raiders of the Lost Ark in Port-au-Prince.

At the end, when the angels came out of the Ark and started eating Nazis, the audience panicked - not a lot of experience with movies & they took the angels as real vengeful spirits coming out of the screen. Davis reported that as the panic started, a group of houngans spontaneously got up and assisted the terrified audience: one group threw spells at the screen to keep the creatures away while others got them to safely make it to the exits without crushing people underfoot.

Power of movies, guys. Power of magic.

Aug 30

The Demiurge! Fuck that guy!

The Demiurge! Fuck that guy!

gehayi:


youmightbeamisogynist:

naamahdarling:

mythosidhe:

Although I have to point out that there was a piece of speculative science fiction called The Blazing World published by one Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in 1666, slightly predating Mary Shelley.

This is the thing. Women have been doing awesome shit since there was awesome shit to do, we’ve BEEN THERE, if anyone bothered to look.

Oh, they looked. And then maliciously and willfully erased us from the books to keep anyone else from “getting ideas.”

Hell, the first named author in history? Enheduanna, a Sumerian high priestess, poet and lyricist. She’s known as the Shakespeare of Sumerian literature.


Fake Geek Boys go back to Sumeria, posers.

gehayi:

youmightbeamisogynist:

naamahdarling:

mythosidhe:

Although I have to point out that there was a piece of speculative science fiction called The Blazing World published by one Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in 1666, slightly predating Mary Shelley.

This is the thing. Women have been doing awesome shit since there was awesome shit to do, we’ve BEEN THERE, if anyone bothered to look.

Oh, they looked. And then maliciously and willfully erased us from the books to keep anyone else from “getting ideas.”

Hell, the first named author in history? Enheduanna, a Sumerian high priestess, poet and lyricist. She’s known as the Shakespeare of Sumerian literature.

Fake Geek Boys go back to Sumeria, posers.

(Source: dovsherman, via catvincent)

(Source: DITOX, via theremina)

http://kushl0rd.tumblr.com/post/96207198558/dj-ghostatl-kushl0rd-my-history-of -

theheadlesshashasheen:

kushl0rd:

theheadlesshashasheen:

kushl0rd:

dj-ghostatl:

dj-ghostatl:

kushl0rd:

My History of Witchcraft teacher is just set on her knowledge that witchcraft and magick is utterly made up and entirely fabricated as a sociological phenomenon, with no basis in reality, and that there are no such things as true witches or real magick,

I’ve just never had much respect for academics that study anything magick-related for any culture but don’t practice it. How can they understand it with out doing it? There’s just so much that is missed, in my opinion, but that might be the tantric influences on thelema that I’m speaking from.

Join the club, my friend. Actually I’ve got very little respect for academic, the Occult aside. Like scientists, they’re incredibly afraid of what doesn’t fit into the schema of Western science, or at least what can’t be studied in a reasonably cut and dry fashion. They’re also incredibly dismissive of anything that may suggest otherwise—to the point of being malicious, condescending, intentionally ignorant, or socially exclusive of the perceived outlier. I ran into this problem when my paper was rejected from a philosophy conference because I had the gall to compare Heideggerian metaphysics with Thelema’s philosophy of Will. Not only was I the only major who submitted that was rejected from the conference, but the conference was both a philosophy and religious conference. 

Of course if they were less concerned with the map and more concerned with the territory we might have more Occultist-inclined teachers who are both factually correct and academically sound. But, you can’t go to a pauper expecting gold. And you can’t go to a muggle for any semblance of decency on a topic they believe is as dry and dead as the perception they’ve chosen for themselves. Not so much that a non-Occult narrative is worse than an Occultist one, but that the mere denial of pursual of the topic, or the failure to admit that one’s own method deserves critique from time and time again, especially when it continues to hold up a picture of the world as you’ve always known it to be true, is what makes their perception a failure.

The Occult doesn’t make a person perceptive—self-examination does. Academics however very rarely are honest with themselves, I find. It makes it easier for them to teach, when they cannot do.

I think the problem lies with fluid terms like witchcraft, or even magic. Given that the definitions of what is being done - or sought out, or feared - based on WHEN and WHERE in the world they are taking place, it’s easy to dismiss them as abstract psychological issues. And there is a certain amount of truth to such things -

Carlo Ginzburg begins his excellent Ecstasies: Deciphering the Witches’ Sabbath by establishing the fact that what became “witch fears” began as fear of immigrants/minorities (Jews), and plague victims (Lepers). A lot of accusations leveled at witches are precisely the same as those leveled earlier in history toward minorities or victims of circumstance. That doesn’t negate the rest of the book, of course, which increasingly leaps backwards into the past to establish that ecstatic cults (like the Benandanti) existed, or that folk practitioners of certain practices existed.

All of these things arose simultaneously, and fueled crazes. The problem is narrowing it all down into a single box and insisting that only one view can be applied. It just doesn’t work.

Of course. And I’m not denying that witchcraft accusations have to a certain extent been used to perpetuate a status quo by the big man—say at women or minorities—but to insist that is all of magick, that is the only history of magick there has ever been…

that’s just flat out wrong. To be more fair to the professor however the subject of the class is “the witch craze”, but the professor thus far has not gone to any lengths to discuss the philosophy of witchcraft, my certain groups practice witchcraft along with why they may have been falsely accused of doing so (say also as a defense against the Big Man, such as slaves practicing variants of hoodou and voodou against their white masters because no other way of fighting back was realistic) or that witchcraft itself is a broad term. 

There is something to be said about the psychology of witch-related things (and I follow a primarily psychological model of magick so I understand how relevant it is) but already the signs here don’t point to a course free of bumps in the road.

Right. It’s the “we have a box, so we’ll stuff everything in it” problem.

You certainly can’t understand Haitian Voodoo without understanding its origins; but most academics don’t have the internal capacity to write a book like Wade Davis (Passage into Darkness or The Serpent and the Rainbow). Instead they stick to what they feel are rational assessments of subjects that can’t be approached in an entirely rational manner.

So we end up with the “mental illness and mass psychology” explanations - “if you DID consider yourself a witch, it was because you were mentally ill, or if you believed in witches’ it was just being swept up into the madness of a craze.”

I don’t know if you caught it, but I passed on a link of a video from the BBC that was on henbane and witches a month or two ago. One of the academics - who had a distinctly “it never happened, because Patriarchy” mindset - insisted that entheogens were NEVER part of the witch trials and witch crazes. One of the individual given Henbane even had a pretty typical “flying ointment” style response to Henbane, and she still insisted there was no basis in history for it. Her arguments were FLAGRANTLY wrong. But she had a position staked already, and wouldn’t budge.

At the risk of a terrible tangent, here, I’d like to point out that I think there is a certain amount of social investment at work here, within the context of both science and academic. In other words, to use the terms from earlier, both academia and western science are the Big Man now. Of course it is in their interest to ensure that the techniques used against the Big Man stay in the realm of theory.

I’m not calling Conspiracy here (though of course that is always a possibility). I think it’s more likely that this is just a feedback loop fed by the (sometimes) subconscious awareness that the possibility of Real Live Magic deeply threatens the worldview that is the basis for everything they do. If you only look at it from a distance, a magical paradigm can easily be misread as “all rationality breaks down and anything is possible”, and I think they are afraid of losing their jobs, which are based on the assumption that certainty can be found in the universe.

Aug 29

Saw photo of bombed out building on tumblr. Caption not in English. Knew immediately the buliding, city, and war.

So, novel is going well I guess.

[video]

How to witchcraft

earth-horn:

  1. light those
  2. stab this
  3. carve that
  4. shake jar
  5. say the thing

I am a Real Magus and I can confirm this

(via catvincent)

(via theremina)

orbsteeb:

orbsteeb:

join the #gamerrevolution! live like a videogame protagonist. stare blankly at strangers while they greet you, then suddenly crouch and crabwalk out of their field of vision. take their things. stand. greet them. hurry though their questions (“dialogue”) with a series of dismissive interjections. question them about the Sword. when you can think of nothing more to say, crouch and sidle upstairs. put on a hat that you find there. leave. equip your strongest weapon and strafe through a graveyard. press your face against the largest tomb and run in place, drifting slowly to the side 

this is making the rounds again and seems apropos

Live the dream, friends.

Aug 26

[video]

Aug 21

I would like you to subscribe to my newsletter

I’m trying an experiment. I’m starting a newsletter.

Basically, this will be my blog now. I will still occasionally post to tumblr, and I’ll still be doing the 140ch Serotonin Hit over on twitter, and who knows how long this will go anyway.

My reasons for doing so are outlined at great length in the initial post I already have written and will be sending soon, but if you’re the sort of person who wants to read reasons at great length about anything I do, or updates on my writing projects, or my random thoughts on technology and politics and whatever else crosses my lidar… sign up.

I promise I won’t spam you. I’m aiming for about once a week, to start. This might go anywhere. Feel free to tell you friends, or, if you’re feeling vindictive, your enemies.

http://tinyletter.com/mediapathic

Thanks for your attention. I know it’s valuable these days.

[video]