Is Thelema Democratic or Elitist?

Abrac

As the result of an exchange in another thread, I've been thinking a lot about this. One part of the BoL comes across as egalitarian and democratc- "Every man and every woman is a star" and "Do what thou wilt" while in chapter 3 we see another aspect that is elitist and authoritarian. Are they as contradictory as they seem? How do we harmonize "every man and every woman is a star" and the principle of self-governance with Crowley's own anti-democratic views?

Edit: As early as 1.10 you can see an elitist attitude developing: "Let my servants be few & secret: they shall rule the many & the known."
 

cardlady22

I don't know about Thelema itself, but I know what kind of reaction statements like that bring up in "modern man" ~ It gets the back up. It goads you to seek and prove that you ARE one of the few/worthy. Granted, that can cause harm when we think we have failed or when we abandon our objective. When you reach the points where you look up from the mat, you have to decide for yourself. Was it pointless? A waste of time? Or did even that little bit of burning light help make you MORE than you would have been? What kind of "more" is entirely up to each individual.
 

Yygdrasilian

Solid

cardlady22 said:
I don't know about Thelema itself, but I know what kind of reaction statements like that bring up in "modern man" ~ It gets the back up. It goads you to seek and prove that you ARE one of the few/worthy. Granted, that can cause harm when we think we have failed or when we abandon our objective. When you reach the points where you look up from the mat, you have to decide for yourself. Was it pointless? A waste of time? Or did even that little bit of burning light help make you MORE than you would have been? What kind of "more" is entirely up to each individual.

Wow.
Nail on the head.

Shaka
 

ravenest

It is neither democratic or elitist ... AC tried to make it a natural expression of the natural order in man and nature.

When no one (whose will it is to lead) calls the shots it leads to trouble, Ya know why? Because the will of the majority or the average vector is SOOOO far removed from the individuality of the unit that made up the average that it is not useufull except for modelling statistics.

This is not how evolution works. It works on releases of energy, flashes of inspiration and even mass movements are often inspired or ignited by one 'illumined' individual. It does not consider the average mass will of the individual and then impliment the plan.

Read the Tao te Ching agiain .... the people are straw dogs ...
 

thorhammer

I, also, don't think either of those terms has all that much bearing on the philosophy of Thelema. Both "democratic" and "elitist" describe either social or political attitudes/practices/models. As I understand Thelema, it's not social or political, but spiritual, and it highlights the individual in a completely different way than the "elitist" attitude. Thelema begins with the individual removing him or herself from all relationships with the rest of humanity, in order to understand his or her own nature and true will, thence to reunite with the rest of creation.

Apples and oranges, IMO.

\m/ Kat
 

Abrac

Yes, following the natural order in man, where "natural order" equals true self or true will. The assumption being that the true will is already perfect and by putting it in the driver's seat all will be well. Supposedly, those who have been intitiated into the Crowley doctrine are capable of understanding this; but uninitiated stars shine a little less brightly. ;)
 

Aeon418

thorhammer said:
Apples and oranges, IMO.
Right on the money. ;)

Abrac, is Christianity elitist or democratic? Most democratic western nations describe themselves as Christian. Yet Christianity rests on the notion of the sinners and the saved. And lets not forget that exclusive club of 144,000 members who will be raptured away, while the rest of us wait outside the gates amid "much wailing and gnashing of teeth".

Christianity sounds very elitist to me. But it's an open elite. Repent of your sinful ways, proclaim Jesus H. as your saviour and lord, and bingo! You're in the club. You've just bought yourself a one way ticket heaven.

Thelema proclaims, Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. You're either doing (or trying to find) or you're not doing. It really is that simple. It doesn't require a vote and you can't get someone else to do it for you. You've got to do the work yourself. If you can't be bothered to do the work out of fear or laziness, tough. The buck stops with you. If that makes Thelema sound elitist, so be it. But it's an open elite.

Everyman and every woman is a star. But most people are afraid to shine.
 

Ross G Caldwell

I agree with Thorhammer's and Aeon's comments as to the nature of Thelema.

But I think that Abrac's question implies something like "If a country were formed which was composed wholly of Thelemites, what kind of government would that country have?"

Rabelais' idea of the Abbey of Thelema was one of innate nobility. If everybody could do what they wanted, then nobody would interfere with anybody else.

So the first answer is anarchy. Not anarchy tending to feudalism (weaker people gathering around a stronger person), but each individual fully respecting the rights of other individuals to do as they please (because of the innate nobility of the free person). I think Rabelais noted that basic needs would have to provided for, so whatever it took to procure them - work - would be necessary, but beyond that, no buying and no selling, no fights over ownership of things. Call it proto-communism if you like, but without the heavy machinery of industry and finance (as we know them and love them today - this is the 16th century remember, and the Abbey was a Utopia, not a nation-state).

Crowley wrote a lot about government. The first thing I recall is chapter 81 of the Book of Lies (chapter 80, and a few others, are relevant also):

" LOUIS LINGG

I am not an Anarchist in your sense of the word:
your brain is too dense for any known explosive
to affect it.
I am not an Anarchist in your sense of the word:
fancy a Policeman let loose on Society!
While there exists the burgess, the hunting man, or
any man with ideals less than Shelley's and self-
discipline less than Loyola's-in short, any man
who falls far short of MYSELF-I am against
Anarchy, and for Feudalism.
Every "emancipator" has enslaved the free."

So here we see Crowley's idea of ideal anarchy - not quite feasible, he recognizes, ironically.

Then there is the "Scientific Solution to the Problem of Government" (1937). This is a short, complex and subtle document, well worth pondering for the application of Thelema to a system of government. The last line reads:
"The absolute rule of the state shall be a function of the absolute liberty of each individual will."
http://www.geocities.com/nu_isis/sspg.html

Finally, Liber OZ (1941).
http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/libers/lib77.html

This is Crowley's last comprehensive statement of Thelemic anarchy - it resembles in so many ways the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), yet goes beyond it.

Yet in all of these we are still left with the fact that Thorhammer and Aeon point out - most people won't be Thelemites. So there has to be government - imposed order, not "natural" freedom (because most people won't be free - not because Thelemites want to "rule" them, but because of their own ignorance and fear - hence the need for sustained education (as Crowley would say, "Education means 'leading out', not 'stuffing in')).

Thus, I think the answer to the hypothetical question of what a government run by Thelemites would look like is - whatever kind they want to have. I would think, at the very least, Thelemic "rulers" of non-Thelemites would try to curb the power of herd/mob thinking, and promote personal development. Thus a strong police force, and a strong dedication to education. In fact, the best Thelemite society might resemble the progressive Western societies of today, shorn of the power of money and religion to influence policy. I'd like to think Corporatism might be gone also, but I'm not the most sophisticated thinker in this area. The Thelemites I know place a high value on self-reliance, and that seems to go hand in hand with the philosophy of Thelema, so it seems natural that "mass production" (and the money-power that goes with it), as it inclines to herd thinking, tends to be disparaged, and would thus tend to be actively discouraged in a Thelemic government.

Ross
 

Aeon418

TzBA - Hosts - 93

Quoted from Astrology, Aleister, & Aeon by Charles Kipp (p.298-299)
Upon the culmination of the Osirian formula, however, and establishment of a new world order as "Ra-Hoor-Khuit hath taken his seat in the East at the Equinox of the Gods," [AL 1:49] it is no longer the case that the affairs of the world and the affairs of the spirit are dissociated. The actualization of their unity is now called for within the personal sphere of every individual human being. From an institutional perspective, the problem of the relation of "church and state" is resolved by the formula, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." Institutions are nothing other than amalgamations of individual wills and therefore have no sovereignty of their own. They come and go as a function of voluntaristic cooperation. Only individuals are sovereign.

One may therefore ask: How does the fulfillment of collective purpose come to pass? Wherein lies the power of direction and articulation that insures continuity and order in the affairs of the world? The answer to such questions is obviously that collective purpose will continue to be achieved as it always has been, through the maintenance of cooperative institutions. There is nothing about the Law of Thelema that stands in the way of human cooperation. The ingredient that is perverting our present world system, which is yet a direct carry-over from the Aeon of Osiris despite the infusion of the Horian current, is the lack of respect people have for one another. We continue to interact in terms of servile personal debasement, and this social condition illustrates how politics is subsumed within the context of ethics. This is why the present political institutions must be further transformed by the continuing encroachment of entropy. Humanity is undergoing a rite of passage into the New Aeon. Although the Osirian formula has been terminated on the spiritual plane, its residua remains to be purged from the arena of world politics. The impending world crisis will affect that purge. Each of us is being and will continue to be called upon to make choices in our lives about what we stand for within the community of humanity, and those choices will determine our personal destinies and the destiny of the world. The greatest sense of responsibility that can be applied by anyone within this context is to act as if one has a vested personal stake in the outcome, not for the duration of one's own particular lifetime, but also as a participant in the destinies of future generations. Obviously, such an orientation is best facilitated by the actual belief in it's literal truth. It must therefore be true. This is both a moral and pragmatic argument and therefore requires faith. No faith, however, is required to demonstrate that each individual must decide for oneself how to act in the face of this possibility, or inevitability, as the case may be.
 

Abrac

Ross G Caldwell said:
But I think that Abrac's question implies something like "If a country were formed which was composed wholly of Thelemites, what kind of government would that country have?"
I wasn't trying to imply that at all, but I can see how someone might read that into it. My question asks whether or not the inherent doctrine of Thelema teaches a type of metaphysical elitism.