The Emancipatory Visions of a Sex Magician | Hacker News Reader

The Emancipatory Visions of a Sex Magician

publicdomainreview.org

69 pointsCaiero29 comments

>Born in Five Points, Manhattan to a Black mother and a white father who left soon after his birth, Paschal Beverly Randolph (1825–1875) grew up in poverty that deepened after his mother died of cholera when he was six.

Isn’t this the setting of Gangs of New York?

Yes. You can still visit the area, in what is now mostly Chinatown, though one of the main feature of Five Points, The Collect Pond is now gone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Points,_Manhattan

Love this dude. Rock on.

This wall of text is worth reading. It's a clever, but somewhat clumsy introduction of the anti-religion, which in the future will be introduced properly by a far greater mind, and that anti-religion will burn society to the ground. The essense of the anti-religion will be encouraging cruelty and unrestrained sexual passions - the two things strictly banned today.

His "multilayered worlds" vision is more valuable, but he never had interest to explore that more.

I wonder why they all did that in the late XIX, early XX century? The communist/socialist revolutionaries also wanted to burn society to the ground by encouraging cruelty and unrestrained sexual passions (glass of water theory[1]).

Some of them succeeded and did exactly as advertised.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_of_water_theory

A number of comments have put "cruelty" and "unrestrained sexual passions" next to each other as if they were linked, but without actually expressing the linkage?

I would put both the guy in the original article, in his context of colonial America, and Communist revolutionaries in Russia, in the context of people who were excluded from the possibility of power by heredity rather than sex per se. The Southern states did this by race and Imperial Russia was literally a feudal society. Both also spectacularly cruel in their own way.

I suppose the unbridled id?

If i want a cheaper iphone, im pleased for u to face slavery if it gets to me cheaper and quicker (cruelty)

Same with unrestrained sexual passion. For instance if i add to the end of that sentence "on a minor." If u don't like that addition; well then u are against unrestrained sexual passion

Which i would say good thing

A suggestion:

Love your neighbor, is getting replaced with love yourself

U are welcome to disagree

> For instance if i add to the end of that sentence "on a minor."

You get a different sentence?

I guess what parent is saying is that 'unrestrained' means you can add any word after the "with a ________", since it's unrestrained. I have to disagree, though. Haven't we, as a society, been restricting (rightfully so in my opinion) more and more those sexual passions which we deem to be very harmful to the ones being sexualized?

Thanks both of u for being kind to me. I realize it is a hard issue to converse on, so i wont say too much

But since you're kind :)

Yeah. I suppose without sex, there are no children, and without children eventually there is no sex

So completely restrained is also wrong. Sex has it's context, and should be restrained within it. Children have their context and should be restrained within it

Which is what you're probably saying; to me "unrestrained sexual passion." doesn't mean that. So yeah, we're kinda in agreement, and questioning where the balance falls. That's a good place to be in

My suggested balance: focus on your spouse's benefit. That leads to _much_ more enjoyable outcomes. I have worked with prostitutes in the past (mostly trafficked women), and i can say forced sex, or unrestrained passion irrespective of another's feelings -- completely removes enjoyment -- unless the person doing it is also cruel

So my balance would be "love your neighbor as yourself."

I realize people can be unhappy with that for many reasons, but i suggest it is at least worthy of discussion

So thanks

I actually meant "grandparent" instead of "parent". So I'm actually agreeing with you. "unrestrained sexual passion" can then mean almost any kind of sexual passion, since it's 'unrestrained', which will lead to sexual practices that we, as a society, have deemed to be very destructive to the individuals on the receiving end of that 'passion'.

> the ones being sexualized

when it comes to minors, people usually conflate rape and sex, as if having sex with a minor must necessarily be rape.

Many if not all children are ready for sex when they are around 9. I for one would have loved doing sexual things with older women I found attractive, I remember very clearly daydreaming of this.

That turned out to be a good thing after all, because they mostly used that power towards cruelty. Countries where power is still in the same hands (Japan, USA, Britain, even Germany) are all comparatively better off than ones where it changed hands via street violence (China, Soviet Russia, Iran, and arguably even the modern example of Ukraine).

It's not like they took power to open cafes serving pumpkin latte.

Maybe the limiting of your power is cruel, but killing (starving, forced labor) you is much more cruel in my opinion. And at the end of day, 99,9% of people are still powerless because there's too many people and only a limited number of positions of power.

> Countries where power is still in the same hands (Japan

Absolutely insane example to use in the context of an article about Paschal Beverly Randolph (b. 1825), given that since 1825 Japan went from feudalism -> forcible opening of the country by US gunboat -> industrial colonialist empire -> democracy imposed by US gunboat

> ones where it changed hands via street violence

Ireland? France? Arguably, the United States?

Japan still had mostly the same people near the top during all of these transitions. They only changed form without changing the essense.

France lost a great deal due to their revolution. They still have to praise it because that's the foundation of their state, but in fact they has lost huge number of their best people (murdered or defecting to their competitors) and were dethroned as the country controlling Europe. And you can see their neighbours who did not do that costly mistake and now comparatively better off (caught up where they were previously incomparable).

Ireland had national independence movement - these fare better than plain "I win, you lose" revolutions.

Isn't drinking water essential to survive though?

Where do you stand on this encouraging cruelty and burning society to the ground thing?

They sound bad to me but I get a sense that you don't think so?

“There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”

While the social norms around sexuality in the Western world keep relaxing, the norms around cruelty only seem to become more restrictive. (Which I find the exactly right course of development, given the reality of contraceptive drugs on one hand, and weapons on the other.)

I guess this “cruelty” GP is talking about should be understood as “do what thou wilt” on the personal level. Or something like Nick Land’s anti-human “coldness”[0] on the societal level? Or maybe (what’s necessary to get to) the O9A’s[1] grand vision of a nazi-satanic galactic civilization? Making inroads but we’re definitely not there yet.

As for the sexual revolution, let’s talk about Alfred Kinsey, for a little bit of perspective: Apart from being funded by the Rockefellers from early on (go figure), committing academic fraud with malicious intent (performing “magick” on America and the world one might say), assembling a large collection of sexual blackmail material (now a familiar trope), working hard to normalize pedophilia (quite possibly being one himself), it is a little known fact that Alfred Kinsey was a deep admirer of Aleister Crowley: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/677651075150657182/

There is, of course, much more to say about the sexual revolution and how it was engineered. And, given the topic at hand, by whom and why.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/qcx6lb/comme...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Nine_Angles

The sexual revolution does not rest entirely on Kinsey, nor was it "engineered".

The sexual revolution does not rest entirely on Kinsey

Don’t put words in my mouth.

They didn't twist your words around. They merely refuted them.

I'm not sure when something qualifies as "engineered" but since the rise of society their have been people and groups attempting to engineer social norms for their personal interests.

I don't really have any opinions on whether this particular social phenomenon was successfully engineered or not, but there were most certainly interests attempting to engineer the western sexual revolutions (possibly unimportant but there are two distinct sexual revolutions in the west that modern historians often speak about).

I did not know who that Kinsey guy is (but I don't like Crowley).

To my mind, the sexual revolution as we know it came with The Pill and with the new generation (traditionally) trying to reject some of the ossified norms of previous generations. The "summer of love" in 1968, and the general hippie attitude towards "free love" seems to have neither satanic / crowlean nor pedophilic overtones.

Can't vouch for whatever sexual liberation movements there have been in early 20th century; there was a lot of anti-religion movement by then, from the Freudian approach to the outright militant anti-Chrisitianity of the Russian revolution.

obviously written by a westerner. outside the West, the unrestrained cruelty of capitalism; especially that at the end of the supply chain providing the vast majority of the things you need for Western civilization, keeps getting worse.

example; clean energy is a mantra in the West, but go to Goma in Congo, and you'll see the really dirty, human rights avoiding source of the metals essential for your batteries and electronic devices. Not one mention of this ongoing, daily brutality. it's just black people, so the West ignores it's crimes there for yours shiny future across the sea. but heaven forbid one of the people from there wants to come to the West. that's not allowed. Back to work, African...

It won't happen until the era of universal material prosperity, when people won't need to work at all. The bored majority will demand freedom from the moral norms that make their lives bland.

Reminds me of the "anarcho-satanistic" anti religion of Illuminatus! and subsequent works. It's been ~20 years since I read it, but it may be that they even referenced him, but they were more into "mainstream occultists" like Crowley, IIRC.

> anti-religion will burn society to the ground

> The essence of the anti-religion will be encouraging cruelty

A society that encourages cruelty will indeed be burned to the ground.

Some people just want to watch the world burn.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com