Acumulation of power to control surroundings around us at global scale is in our reach

[Viktor]

But are you brave and determined enough to go for it? time for change may begin, time has come to accumulate true magic power.

Allow to me first explain what I mean by the tread tile.

There is theoretical as well as practical possibility for a wizard (and his group) to accumulate powers in order to influence the world in a way that lets them channel their powers at global scale causing radical changes to what 'truth' is, pushing their agenda and causing downfall to the well established orders that are corrupt with their own vision that care only about their survival and more power, normally accumulation wealth and souls.

There are two types of wizardry powers:

1. One is, let's call it so "inward perfection"
a wizard of this type seeks inner peace and accumulation of power to control spirits concerning him or her self, (e.g. self satisfaction for the purpose of self fulfillment of their personal desires), such wizards do not seek leadership or necessary centralization to influence world around them, they seek to spiritually empower themself for personal pleasure or spiritual needs, with almost no interaction with other wizards or groups.

They do not seek to influence world around them, don't seek to influence other people, they seek self-fulfillment and inner peace, somewhere in their corners or personal altars where nobody could see them.

2. Second breed of wizards are those who have far sight vision, and are those who can't be bothered with self-fulfillment in spiritual sense, they seek sensation at a regional or global scale for fame and power, however without exposing them as this could result in fierce backslash, even if not exposed they risk of being exposed by powers that will oppose them the more power they accumulate.

While the first group is more inclined to chaos magick or rituals etc., the second group favors establishing or joining covens, a "church" or secret society etc. so that it can act legally, ruling out being labeled as "terrorists" or similar nonsense.

There are many groups around the world that are close to point 2, however many of them are still organized around point 1 and do no accumulate power, likely not standing the test of time.

Which group do you want to belong to?
Would you find attractive to belong to a group that can truly influence surroundings with spiritual power?

I belong to no group of the two, but if I had the chance to choose I'd choose group two.

Possibilities are endless but it may require a lot of work and structural organization and above all a lot determination.

 

[Morell]

Your division into two groups resembles LHP and RHP to me a lot. I think that there are many aspects that are the same..

I lean more towards number 1. and LHP.

My thought:
When you are useful to yourself, you might be useful to others.
When you are useful to others, you might not be useful to yourself.

I think that magic performed in groups can be quite a disadvantage to some magicians. To make group of various people totally agree on something while having them well mastered to be usable for a ritual is quite a challenge, as each person has unique needs and goals anyway, so to make really united group you would have to really train their minds, or you need a literal cult members brainwashed enough that they think and feel the same. Doesn't sound that cool to me.

 

[Viktor]

I agree with your points, managing a group is very difficult.

However one person alone is powerless.
One person alone can do nothing or very little.

Wolfs are most dangerous when in group.

 

[Morell]

I agree with your points, managing a group is very difficult.

However one person alone is powerless.
One person alone can do nothing or very little.

Wolfs are most dangerous when in group.

I disagree that one person is powerless. Even in the group, the power of the group is not only in the numbers, but in the abilities of the leader and leader can be only one too.

 

[Viktor]

I disagree that one person is powerless.

One person alone will face many groups or enemies if it tries anything against them.
Even Bruce Lee had to flee his country to escape threats by groups.

Even in the group, the power of the group is not only in the numbers, but in the abilities of the leader and leader can be only one too.

Yes, without a good leader a group is doomed to collapse.
Here a group may be just anything, even a country without a good leader will collapse.

 

[Morell]

One person alone will face many groups or enemies if it tries anything against them.
Even Bruce Lee had to flee his country to escape threats by groups.

True! Though not all people are equal, definitely not in magic. I think we mixed group one into group two in this debate pretty fast. Bruce Lee wasn't training just for himself and for his personal evolution (group one) but he taught others and was quite active figure. (rather part of group 2... meh we are already looking at the position somewhere in between...)

Problem of this debate is that people working alone will work for themselves and invisible and the world won't care, therefore while they do not manage multiplied power of the group, they also face zero or very low resistance from other people.

While the group that works not for themselves but for the world, will have to face not only support, but also opposition of the collective.

And one can be part of both as well. I would say that group two cannot be working only in group workings that the members of it also need to work individually to be actually useful to the group.

 

[Viktor]

Problem of this debate is that people working alone will work for themselves and invisible and the world won't care, therefore while they do not manage multiplied power of the group, they also face zero or very low resistance from other people.

That is very good argument for working alone.

It however lasts only as long as you don't get exposed, after that you'll be known, and that normally means known for good, unless you move to some other place.

 

[Morell]

That is very good argument for working alone.

It however lasts only as long as you don't get exposed, after that you'll be known, and that normally means known for good, unless you move to some other place.

Depends on the place and people.

 

[Shalux]

To make group of various people totally agree on something […] as each person has unique needs and goals anyway

Let me take this outside of magic first.
It seems to me that people can have common goal, for example about societal changes (groups have acted to try and change aspects of society over time, even if not magically).
I think that, from a general point of view, a group doesn't need to "totally agree" on a topic to be active and determined. Rather the group (or 90% of it) totally agrees on some fundamentals, that are not negotiable (for instance, 'in a society no one should be let starving, or sleeping outside, period'). The group can then start acting to try and change the situation step by step, with the global "how" being built and debated as the group goes along, acts and grows. What I mean here is that the group does not need to have a unique and precise view of how the situation will be managed, only big orientations and initiatives for action. (Not sure I express myself clearly, but even the most active group has several distinct opinions about many points, which is sane and how you end up with finer ideas than any member would have had.)

Now it would be interesting to see how this experience from active and efficient usual groups could be translated in magick. There has been several experiments in this direction, as witches have often been associated with societal resistance (maybe with a bit of an exageration at times recently, it got a trendy vibe that's also probably being commercially exploited, but that's another topic!). But maybe a more conscious use of previous non-magic experience and know-how would be fruitful?

 

[Morell]

We can take a look at the groups outside of magic. It's about asking the right questions in the end. My question: Why do people join the groups in the first place? The reasons vary a lot. I'm member of one local group of writers and sometimes I get invited to other groups and honestly, most people are there just to be in a group with other people. Active membership of people, who actually want to do something seriously tends to be a minority. And that can hit a wall with the group intent. Seeking groups is natural to humans, even if we actively seek them for some purpose.

And I agree that it works for occult groups too. I actually have a book here named Black Lodge. It's a tale from occultist who spend some time in a occult group and describes his experiences. He practically outgrew them I think. (another problem of the groups) I talked with the author who was looking for a group to fit in. He actually was glad that I asked him to share he book further. I find his book to be a good read.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Shalux]

Active membership of people, who actually want to do something seriously tends to be a minority.

That is so true!

I agree with what you wrote here; and thanks a lot for the book I'll look into it with interest.

He practically outgrew them I think. (another problem of the groups)

Yes, the level of intent will vary in a group and that can be a problem indeed. But that's something that can be manageable, as long as there are several people in each level
For many reasons, not everyone can contribute to the same level, and knowing what each can and cannot do is important.
But seriousness and reliability (within the amount of time and energy each can pour in) are of paramount importance, and indeed difficult to find.

 

[Morell]

Yes, the level of intent will vary in a group. But that's something that can be manageable, as long as there are several people in each level
For many reasons, not everyone can contribute to the same level, and knowing what each can and cannot do is important.
But seriousness and reliability (within the amount of time and energy each can pour in) are of paramount importance, and indeed difficult to find.

There is more to the levels of the group. Those on the top might not want to submit to someone who becomes more knowledgeable than them. Hierarchy is indeed another matter and can get very problematic and even dangerous when some serious power and influence is included.

 

[Shalux]

There is more to the levels of the group. Those on the top might not want to submit to someone who becomes more knowledgeable than them. Hierarchy is indeed another matter and can get very problematic and even dangerous when some serious power and influence is included.

Yes, group dynamics can become difficult and even dangerous. In particular when people aren't driven enough by the common fundamentals and goals, but by other, more personal, ideals or ambitions.

 

[Morell]

Yes, group dynamics can become difficult and even dangerous. In particular when people aren't driven enough by the common fundamentals and goals, but by other, more personal, ideals or ambitions.

Fundamentals and goals need to be explored too before joining. Actually the group should be explored and studied before joining... But on the general sense I agree.