Astrology is Not New Age...Part Two

Mercury in veil-lifting Virgo has just stationed retrograde opposite Neptune Rx and Chiron Rx conjunct in veil-dropping Pisces, and I'm digging up a little 'deconstructing the New Age' review on this blog.

In light of a few misinformed comments and e-mails I've received in the last little while, I'd like to make this crystal clear: Astrology is not New Age, and I find the co-opting of astrology by the New Age movement and its adherents problematic.

I've written a post on this exact subject in the past, and I've reiterated it on the blog repeatedly. This is the tricky part about writing a blog. A lot of people who comment or e-mail me are not really acquainted with my writing or perspective. A lot of times, they're reading a single post and commenting on that.

From a previous post:

"Unfortunately, astrology has come to be understood as synonymous with New Age ideology in the minds of many people, which includes the 2012 furor. A lot of people are actually embarrassed to admit they are interested in astrology due to the associations with New Age.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Astrology is not New Age. Astrology is not a belief system. It's a symbolic language describing cycles and themes that we can use as a navigational tool. That's not all it is, but that's it in a nutshell. If it works for you, use it. If it doesn't, don't. I really don't mind. But please know that astrology is alive and well outside the confines of the New Age."

A common criticism I receive here is: How can you be opposed to New Age? Astrology is inherently New Age.

No, actually, it isn't. The roots of astrology are ancient. They go back at least 4,000 years. The roots of the New Age movement go back less than 200 years. The New Age movement has co-opted astrology and many other ancient traditions, but none of these traditions is New Age.

Here's a previous post on that subject: Astrology is Not New Age from April 9, 2009.

Another criticism I've received is that the foundational idea of the "New Age" itself (related to the Aquarian Age) comes from the precession of the equinoxes and this proves astrology is New Age. Actually, no. This proves only that astrology has been adopted by New Age adherents to promote New Age ideology, including what they believe the Aquarian Age/"New Age" means. The precession of the equinoxes is not New Age. It's a physical shift of the position of the Sun at the time of March equinox from the physical constellation Pisces to the physical constellation Aquarius.

Here's a previous post on that: The Precession of the Equinoxes, Shifting Astrological Eras and '2012' from March 9, 2011.

Yet another common criticism I receive, generally from people of the soft New Age persuasion (ie. those who would not necessarily wear their New Age status on their sleeves or who downplay their adherence to its ideology), is that I can't possibly be so black and white in my rejection of New Age.

I can and am, actually. I find the energy and ideology of the New Age poisonous, manipulative, insidious, fatally flawed, and deeply insulting. There are no shades of gray.

Feel free to create your own reality, manifest your abundance, and achieve blissful enlightenment under the tutelage of your favourite guru or Ascended Master. Just do it over there, away from me.

Astrology requires no specific belief system to practise or utilize. Astrology can be a belief system, but it isn't for me. As astrologer Antero Alli says, "I don't believe in astrology. I use it because it works." I practise astrology as a navigational tool - something that provides valuable insight to help me and others get through the territory.

Here's a previous post on that: Astrology: No Specific Belief System Required! from April 18, 2009.

This is a phenomenon I don't completely understand, but it happens with this blog a lot, and I see the dynamic as a combination of Pisces/Neptune and Scorpio/Pluto.

1. People of a New Age persuasion are attracted to this blog for whatever reason - probably because they have never seen New Age ideology refuted or deconstructed before and are intrigued.
2. They read only what they agree with or what seems to support their own views and unvoiced critiques of the New Age movement.
3. They discard or overlook the rest, including my pointed critiques of the entire ideology/paradigm.
4. They continue reading the blog, assuming I am aligned with their belief system and seeing only what supports this view.
5. Eventually I write something that lets them know in no uncertain terms that no, in fact, I am not aligned with New Age beliefs in any way. (ie. I'm really not kidding about this.)
6. They get angry and leave comments or send e-mails that try to critique my point-of-view (with arguments that don't actually get the job done).

It's Neptunian projection related to what I'm about (ie. that we're on the same page), which I know the internet is rife with, and then Pluto rips that projection a new one, puncturing the Neptunian illusion and resulting in disillusionment and anger.

One recent example of this phenomenon was my article on the summer solstice Cardinal Grand Cross and triple eclipse season being plagiarized by the newsletter of a New Age ascension-promoting channeller. The people involved were mystified as to why I, a New Age critic, would object to my words and work being folded into their New Age newsletter. Trying to get New Age adherents who believe that everything comes from the non-physical to be passed around hippie "free intellectual love" style to understand the concepts of plagiarism and copyrighted intellectual property was a fun, fun exercise, let me tell you.

Posts on that here and here.

It's actually fairly mind-boggling how often this happens, and each time it's like stepping into the Twilight Zone.

The arguments and critcisms always go down in the same way, all New Age 101 Handbook stuff. They follow the pattern, and I've heard it a hundred times before. The problem is that I don't want to direct my energy to refuting this stuff on constant replay. If I've gone over something already on the blog, I generally won't devote my time and energy to repeating myself. I'm making an exception here because this has happened so often in the past little while, and I'm hoping I can just direct people to this post for all their educational needs from now on.

I guess when your prevailing belief system (New Age) focuses on everyone thinking the same way ("oneness") and dulls the discernment skills that would make those differentiations, it can come as quite a shock to realize that we don't.

Astrology is Not New Age

This was the title of a post I made recently on an astrology message board, and wow...what an uproar it caused!

My points were that astrology pre-dates the New Age movement and is therefore not an offshoot of the New Age movement.

(Just for illustration - the roots of astrology go to at least 3000 BC. The roots of the New Age movement go to the 1800s AD.)

Because the New Age movement has taken certain old school things like astrology under its umbrella - along with things like crystals, herbs, massage, yoga - there is quite a lot of permeation of astrology with New Age beliefs by astrologers who hold those beliefs, in whatever form.

To the point that a lot of people are not aware that astrology and New Age ideas are not one thing.

On the message board, people argued that the two were inextricably linked. Or chose to argue all around the subject.

You're not objective! (Of course not. Never said I was. I made it clear I was not New Age and had problems with the New Age movement.)
You're a bigot! (Erm...I wouldn't turn this into a religious persecution thing.)
New Age is not a movement! It's indefinable and means different things to different people! (Honestly, that whole "everything is subjective" thing is a common New Age argument and kind of a cop-out.)
Define New Age then! List all the New Age beliefs! (Gack. Did the best I could on that one, but are you serious? You think I have the time or inclination to spoon feed you all that information?)
These are old ideas, not New Age! (I didn't say the ideas were anything new. I'm talking about the spin on these old ideas, the use and application of them today by the current New Age movement. For example, the "law of attraction" becoming so widely popular through sale of The Secret and now its sequel Beyond the Secret.
You're making generalizations! (Yes, well, I've had a massive number of interactions with people who hold New Age beliefs, and there are definite commonalities. Such strong commonalities that I can generally tell if someone is New Age within a minute of speaking with them. When you stop presenting these commonalities, I'll stop talking about these commonalities.)

And on...and on...

How can we create an astrology that does not include the law of attraction, one poster asked, somewhat rhetorically?

To which I replied, we don't need to create that. It already exists.

The same poster argued that the "cornerstones of astrology" are based in New Age so astrology cannot be separated from New Age.

Again, not true.

Where is this supposed non-New Age astrology that you speak of, she asked?

Right in front of you, I said. I'm not New Age and I practise astrology. Again...this is my basic point. That other forms of astrology exist.

To me, the fact that people are even arguing this shows a need for clarification.

If you want to combine astrology with your own New Age ideas, all right. But to not acknowlege your own context? To claim that this is the only form of astrology that exists? And then to dodge my actual points with a bunch of diversional arguments?

Finally, I realized...hey! It's not my responsibility to educate people or to go over the minutiae of my subjectivity so that they can find some fatal flaw. I wasn't asking anyone else to do that. I also wasn't trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking. I was just trying to put forth my perspective as a breath of fresh air for people who feel similarly. Agree or disagree...really makes no difference to me.

Honestly, I know this is a subject most people couldn't give a rat's ass about. And I really do wish I would stop having interactions with New Age proponents that show me the need for some critique. But I have to call 'em as I see 'em. What's the point of a blog otherwise?

Sometimes I have to share my perspective even though I know it will cause the shit to hit the fan...actually, it seems especially in those cases. 

 

Astrology is Not New Age...Part Two