Saturday, July 22, 2006

On Rachel Corrie: Horoscopic Example Of The (Astrological) Left

On Rachel Corrie: Horoscopic Example Of The (Astrological) Left

5:15 AM 07/16/2006 Sun

As is the case with many astrologers, I'm a subscriber to Astrodatabank, the chart collecting and verifying vehicle founded by the late, great Lois Rodden. In recent days, ADB offered the chart of Rachel Corrie, an American peace activist who was killed by bulldozer in Mar 2003. It seems that her death has sparked a good bit of activity from the Artistic community, both here and abroad; various plays and the like have been running in New York City and in London, and in fact, the British stage play on her life is due to arrive here in the States in the Fall.

ADB points out that there are strong views on Corrie left and right, which is true; but where the good folks at ADB falters is in the following statement:

"As astrologers "involved in mankind" we strive to read charts without interjecting our own feelings, biases, moral values or political opinions. Putting aside what we may think of her actions and political views, let's examine this young woman's chart for clues to her motivation and the promise of her chart:"

The above statement is not a reflection of time honored astrological practice, but of a much more recent point of view that has been largely taken from the Psychological World, the idea that there is no right or wrong, only motivations and so on. It is not only decidedly morally cowardly, but it is also decidedly anti-religious AND anti-American.

If one goes back and studies the works of great astrologers in the past, from William Lilly to BV Raman, one does NOT get the impression that they "strive to read charts without interjecting our own feelings, biases, moral values or political opinions"; instead, quite the contrary was true, that they gave counsel and guidance to their clients from not only a astrological perspective, but just as often, I would argue moreso than the former, a MORAL one.

This is a powerful issue, one of a great many, that we astrologers simply must address, in the coming years, the question of whether the astrologer is indeed a guide in the true sense of the word, or, whether we're glorified astrological report writers, spouting delineations without putting anything into context, and definitely without providing some moral framework. The very notion that the people at ADB speaks of above, is one that would be anathema to both Lilly and Raman alike.

While there is little doubt that Astrology as a body of knowledge is one that is ruled by the 8th House (remember, Astrology is still associated with the Occult, which only means "that which is hidden" - 8th House, secrets, hidden things, etc.), its practice with regard to the masses, to clients seeking astrological counsel, is a 9th House affair. This is because the client seeks a greater or wider perspective on where they are in life, what decisions they should take, what they should do given a particular situation. All of this falls under the 9th House, as well as the astrologer himself, for it is he who is the guide, the guru, the teacher to the client. Merely stating the astrological placements without giving context, or in this case under examination, giving moral clarity, is at best naive, at worst, an outright abdication of responsibility on the part of the Astrologer.

Think about this for a sec - would we be so "objective" if we were approached by say, a Kenneth Lay character, who wanted astrological help in hatching a scheme to defraud his company? What about a bank robbing ring who wanted to know the best times to hit banks without capture?

Now, of course, the replies of many of my colleagues would be, that they wouldn't take such client requests on the basis that such things would be harmful to others, or some other such reason. Fair enough, which only goes to prove my initial point, that when we really break it down, we astrologers do know right from wrong.

Or do we? Clearly, there is a significant portion of the American astrological community, who thinks that Gay Marriage is fine (while at the same time, curiously, thinks that Marriage between men and women is a purely opitional affair; note the near-total absence of the word "marriage" in current Synastry books and so on); who thinks that Abortion on Demand, is OK; who thinks that other uber-libertine values are just as good as those that are based on propriety and restraint, or at the very least, a good dose of commonsense. I myself have been in heated debates with those in the community, who are adamant in their support for such life choices, and who excoriate me, for standing in opposition to said choices, be it on the part of the astrologers themselves, and/or their clients. So much for being objective.

This new-fangled approach to Astrology came from the seeds of the cultural revolution of the 1960s; Dane Rudhyar's writings, which were presented to the public for the first time a generation earlier, found new popularity in the heady times of the 60s. At the time, of course, the Uranus-Pluto conjunction was raging in Virgo, and both planets would then move on into Libra, while Neptune would transition out of Scorpio into Sagittarius, bringing with it mind-altering drugs and an anti-culture that would further undermine the basis of American civil society. During these times, Saturn, the planet of propriety, structure, tradition and the values an entire Society embraces, was in Pisces, and would move on into Aries. These two Signs are not particularly good for Saturn, in fact these Signs would point to a "watering down" of earlier values and moral teaching, and move on into what the late Jim Morrison called "Breaking on Through". In Aries, Saturn would represent at the very least a rebellious streak on the part of the younger generations, at worst outright anarchy-and we saw plenty of both then.

With the Uranus-Neptune conjunction of the 1990s, enhanced computer strength, which included the Internet, added to the "new" Astrology, and brought to the forefront other ideas, like various strains of Paganism and the like into the Astrological Method; Paganism, Psychology, and New Ageism became more important to many astrological practitioners than the values held by such venerated pros such as Lilly or Raman. All of this is indicative of the American (and Western European) Political Left.

To be on the Left, is by definition, to be a Moral Relativist - there is no good or bad, no right or wrong; all wars are bad; all violence is bad; religion in general is bad, in particular, those based in the Abrahamic Tradition (Christianity, Judiaism, Islam); making moral value judgements are bad, and so on. This is, sad to say, the dominant view held by the American Astrological Community today, in large part due to the fact that it has shown little to no evidence in the least that it is able or willing to track its own development, or to even ask if what it embraces is necessarily the right thing to do.

And this is why, such comments as those quoted above regarding the late Ms. Corrie, can be made, because anyone who thinks clearly about the issues surrounding her life would have to come to the conclusion that she was at best extremely idealistic and at worst extremely morally confused.

So, with all that said, let's go to Ms. Corrie's chart:

Rachel Corrie Apr 10 1979 3.15AM PST Olympia WA; Placidus 12 Aqr 07, Rodden.

Several things jump out of the chart at you, upon first glance: Aquarius rises, a Sign that is usually interested in social movements, political causes and the like, with its ruler Uranus in Scorpio in the 9th House, and Peregrine (Tyl); right off the bat we can say that under the right conditions, Ms. Corrie would be interested in such things, perhaps with a decided philosophical/religious/international bent to them. However, with Uranus running wild AND being Rx, it can also suggest that Ms. Corrie could be drawn to movements and ideas that are so "out of the box" - so radical - as to not make any sense in the real waking everyday world.

This inherent trend towards radicalism is heightened by noting the fact that the chart is dominated by the Neptune/Mercury/Moon t-square, with Neptune in the 10th (a potential martyr for the cause), Mercury rising in Pisces (not the best placement for clear thinking) and the Moon in Virgo in the 7th; this is a construct that just screams "idealism" to the top of its lungs!

Note also Venus rising in the Asc, along with Mercury and Mars, and that Venus is in Pisces, disposed by the powerful Neptune in the 10th; and we can also note that Saturn is Rx in the 7th, ruling the 12th; in some way, the father wasn't able to give the structure this woman really needed, to be able to deal with life on its own terms, instead of rushing headlong into situations that could get her into lots of trouble, based on erroneous idealistic beliefs.

In fact, we can note that this chart is deficient in two major ways - it has virtually no Air, and a paucity of Earth elements. Along with a weakened Saturn, it all points to a Water rich chart that is indicative of feeling and sensitivity, but left to its own devices can be devastating to the individual and quite possibly, to everyone around said individual.

It would be very, very hard to counsel Ms. Corrie to channel her energies into more productive outlets, projects that yield practical, tangible results. Her idealism, her radicalism, just wouldn't allow for it.

Mars rises in Aries, and forms a quindecile to Pluto in the 8th; this aspect is one that can suggest a good bit of recklessness, even violence, on the part of the native, or in the form of others visiting violence on the person. In a woman's chart, even in these times, I have seen over and over again, it can lead to being a victim of violence. In most everyday cases, this manifests as date rape/spousal abuse/ and/or sexual molestation, but in Ms. Corrie's case, it was in the form of a bulldozer being run over her in the Palestinian Territories. In any event, charts with signatures of violence and/or recklessness, tend to be their most potent while the native is in their youth, hence the higher potential for such people getting seriously hurt and/or killed at such times. The older one is, the less likely they are to engage in such risky situations, and the more likely they are to live to a ripe old age.

At the time of her death, transit Neptune was exactly on her Asc; transit Pluto was exactly conjunct her 10th House Neptune; transit Saturn had just moved past opposition to her Neptune. SA Pluto=Moon, SA Uranus=Saturn/Neptune (Uranus Asc ruler), SA Moon=Uranus/Neptune, SA Venus=Sun/Moon, SA Jupiter=Sun/Moon; fame from death.

Please note the strong emphasis on Saturn, Neptune and Pluto in these measurements, denoting "giving it up" for a cause. Keep in mind, please, that ALL THREE of these planets are very strongly configured in her chart along these lines to begin with. Hmm.

A final note: it is VERY important to point out that Ms. Corrie was born in a section of the United States that is well known for its far-Left political orientation; in light of this fact, the likelihood that her chart would find full expression was all but assured.

I'll have more to say about the wider Israeli-Palestinian situation and current war with Hezbollah/Lebanon in due course. Stay tuned...

Salaam,
Mu

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home