Occult Symbology In Music and Songs

03/28/11

A growing topic of discussion is the belief that there are hidden and dark agendas in today's music. In particular, some people are accusing pop "artists" of producing symbology that promotes the occult.

The occult are an ancient religion that worships Moloch, sometimes depicted as an owl or a bull, who believe in the use of idol worship and animal/human sacrifices as a means of getting closer in oneness with Moloch. Eventually, the goal is becoming a deity yourself. It's important to note there is a huge difference between the occult (also referred to as Lucifarian) and Satanism. Satanism is the worship of Satan or the devil, while the occult believes in appeasing idols (that could arguably be interpreted as Satan) with the goal of becoming a God themselves. Arguably, occultists believe in neither God nor Satan, instead they believe in appeasing higher powers that be, so that one day they may be granted the opportunity to become a higher power.

In my opinion, people are handing the "artists" far too much credit. I doubt there's a conspiracy and I doubt most "artists" we see today are intelligent enough to pull such a sophisticated cult movement. What I am listening to every time I turn on the radio is the slow degradation and erosion of meaningful artistic and creative content in our music. The topics are baseless. The music doesn't carry any emotion or expression. Most of the "artists" can't even write. Most only passably can sing. Sometimes, if you're lucky, they or a few of their friends can play a musical instrument. A lot of us who are not stuck in shock and awe due to peer pressure may know many acquaintances in our own town who can actually sing and write better than many of these famous "artists", so what exactly is going on?

There's no occult you're listening to, although it's understandable that you would think so, because music that's both empty in content and emotion is rather unpleasant. It can bring a chill up your spine. The feeing of emptiness is often associated with a world turning careless and amoral.

What I believe we're listening to is plain and simple business as usual for corporations. Put yourself in the perspective of a corporate executive. Everyone knows an intellectual artist, enriched in how the world functions and his/her surroundings, has always historically been a threat to the status quo all throughout history. The influence of such an artist carries enormous weight that the wealthy who run these corporations wish not to test. So through the means of controlled exposure to the arts corporations hope to better protect their positions. How they do this is through glorifying and idolizing an average at best artist with irrelevant subject matter. This serves to distract people well and turns people's heads away from an original artist that could potentially break the status-quo.

The blueprint is simple: Find a reasonably attractive guy or girl, who can sing decently, and because he/she can only sing decently, chances are he/she will feel forever grateful and indebted to the fame and opportunity. Find someone who is easily persuaded and controllable. Very rarely would a talented intellectual artist fall victim to tactics of manipulative persuasion and control. Once the individual is propped up with a band and the best stage technology you can buy, write baseless songs for the individual to sing that follow within certain confines and emotions deemed acceptable by the corporation. The result we have through every music corporation undergoing this process is random mediocre talent thrives, while truly talented and intelligent people are left in the dust. The status-quo is protected, while artists who could potentially cause upheaval are marginalized.

I also question the "fame and fortune" I see many of these mediocre artists fall on their labs. There are subtle indications that the fame and fortune isn't completely theirs. Many modern day musicians fall into drug addictions, so much so that it’s become a propagandist initiation rite that all artists should have a heavy drug addiction. The consensus going around is that the arts are a chaotic field and drugs are part and parcel of coming up with new ideas. I can tell you that this is rubbish. I grew up with artists my entire life in various fields and I can tell you they're some of the most organized people on the planet. It takes a lot of organization and discipline to write a song or a novel, far more than any office worker or pursuing the sciences by being passively told what to do all throughout school/college. I've been a jack of all trades my entire life, I've done it all, so I'm not saying this strictly from an ignorant point of view. The only area in life that I found took as much discipline as my art was trying to start my own business. I believe the drug addictions are a cause of something else that's darker and more sinister. I believe modern day famed artists subject themselves to drugs to escape from slavery. A well hidden slavery we can't see or possibly understand because on the surface all we see is a rich and spoiled individual.

I know such a concept may seem ludicrous to many, but consider the following: What good is being paid a million a year if you're forced into a loan of two million a year? I believe this is what corporations do to the artists they pick up as a further means of control. They offer them ridiculous salaries to play the part, but hidden in the contract is a large loan that finances this immediate gratification lifestyle that can't ever possibly be paid back. The conditions are you won't have to pay back this loan as long as you play by the rules, our rules, until you die. Also in the contract is you must keep quiet about the nature of your contract. It's no wonder that many lawyers cringe whenever they read a contract offered to a writer, singer, etc. I can't help but feel many artists who sign contracts to these corporations essentially become their property. They cease to be human and become commodities. For all intents and purposes, they're slaves with golden shackles.

Considering all that I have witnessed regarding commercial art over the years, and if my intuition serves me well, a musician would have better luck being a "road warrior" and selling CD's in the trunk of his or her car. You would stand to make more profit that way, and wouldn't hopelessly indebt yourself by going to a diploma mill art school, or signing a contract that essentially turns you into a piece of property for a major corporation. Yes sure, you may become a millionaire on paper and with assets, but a slave is a slave. If you stand to lose it all tomorrow by simply doing something "big daddy" doesn't like, then are you truly rich?

As for the occult symbology you're seeing in music videos. Consider the fact that famous artists are mediocre at best and not talented enough to come up with their own symbols and designs. They can't display symbols of renowned religions for obvious reasons, so what's left for them to copy and paste?

-Donovan D. Westhaver