Losing Ground, Losing Hope, and Losing the Fight- How our approach to hate speech divides us and the need for a change in tactics- Amanda Blackfeather

“When we can love greater then our hate for one another we might see an end to our constant internal conflict.”

We strive to confront hate speech and oppressive ideologies. Our groups constantly debate word usage and publicly condemn certain individuals, making them temporary villains. Admins enforce non-tolerance policies, with pinned posts outlining strict rules against discrimination, stating clearly what is prohibited. Violating these guidelines results in removal and banning. We have a list of banned words and are sensitive to various symbols and their meanings. We use our own terminology to define and combat these issues.  

The most recent Community Standards Enforcement Report published by Meta for the period of January through March of this year indicates that 7.4 million items were flagged and removed as hate speech on Facebook, and 8.6 million items on Instagram. This number remains relatively consistent with trends from the previous year. The company's Community Standards define hate speech as “direct attacks against people — rather than concepts or institutions— on the basis of protected characteristics (PCs): race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, and serious disease.”

The harms caused by online hate speech to victims and communities are not trivial, often matching those caused by physical crimes. Victims report feeling fear, anger, sadness, depression, and a newfound prejudice against the attacker’s group, as well as physical effects including behavioral changes and isolation. Research also shows that online hate speech is often a pre-cursor to, or an extension of, offline hate crime, which can multiply and intensify the effects. (Taken from BEHIND THE SCREENS- A Report on the Rise of Online Hate Speech, Cardiff University)

Given our focus and sensitivities on this matter, along with the efforts of group administrators, community activists, and attempts to address individuals, it is reasonable to conclude that we are addressing hate speech. Trends indicate that, while incidents of hate speech removed by Meta have remained steady from previous reports, there will likely be an increase in the upcoming year. The definition of hate speech and our response to it pose challenges. Within the occult community, we experience an inconsistent and sporadic approach to this issue. It is time to reconsider our strategy. Several instances within our community highlight this need.

A Case of Trust
Many of our self-appointed activists have become a source of concern. While their sincerity and belief in addressing issues are unquestionable, it is evident that the community has experienced a decline in trust towards these individuals. Many of their actions focus on individuals whom they consider a threat to the community. However, numerous targets have not committed any wrongdoing. The resulting conflict from targeting individuals can escalate to affect entire groups or create divisions within the community.  The harm inflicted on an individual's reputation or status within the community is irreparable when accusations are made against them. It has become apparent to many in our community that targets are often selected based on personal animosity. Consequently, a culture of heightened sensitivity to this issue has emerged.  People are concerned about being the target of accusations. This has led to a situation where admins and members of a group are highly vigilant to any potential issues. Several matters need addressing. The primary concern is that the current approach lacks effectiveness and is causing division within the community. These activities are equally likely to target individuals within the community and be misdirected, rather than addressing any real threat. Our advocates must reconsider their strategy in light of the diminishing trust. The initial step towards rebuilding trust may involve organizing and developing a collaborative structure. Acknowledging that personal bias exists can help explain why individual choices may be questionable. The decisions and actions of advocates require review. By working with others in a structured manner, their choices and activities gain legitimacy. Knowing that their declarations are reviewed and that they are part of a coalition helps reduce accusations that their decisions are personal and reactionary.  The next step would be to develop a plan. Confrontation and division are not plans; they are reactions. If the objective is to target individuals suspected of engaging in hate speech to remove them from the community, the question arises: what comes next? This is an important consideration because when successful in such undertakings, it has led to the removal of individuals from the community, increased division, and shifted focus onto the advocate.  Although important, this focus is not the main issue. Statistics and evidence show we're losing ground, with activities building resentment and suspicion. When unsuccessful, they deepen divisions and waste resources. A thoughtful and organized approach is needed since current methods are flawed and mistrust is harmful. Activists must decide if the priority is to effectively address issues that threaten our community or if the vindication of their emotional sense of grievance is to be the guide.  We are losing hope, losing  ground, and losing the fight. Commitment to the larger outcome is essential.

A Case of Misplaced Conclusions
To effectively address the issue of hate speech, it is crucial to evaluate our conclusions concerning the matter. Rather than merely reacting to the speech or symbols we have identified as problematic, we need to focus on understanding and resolving the underlying issues.  We have conflated individual actions or beliefs with our perceived conclusions of hateful ideologies.  One case of misplaced conclusions can be seen in the deep division between our pagan brothers and sisters of Europe and our established occult groups and community.  In recent years, the neo-pagan movement has gained traction in various regions of central and northern Europe. This development emerged as a counterresponse to the increasing influence of ultra-conservative religious movements on political and social attitudes.  Pagan movements aimed to restore cultural and magical identity while empowering individuals who opposed mainstream religious bias. These groups aimed to build support and establish connections within the broader occult community to mitigate their isolation. Confronting significant challenges associated with identifying as pagans in an increasingly ultra-religious context, they faced risks by publicly declaring their pagan beliefs. The effort involved reclaiming culturally significant symbols that had been integral to their heritage for millennia. (This is not about the swastika which is not a pagan symbol but is drawn from a euro-Asian background and is still used in many Hindu settings according to their meaning of the symbol)    Based on misplaced conclusions these groups were treated with suspicion and the symbols that they were using were labelled as hate speech.  There were several instances where these symbols were considered deeply significant to the pagan group, reflecting their history and representing empowerment. However, they faced condemnation and rejection from the mainstream occult community. It was akin to a native group being accused of racism for using a symbol pertinent to their culture, and then being prohibited from using it due to its previous misuse by others. Our attempts to combat hate speech and racism resulted in division within our community, leading to suspicion and resentment among us and pagan groups reclaiming their identity. The assumption that these groups might lean towards right-wing ultra-conservatism or racial intolerance is not supported by statistics or rational evidence. These assumptions reflect misunderstandings about the nature of fascism, the development of racial bias and resentment, and its growth in cultures and groups. Data from HateLab, a United Nations-supported resource for studying hate and the science of hate speech and bigotry, indicates that incidents related to hateful ideologies have increased in the US, Great Britain, and India.  These activities have been associated with various political and religious movements expressing grievances. This suggests that focusing solely on the speech or symbols representing these movements may lead to incorrect conclusions about their underlying purposes.  We must reassess our conclusions and take a moment and understand that we are losing hope, losing ground, and losing the fight because of our approach.  Much of this is due to our terms which speak to the past and are inaccurate in application and cloud the relevant issue.  Our continued use of the term “Nazi” to describe racial and culturally exclusive movements is problematic.  We don’t call a group neo-confederates for the use of the Confederate flag.  We refer to them as white supremist.  The Confederate flag has been a contentious symbol in political discourse, causing significant division. Progress in its removal was only achieved when it was addressed for what it truly represents—a racist image of hate and bigotry—rather than as a reference to its historical use. Emphasizing the flag's meaning and impact facilitated the process of eliminating its presence in public and governmental contexts. Debates over its historical and cultural significance had previously impeded progress. By focusing on its true implications, discussions regarding any perceived historic value were avoided. It involved actions intended to impact the minority population.  The continued use of the term “Nazi” clouds the issues and constant reference to holocaust and fascism makes the struggle against hateful movements more difficult.  One consideration is that by its use it takes focus off the immediate issue of bigotry and hate.  It is a way to excuse our own expression of hateful and bigoted actions and attitudes by reference to what happened some place else.  It is as thought we want to assert that our own bigotry and hate is imported and that it is somehow foreign to our own bias.  The constant reference to the holocaust is problematic due to it being ineffective to  our purpose and is premised on a misunderstanding of the rise of fascism at the time.  Our European community lays great stock in the actions they have taken to confront issues surrounding the rise of fascism in the 1930’s.  They have taken actions to outlaw the use of the swastika through laws as well as making it illegal to be a holocaust denier  Great efforts have been taken to remember the lessons of those times.  Yet it cannot escape our awareness that the term “ethnic cleansing” arose from the activities in Bosnia Herzegovina being the most recent incident where whole communities were being destroyed and then buried in shallow graves.  The fact is that right there in our civilized and socially conscious Europe and even in the area where both WWI and WWII can be considered to originate, the effort to wipe out a whole culture continued.  Our desire to keep our awareness focused on this horrific instance has done nothing to prevent the atrocities that happened in Cambodia where information shows that more people died at the hands of the Pol Pot regime than any concentration camps in Germany.  The list goes on when we consider the political atrocities enacted by the military in Myanmar against a minority population and sanctioned and encouraged by the Buddhist religious structure.   The acts of ISIS to eradicate any form of Islam they considered as heretical or Christian belief when it held power, not to mention the cultural crimes against humanity as they actively destroyed artifacts and art would show that our approach has not achieved what we would desire.  It would be possible to prove the point by an almost endless list of issues and atrocities that are current and show that we may not have learned the right lessons from this past.  At the very least we can accept that our approach has been ineffective.  If we can look at the issue in this simple way and accept that it is about effectiveness and not about the arguments relating to past incidents, we can entertain that it might be about our approach.  Words matter.  Their meaning is important, and they will cause the listener to focus on where they direct.  The mistaken use of “Nazi” and constant reference to holocaust is problematic for several reasons.  Inaccuracies of meaning being only one of the issues.  There is an inherent denial of current facts that we overlook when we use the term.  It places the issue we are confronting in the past and all the subsequent arguments focus on previous issues and cloud our ability to focus on the immediate bigotry and hate.  It causes us to think of these issues not in the present and as immediate and possible but in the past and happening in some other place.  It allows the perpetrators and purveyors of hate to deny the  reality of what they are doing as they can easily state that they are not Nazi’s.  Also, we do not need to compare an immediate and actual offense against people to the past to prove its importance and relevance.  Each act of bigotry and hatred  is enough to warrant our approbation and condemnation.  An act of hatred or hate speech does not need to be viewed considering past situations but must be seen in the present condition.  The pain and effect of these acts must be seen in the present and given credence based on the harm caused and not on some hypothetical or past issue.  If we are to  confront and effectively combat these issues our words will matter.   If words and symbols are the effect, then we need to consider the cause.  According to the US Justice Department the number of groups designated as hate groups is on the rise and has been so for the last five years.  There are holes in these statistics as the way they define a hate group is based on a specific point of view.  Antigovernment and militia groups are held to be hate groups because they are designated threats  to order and the government.  Yet, the congregations and churches that have organized and acted against pagan gathering and activities are not deemed as hate groups.  In the Seattle area a recent case and act of violence against a bar that hosts a transgender book reading designed to educate and inform young people,  came under gun fire and was the focus of national organizations such as the Proud Boys.  A pagan gathering or festival was the focus of a church that had members show up to the gathering with hand guns on their hips and the clear intent to intimidate the  people.  The festival shut down immediately and the intimidation was effective.  These actions are not counted as acts of hatred and are sanctioned by organized attitudes and opinions.  If we are to effectively combat the advancement of hate, we must understand that the threat will come from organized and deliberate groups seeking to attain some purpose.  The importance of this becomes clear when we consider how ineffective we have been on the matter.  We must accept that we are losing hope, losing ground, and losing the fight and if we can accept this, we can consider that it is time to change our tactics.  It is time we see the issue for what it is and prepare ourselves to confront it accurately and understand that our words will matter. 

A Case of Shooting the Messenger
Recently I was removed without discussion from a group based on a post of mine that was bringing to the attention of the admins and members a situation within another group called the Chaos Magick Underground.  The purpose was to bring to people’s attention a group within our occult community that was actively and deliberately promoting hate speech and transphobic opinions.  The importance of brining this to light was that there was at least one group admin that was a member of the Underground  and a surprising number of individuals from the occult community who were also members of this group, numbering over four thousand members.  My post included a closed file that had a warning relating to the content as offensive and indicating that people should be aware of Chaos Magick

Underground.  The content could not have been in violation of any community standards as it was taken from the public feed of the group.  I am including in this section a few examples of the posts from Chaos Magick Underground to show how I concluded that it is a group that is the purveyor of hate speech and hateful ideologies.  It is an example of hate speech and posts that are not incidental but are the norm and are supported by the  leadership of this group.   They are offensive and the ideas and concepts they convey should be condemned.  They are not merely some hypothetical idea of hate speech that promote hate crimes, they are the actual expression of hate.  What should be considered is the response of the admins regarding my post.   Their reaction is one of the reasons we are losing hope, losing ground, and losing the fight in the face of hate.  If you spoke to any of these admins, they would tell you that they actively attempt to combat hate speech and that they have done much to support the cause of creating safe spaces.  They would base this opinion on actions within their group where they have increased the use of removing offensive items and banning those individuals they deem an issue.  A problem arises based on the  way they operate and how they make decisions in this area.  There is no review of their actions, they are not subject to any restraint or to the opinion of their membership and they feel no need of accountability.  Controlling the narrative based on absolute control of the space is one of the singular definitions of corruption.  We all want to believe that our motivations and actions conform to the ideal we aspire yet, lacking any form of review or accountability we can easily allow our personal issues or bias to be the real motivation.  By holding control of information and not creating any form of recourse or review of leadership they  lose credibility.  Incident after incident arises where members are unable to speak and to provide their concerns or comments regarding such actions.  It is a process where trust is lost as actions are taken to remove dissent or to

prevent open discussion.  It is not possible to determine what motivated the removal of my post warning people of the activities of the Chaos Magick Underground.  Just as there is no mechanism to gain answers for why I was removed from the group without notice or discussion after the post.  It is safe to conclude, however, that it is about the control of the narrative in such a way as to make it almost impossible to discuss.  When we consider how we approach the concept of hate speech and more importantly the idea of mounting fascist ideologies  there are  some fundamental conclusions that we must reassess.  Some basic principles that are the foundation of our open and free societies and democracies apply.  We have learned that tolerance is not a weakness but is the strength of our societies.  An argument that continues to fall flat and yet is the constant refrain of many advocating confronting of issues is that tolerance in the face of this situation is the problem.  They will argue that freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and open dialogue are the danger, and it is in those spaces that issues of fascism and bigotry arise.    It is the argument that it is possible to use tools of arbitrary and capricious censorship or tools of unrestrained authority to advance our objectives of openness.  It is the threat of imminent downfall and subversion of our belief as the argument to dismiss the principles that are the foundation of what we value.  It is the misperception that the reasons we would use these tools are any different or any less a break of our fundamental belief than when others applied them.  Consider that when calls come about for media platforms to do something about misinformation we are calling for the arbitrary and unrestricted constraint on expression.  We are

demanding that a corporation determine what is fact and what should be considered misinformation.  We are calling for this corporation to decide what is okay for us to read or what opinions should be allowed.  We wish to place in the hands of a biased company the obligation to decide what content is available.  The reason people wish to hand over this power of control is founded on the conclusion that what is motivating issues can be traced to lies and outrageous conspiracy theories.  The prevalent thought is that by allowing these ideas to be expressed they pose a threat to our freedoms.  The call for censorship and control of content is made to defend our freedoms and safeties.  What it has done is shift the focus from an obligation of the individual to determine the issues and placed that onto others who must decide what is right and correct to hear.  If such suppression of information or ideas was the safeguard of our freedoms, then we should do away with any pretense of individual expression.  If the answer to the issue is absolute control over what people may read, may say, or what they may believe then we must accept that we have been mistaken in our ideas of the individual dignity and rights of expression.  We have come to a place where we believe that oppressive acts of suppression of ideas and speech is the answer to confronting ideologies of oppressive political, social, and religious perspective.  We have failed to understand the meaning of our most profound thinkers and twisted our principles to justify our immediate breaking of them.  If violence is the answer to violence and acts of arbitrary unrestrained authority were the path to a greater freedom for humanity, then we would have already attained a

utopia.  It is our continued unwillingness to understand how our actions and choices in the immediate are part of the issue.  The admins of the group that determined to remove the post regarding the Chaos Magick Underground and then ban me without any discussion or explanation are why we are losing hope, losing ground, and losing the fight against the current of exclusive, bigoted and arbitrary use of authority.  That they can convince themselves that the use of arbitrary exclusion and the application of unrestrained tools somehow are the acts of enlightened or ethical considerations is the issue.  The fact that this incident becomes known through a publication beyond their immediate control and that the membership of the group can only hear the dissenting opinion from an outside source is the problem.  Without the means to raise objections or to present concerns the narrative is controlled by the admins of the group and since they control the information it is only their perspective that members of the group will hear or be allowed to see.  They will tell you that they are sensitive to issues and justify policies and procedures. 

But they do not allow discussion, have no motivation to reconsider acts of their leadership, and there is no ability to constrain their choices.  This is the cause for mistrust of their leadership and the underlying reason why the ability to confront the issues of hate and such ideologies is limited.  Lacking my access to a publication or platform, individual members have no capacity to express opinions or concerns.  They cannot hope to find any sense of fair or responsive means to their sense of being treated unjustly.  Since we have no proof in the equal or fair decisions of the leadership and have every proof to the contrary we cannot be faulted for determinations that point to the part they play in a failure to address our issues of concern.

 A Case of Underestimating
The issues that surround Chaos Magick Underground arise from a failure to understand the forces and mechanisms that convey hate speech and foster these concepts of bigotry and reactionary political and religious ideologies.  This group of ever increasing numbers and a membership that reads as a who’s who of prominent members of our occult community is the work and creation of Richard Abraxas who many became aware of a few months ago.  Despite being provided with background information and details of the individual many sought to dismiss them as a troll or someone who  was not to be taken seriously.  The ability of this individual to  marshal the focus and activities of people and to maintain a string of groups is impressive and speaks to their ability.  Despite warnings, despite careful assessment of what past could be put together and assertions that this is an individual who should not be simply discounted we are faced with an established group of thousands that by all definitions would meet the criteria of a hate group.  They espouse political ideologies of reactionary belief, they message every form of bigotry or racist trope, and they unabashedly are proponents of the assault on civil liberties.  What we have failed to understand is that these movements and efforts are  in many ways ahead of us  in organization.  We continue to misunderstand what hate speech  is used to achieve and failing to understand its goal we continually focus on the words without understanding the purpose of what is being said.  It is not the words, and it is not even the meaning of the words that encompass the concept of hate speech.  It is the ideology and purpose behind why the words are used.  Like all things, hate speech is contextual and relative based on its intent.  Some speech  is offensive, some is unkind, other speech is rude or hurtful, other speech may be defined as inappropriate for the setting.  Hate speech has a purpose beyond the words used and intent that is  expressed past the semantics. 

The Leadership Conference Educational Fund published an update on their State of Hate report from 2022 this last year.  In May of 2024 they updated the report to include A Cause for Concern which outlined the areas where they felt it critical we understand the danger of online hate speech ahead of the 2024 US election.  Their conclusions were that proponents of hate and bigotry had achieved an outsized effect where a small number of organized and active groups were able to move hate to be a campaign platform.  In essence they had managed to take hate speech and translate it into ideas and argument that were palatable and appeared reasonable to a wider audience.  If we cannot understand the purpose of hate speech and that it is not the specific words or meaning of the words that is important but the intent which matters, we will continue to lose hope, lose ground, and lose the fight.  Hate speech, with all its emotional and visceral terminology and the passionate reaction to its use must not be mistaken for a form of reactionary or impulse response.  It is calculated and despite the general misunderstanding of its purpose, it seeks an objective.  We often conclude that the purpose of the bigoted comment or the unfounded slurs directed at groups or classes of people means that they are the target.  They may be who the speech is directed  at, but we are the target of the intent.  The public purpose of chanting “Jews will not replace us” as they marched through the streets of Charlottesville, while directed  at our Jewish community, they were not the target of the purpose.  The target was those who stood silent and by their refusal to  respond became participants in the hate.  It was designed to present the concept that we were powerless before this strident hate.  It was crafted to support the  idea that we were separated in our communities.  It was designed to convince those who remained silent that it was what they believed also.  Conveyed in the statement along with the torches and the form was the stated intent of violence.  Organized, political, and deliberate sense of powerlessness.  In a follow-up interview a pastor of a local church in Charlottesville  talked about how for several hours she and members of her congregation huddled together in terror and fear as these racists marched around the church with their torches.  Now we could argue that they were in no real danger as the marchers were doing nothing but exercising their right to march.  Just as it could be argued that the members of a church who showed up at a pagan festival with guns on their hips were not attempting to intimidate and they were doing nothing illegal.  The message was clear, organized, and calculated.  In these public statements of hate speech, the target is at those who by inaction become complicit in the statement.  In the Chaos Magick Underground the hate speech and the expression of reactionary and exclusive political ideology is targeting those who remain silent in its presence.  If you imagine that  people from among our community who are members of this group stand up and confront the statements of hate, you would be wrong.  The intent is to subvert the occult meaning of magick and to control the direction of influence to advance a social or political purpose.  By continual use of hate speech and messaging it conforms those people who are part of the group to  the ideology and purpose.  The way that a small contingent of individuals can exert an outsized influence on situations is by the coercion of our silence.  

A Case for Talking Back
The Dangerous Speech Project is a non profit, non partisan research team studying dangerous speech.  “Our work is vital right now for another reason. In public discourse in the United States, whenever there’s a controversy about speech two opposing sides form up against each other, under the banners “free speech” and “hate speech.” This is a false dichotomy: it’s possible, and in fact essential, to counter hatred while also protecting freedom of expression. Focusing instead on “dangerous speech” allows people of different backgrounds and ideas to start a discussion, since almost everyone agrees that mass violence should be prevented.”   What they have discovered in their study and research is that the most effective tool in confronting these issues is counterspeech.  It is the idea that engaging in a counternarrative that has the purpose of undermining hate speech is effective in many ways.  This research group have undertaken studies from different countries and group conflict situations and analyzed the effects and impact of what they call dangerous speech.  They have created a working guide and field manual for those who determine that they wish to be counterspeech activists.  They have formed guides for how to keep yourself safe from harassing and threatening activities of those you engage  with.    They provide effective strategies based on study and application of how to counter hate speech and engage in deliberate acts of support and countering hate.  From developing collective strategies against hateful ideologies to formatting support and mobilization response the Dangerous Speech Project supplies a how to field guide to combat this issue.  The important aspect of the information  they provide is that it is backed up by data showing the effectiveness of its application.  This means that the strategies that they provide and the methods used have a proven effectiveness.  In our approach to this issue we must admit that our effort and attempts thus far have done little to prevent the encroachment on our community.  If we are going to fight the effects of hate speech and the impact of these ideologies on our occult community we must reassess our approach in light of what works and admit where we have failed in our attempt.  This will require that we get serious about our response, become committed to the effort, and that we no longer lose hope, lose ground, and lose the fight. 

It is my intention to recommend to the Advocacy Council that they immediately and without hesitation study the guides and recommendations of the Dangerous Speech Project.  That they begin adapting these guides and methods to be put into use on behalf of our occult community and that we organize in such a way to effectively take the fight to these hate mongers and in defense of our people.