Saturn square Neptune

And the Danger of False Narratives

Part I: Hillary & Benghazi

By Glenn Perry

Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder
respectable, and to give the appearance of solidity to pure wind.
~ George Orwell

It is generally accepted that politics is shrouded in lies. This may be a more or less permanent condition, much like cloudy weather in Seattle. Yet, it seems that when Saturn and Neptune align in hard aspect those clouds crystallize into hailstones of deceit that precipitate upon the populace with a din so deafening it can drown out the voice of reason. With Saturn square Neptune exact three times this year, a transparent film of lies has settled across the globe like a toxic pesticide.

Figure 1: The Booromean Rings

Examples are legion but I will focus on three, which, because they are expressions of the same archetypal dynamic, intersect like Borromean rings: 1) the Hillary Clinton scandals involving Benghazi and her private email server; 2) the Black Lives Matter movement, and 3) ISIS propaganda that exhorts its followers to commit murder-suicide.

Given the complexity of the subject matter, I have decided to tackle these issues in four parts. Part I here explores the general meaning of Saturn square Neptune in light of Hillary Clinton’s recent travails. In our next installment, Part II, the political divide between liberal and conservative ideologies will be examined with a particular focus on Saturn-Neptune dynamics as symbolizing the birth, nature, and evolution of progressivism. Unless we understand progressivism, the remaining topics cannot be fully comprehended. Part III tackles the vexing conditions that have led to the Black Lives Matter movement, and Part IV examines the conflation of government and spirituality that is so disturbingly exemplified in radical Islam.

In what follows, I occasionally refer to the planets in terms of behavioral propensities that characterize individuals and institutions, but it should be clear that I am referring to archetypal components of the psyche, not whole people.

The Closing Square of Saturn to Neptune
The synodic cycle of Saturn-Neptune occurs over a period of approximately 36 years, starting with the conjunction, the most recent of which was in 1989, and ending with the next conjunction in 2026. As Saturn pulls away from Neptune by virtue of its faster orbital speed, it formed the first (or opening) square in 1998; the opposition occurred in 2006; and we’re currently in the closing square of 2016. In effect, it’s one long continuous 36-year cycle punctuated by four periods of acute activation that last for about one year each. And during that year, the relevant aspect will be exact three times―thus, the current square was exact on November 26, 2015; again on June 18 this year; and will once again be exact on September 10th. 

Because the Saturn-Neptune cycle is a cycle, it is important to understand the phase in progress. Not all phases are alike, first because they occupy different signs, and second because each angle has its own meaning. A closing square, which is the angle presently occurring, constitutes the start of the final 90 degree phase of the cycle. As such, it is a Capricorn angle, for an aspect derives its meaning from the nature of the sign that constitutes that angle in the zodiac.

As a Capricorn angle, the closing square implies that Saturn and Neptune must find a way to successfully combine their respective energies and build something of enduring value. Capricorn is associated with restraint, control, and the pursuit of realistic, practical ends; thus, the relationship between Saturn and Neptune will be characterized by exactly this dynamic throughout the period in question. And since Saturn is the ruler of Capricorn, this compounds and highlights the significance of Capricorn-Saturn during this particular phase of the Saturn-Neptune cycle.

Some Thoughts on Saturn
The archetype of Capricorn-Saturn is predominantly concerned with issues of success-failure. In fact, all Capricorn-Saturn behavior can be traced to a fear of failure. To compensate for this fear, there is a focused, disciplined, goal-oriented striving that endeavors to achieve the desired end―success―which is exemplified in authority figures that serve a regulatory or executive function, such as fathers, taskmasters, bosses, CEOs, and presidents. Institutionally, the Capricorn-Saturn archetype is inherent in government of all types at all levels, the proper function of which is to establish rules, enforce limits, and maintain civic order. Internally, Saturn correlates to our capacity for self-governance (self-restraint, self-discipline, self-control). 

Implicit in Saturn is the notion of hierarchical order as reflected in nature’s tendency to organize its parts into increasingly complex wholes―atoms into molecules, molecules into cells, and cells combine to form multicellular organisms of ever increasing complexity, culminating in human beings who further self-organize into families, communities, towns, states and nations. Planets combine to make up solar systems, solar systems to make up galaxies, and galaxies are but parts of galactic clusters. “Infinity yawns at both the top and bottom of the stratified hierarchies of existence,” writes Arthur Koestler.^[1]

While Saturn’s ultimate goal is success―that is, aspiring to the top of the hierarchy― success is a relative term, and when applied to collective human evolution we must assume that varying degrees of success-failure will characterize the current square. In effect, we can expect Saturn to test the viability and sustainability of any organization with a strong Neptunian component. Since our focus here is on the world of global politics, the following should be considered in that light.

Neptune: The Pursuit of Oneness
As ruler of Pisces, Neptune’s prime directive is attainment of a transcendent, spiritual ideal of unitive consciousness in which all divisions are reconciled into a blissful harmony. If human experience falls short of this ideal, which it almost invariably does, it causes distress and existential guilt. Human suffering due to loss, illness, poverty, old age, or victimization evokes a Neptunian response in us all, which we experience as compassion and the wish to relieve suffering. Neptune correlates to charity, aid, volunteerism, selfless service, and other altruistic activities dedicated to the ideal of an indiscriminate, all-inclusive, universal love.

Neptune’s flip side is the actual experience of suffering, which can be a gateway to the development of compassion, humility, and dependence upon a higher power. Spiritual traditions like Buddhism honor suffering as “the mud out of which the lotus flower blooms.” Christianity employs its own metaphors―purification through trial by fire, the passion of Christ, and so on. Virtually all spiritual traditions teach the necessity of suffering and its accompanying requirement: renunciation of attachment, as implied in the aphorism “Let go and let God”.

Because the spiritual impulse underlying Neptune is inherently sacrificial and submissive, it can easily be misdirected or carried to excess if driven by excessive, irrational guilt. The result can be escapism and self-undoing. Let go and let God becomes give up and self-destruct. Renunciation of attachment becomes abdication of responsibility. Surrender to a higher power is perverted into a life of dissolution, moral degeneracy, and abject dependency, often fueled by substance addiction. Not only can individuals do this, so can entire cultures, as we shall see.

While spiritual practice and charitable service is the healthy expression of Neptune, this can be misallocated via victim-savior dynamics that entail the enabling of bad behavior. Neptunian overfunctioning, or “co-dependency”, is again fueled by excessive and irrational guilt as evidenced when “saviors” feel compelled to rescue “victims” from the natural consequences of their own self-defeating actions. In this context, a victim is someone who is victimized by their own choices―to abuse drugs and alcohol, to drop out of school, to avoid work and responsibility, to be sexually promiscuous, to lie, steal, cheat, or otherwise engage in criminal behavior.

Typically the victim will manipulate the savior with intimations of blame, as if the cause and solution to the victim’s suffering lie outside themselves. Yet, by not allowing individuals to endure legitimate suffering, the savior merely enables and often exacerbates the victim’s problems. This can lead to savior burnout, depletion of resources, resentment, and more guilt. The French call such an arrangement a folie a deux (folly of two), a kind of mental illness shared by two entities caught in a vicious cycle that escalates over time.

One additional point regarding Neptune is germane: its penchant for obfuscation and fraud. Because Neptune symbolizes our desire for a transcendent ideal of infinite love and beauty, it is disinclined to recognize anything that deviates from this ideal. And since such ideals―for oneness, unity, heaven, paradise, utopia―necessarily emerge from the imagination (they have no obvious corollary in reality), Neptune signifies our capacity for fantasy. If reality deviates too markedly from the ideal, one can simply substitute fantasy for reality by superimposing the ideal over the real. Denial and deception entail the switch of an actual reality for a preferred one; hence, the Pisces-Neptune tendency for delusion, lies, and deceit.

The flip side is the Pisces-Neptune vulnerability to deception. Pisces-Neptune is the part of us that strives to reconcile duality into a unified whole; thus, it has difficulty making rational decisions that require Virgonian discernment and discrimination. A tendency toward feel-good fuzzy thinking, vacillation and acquiescence results. People often will believe what they want to believe and thus can be easily misled. As Hitler famously said, “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.”

While the Pisces-Neptune capacity for surrender, letting go, and trust in a higher power signifies spiritual strength in its own domain, it correlates to weakness when misdirected. For it is precisely its malleability that makes Neptune so easily influenced by stronger wills that frequently are not divine in their intentions. The upshot is that Pisces-Neptune is often the dupe, especially in relation to figures that embody those archetypes with which it is entangled―like Saturnian authority.

More on the Closing Square
I have taken time to articulate the individual psychologies of Saturn and Neptune, for it is their combination that ultimately concerns us here. As the reader might surmise, government, under the sway of certain political ideologies, has progressively assumed the role of savior to an increasingly victimized society. During Saturn-Neptune squares, these role dynamics are tested and stressed to the breaking point.

A cornerstone of AstroPsychology is that planets signify fundamental human drives and capacities. Viewed individually, each planet operates as an autonomous agent pursuing fulfillment of specific needs. Saturn, for example, signifies our capacity for success, which entails the pursuit of Capricorn needs for order and control. When combined in aspect, however, any two planets comprise a multi-agent system in pursuit of a joint goal that exists at a higher order of abstraction than the individual goals of the respective planets.

Multi-agent systems propagate as ideas or “cognitive structures” that entail plans for how best to collaborate in fulfilling the respective needs the planets rule. In effect, a planetary pairing symbolizes a narrative that provides an explanation for the way things are and a strategy for how to proceed in order to achieve the joint goal. Such narratives are inherent in planetary combinations independent of the angles they form during particular phases of their synodic cycle.

Ideas that emerge from multi-agent systems not only have histories, as reflected in their synodic cycles, they also have consequences. Any number of different strategies can accompany a multi-agent system, some more functional than others. Core strategies are like entities that evolve over time and take different forms depending upon the signs they occupy and the particular phase (angle) they are currently forming.

With regard to Saturn-Neptune, the closing square signifies that Saturn and Neptune have reached a critical mass or tipping point in their mutual struggle to achieve a joint goal. Consequences of the unfolding 36-year cycle between Saturn and Neptune will manifest as certain types of phenomena, notably in government, as government is a Saturnian entity that can be observed, measured, and evaluated. Government’s entanglement with Neptunian ideals will be especially apparent. During the closing square, events will occur that explicate the degree of integration in the collective psyche that Saturn and Neptune have achieved to date. In other words, the current story that undergirds their relationship is being tested. Is it wholly true, partly true? Is it functional? Is it the best we can do?

The ultimate ideal, of course, is for maximum differentiation and coordination of Saturn-Neptune so that their respective needs and functions are cooperating in perfect equilibrium. This might be reflected, for example, in some sort of global order inspired by a grounded, spiritual sensibility, a virtual heaven on earth, however remote and improbable that goal might seem. Preferably, Neptune infuses the natural hierarchical structure of society―individual, family, town, state, federal―from the bottom up, from the grass roots, from spiritual values inculcated in strong families and expressed through local churches, fraternal orders, service clubs, and voluntary non-profit organizations. Conversely, dangers lie in government policies that weaken the body-politic with misguided attempts to impose a utopian dreamworld from the top down.  

Just as with individual human beings, the goal of a fully integrated Saturn-Neptune dynamic is a work in progress. Each planet is inseparably tied to the other as figure to ground. When Saturn is emphasized, Neptune is ground; when Neptune is emphasized, Saturn is ground. Each must perform its functions in its own realm, but always in relation to the other’s predominant values. Government has to perform its proper function of maintaining civic order, yet simultaneously accommodate the reality of human suffering brought about, for instance, by floods and other natural disasters. Neptune must pursue its spiritual ideal of transcendent unity, while recognizing that a government’s capacity to allocate time and resources to such ends is limited.

A fundamental principle of all squares is mutual influence and reciprocal resistance. While not being able to escape the others influence, each planet’s respective values are operating at cross-purposes. If optimally managed, inherent tensions can be welded into a composite that is stronger than either one separately. One example might be government regulations that mitigate against the outbreak of disease. Or a charitable organization which, by benefiting from tax-exempt status, is empowered to distribute resources to the needy.

More likely, however, one planet will defend itself by overfunctioning at the other’s expense. Again, this is due to the inherent difficulty of integrating forces that are operating at cross purposes. Dysfunctional strategies result from the overfunctioning planet consciously denigrating the values of the repudiated planet, while unconsciously and unavoidably being saturated with that planet’s values. The result is a compromise formation―an odd, uncoordinated mix of the two planets that to varying degrees impairs the functionality of both.

For example, a government might denigrate traditional religious values, undermine Christianity, and favor Darwinian evolutionary theory over Intelligent Design; while, at the same time, assuming the responsibilities of a charitable, quasi-spiritual organization dedicated to the relief of suffering on virtually every front―open borders, sanctuary cities, amnesty to illegal immigrants, universal health care, redistribution of wealth via progressive taxation, and expansion of entitlement programs such as social security, welfare, unemployment, disability, food stamps, and government guaranteed student loans―all of which saps the economy, exhausts tax revenues, drives up the national debt, and neglects the country’s infrastructure to the point of collapse. Note on the one hand that Saturn depreciates the authentic spirituality of Neptune, and on the other becomes so overextended from the misappropriation of Neptunian functions that it teeters on the brink of self-destruction.

The Hillary Clinton Scandals
It is not my intention here to make a case for the guilt or innocence of Hillary Clinton in relation to her recent troubles. Rather, I am interested in what they mean in the larger context of Saturn square Neptune. In other words, the controversies surrounding Hillary are not only an expression of her natal chart, but a symbol of an unfolding Saturn-Neptune mindset in which we all move and have our being. Let us begin with the facts about Benghazi.

On the evening of September 11, 2012, the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi Libya was decimated in a premeditated military-style attack by approximately 150 terrorists armed with automatic weapons and heavy artillery. The entire incident lasted about 13 hours in two separate attacks. Four Americans were killed, including ambassador Chris Stevens and information manager Sean Smith. CIA agents Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed in the second attack, and ten others were wounded. Surviving Special Forces members subsequently reported that they were ordered to stand down (not defend the compound) three times. They finally defied orders and went anyway.

In the aftermath, Hillary Clinton, in her role as Secretary of State, took responsibility for security lapses that left the U.S. post unprotected in the midst of Islamic terrorists that had sprouted in the blood soaked, toxic soil of former president Muammar Gaddafi’s death. The decision to deploy as few troops as possible to Libya was part of the Obama foreign doctrine of leaving a small footprint and not intimidating foreign governments with U.S. military might.^[2] Rather than admit the lethal consequences of their mistake, however, for the next two weeks Hillary and Obama repeatedly suggested the attack was due to a spontaneous protest triggered by an amateurish 13 minute anti-Islamic “trailer” produced by a U.S. Muslim and uploaded on YouTube.

When this narrative was challenged by reporters, Hillary and Obama sidestepped by referring to “an ongoing investigation.” Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, repeated the official line in five sequential television appearances: Benghazi was a protest that evolved into a spontaneous, unpremeditated attack provoked by a “hateful video” satirizing the prophet Muhammad.

There was, in fact, such a video, and it had provoked demonstrations in the Muslim world. But there was never any evidence that it inspired the Benghazi attack. Republicans suspected the video was a red herring to deflect attention from the real issue. For the prior two years, the American people had been told that al-Qaeda had been defeated. “Osama bin-Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is on the run” was Obama’s stump speech for his 2012 reelection campaign. Only months from the election, the attack on Benghazi contradicted the narrative and was thus a political liability.

During the weeks following the attack it was apparent that a carefully scripted official story was being systematically fed to the American public: That hateful video killed our boys. No other possibility was mentioned despite Libya’s new president, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, publically proclaiming on September 16: “The way these perpetrators acted and moved, and their choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, this leaves us with no doubt that this was preplanned, predetermined.”^[3]

Obama’s Rose Garden statement on September 12 did include, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.” However, there’s an important difference between attributing acts of terror to a spontaneous uprising and admitting that Benghazi was a premeditated, well-orchestrated attack by al-Qaeda. That admission would not come until more than two weeks later in response to incontrovertible evidence that refuted the original narrative.

Meanwhile, both Hillary and Obama kept repeating that the attacks were due to an offensive video directed at the prophet Muhammad. As late as September 25, two weeks after the attacks, Obama said on another U.S. talk show, “The View”:

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.^[4]

Subsequent congressional investigations revealed that the CIA almost immediately received intelligence reports that there was no “protest” at Benghazi on September 11. In fact, the CIA’s initial September 12 executive update stated that “this was an intentional assault and not the escalation of a peaceful protest.”^[5] This language was subsequently dropped for reasons that in retrospect are clear. An email from top Obama aide Ben Rhodes lays bare the White House strategy. “Goals: To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”^[6]

That the preferred narrative was fabricated from the beginning is evident in Hillary Clinton’s initial press statement on 10:08 pm, September 11th, within an hour of the attack and while it was still ongoing.

Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.^[7]

What is extraordinary about this statement is not merely that it’s a smokescreen, but the nature of the narrative itself. It subtly intimates that the cause of extremist violence is religious intolerance, and by implication any intolerance. Whether Hillary truly believes this is open to question, but that is the narrative they chose to propagate: violence is wrong, but intolerance is more wrong because it is the reason for violence.

Server, what server?

An unexpected outcome of the congressional investigation was the discovery that Clinton was using a private server for official government correspondence. While 32,000 of her private emails were reportedly deleted after being requested, many were recovered.^[8] Of special significance are two, one sent the day of the attack and the other the day after. Within the hour following her September 11 press statement, Hillary wrote her daughter, Chelsea: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an al Qaeda-like group….Very hard day and I fear more of the same.”^[9] And in an email the following day, September 12, she recounts her conversation with the Egyptian foreign minister:

We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest. . . . Based on the information we saw today we believe the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al-Qaeda.^[10]

Two days later, September 14, Hillary attended the transfer of remains ceremony with the family members of those killed at Benghazi. In her official remarks at the ceremony, she stated: “We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with.” Kate Quigley, sister of deceased Navy SEAL Glenn Doherty, said that Hillary again brought up the story about the phony Libyan protest in their private conversation. “When I think back now to that day and what she knew…it shows me a lot about her character that she would choose in that moment to basically perpetuate what she knew was untrue.”^[11]

Patricia Smith, mother of slain information officer Sean Smith, had this to say in her congressional testimony at the Benghazi hearings:

Obama and Hillary and Panetta and Biden and Susan [Rice] all came up to me at the casket ceremony. Every one of them came up to me, gave me a big hug, and I asked them, ‘what happened, please tell me.’ And every one of them said it was the video. And we all know that it wasn’t the video. Even at that time, they knew it wasn’t the video. So they all lied to me.^[12]

Likewise Charles Woods, father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, reported that when he gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand after the ceremony, she said, “We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son.”^[13] It doesn’t get any clearer than that. Not al-Qaeda, not Obama’s foreign policy of leading-from-behind, not Hillary’s failure to provide adequate security to the compound, but anti-Islamic sentiment killed the four Americans.

When confronted with these allegations, Clinton pushed back, saying that any contradictions in her statements about Benghazi were due to “the fog of war,” fragmentary and disjointed information that was “changing by the hour.”^[14] However, given the consistency and certainty of the Obama administration’s statements about the video, and given concerns about Obama’s re-election and Hillary’s looming run for the presidency, it is difficult not to conclude that Hillary was complicit in fabricating the politically expedient but ultimately false narrative. Such is the crux of the just released report of the House Select Committee on Benghazi:

Obama Administration officials, including the Secretary of State [Hillary Clinton], learned almost in real time that the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Rather than tell the American people the truth, the administration told one story privately and a different story publicly.^[15]

It is also worth noting that despite eight congressional investigations costing 20 million tax payer dollars, it has never been determined who was responsible for the order that U.S. forces stand down. Upon being informed of the attack on the afternoon of September 11 by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Obama “immediately ordered the military to deploy all available assets.”^[16] Allegedly, he never modified or rescinded the order; yet, there were three stand-down orders according to CIA operatives who eventually disobeyed their superiors and rushed to rescue Ambassador Stevens in the burning compound. Moreover, no military assets were deployed to help the few men who fought 150 terrorists. The last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. When Obama was solicited by the House Select Committee on Benghazi to address these unanswered questions, he refused to comply.^[17]

The Astrology of Benghazi
I have taken some time to detail the events surrounding Benghazi because they illustrate in microcosm a larger narrative symbolized by Saturn square Neptune. As expected, the current phase of the Saturn-Neptune cycle is crystallizing in events that reveal the relative integration of these two archetypal forces. While the events and subsequent cover-up of Benghazi occurred in 2012, the fact that it has been headline news since the fall of 2015 illustrates how planetary dynamics “pop” into acute manifestation during angles like the closing square.

An additional factor to consider is the sign positions of the two planets―Saturn in Sagittarius, and Neptune in Pisces. Since Neptune rules Pisces, its sign position does not add any new information other than it doubles-down on the basic psychology of Neptune, making it pure and strong. Saturn in Sagittarius, however, adds something new to the mix. After a brief tenancy prior to retrograding back into Scorpio, Saturn settled into Sagittarius to stay in September of 2015, where it will remain until December 2017.

Sagittarius symbolizes the principle of expansion, as exemplified in the search for truth and meaning. It rules the domain of higher learning, justice, law, ethics, morality, religion, philosophy, ideology, travel, and foreign affairs. Saturn’s two year sojourn through Sagittarius correlates to a serious, pragmatic focus on the aforementioned fields, especially with regard to perceived shortcomings and failures.

Saturn tends to contract, restrict, and reduce for the sake of economizing, cutting away unessential elements and getting to what is solid and real. In Sagittarius, examples are legion, from halting the spread of a toxic ideology like radical Islam to restricting the flow of illegal immigration. With regard to our central topic, however, it is epitomized in the House Select Committee on Benghazi, which released its final report on July 8, 2016. A highlight of the investigation was Hillary Clinton’s testimony in October 2015, right after Saturn ingressed into Sagittarius and during which there was a serious attempt to get to the bottom of what really happened and why. Hillary’s honesty in the entire matter was the overriding, central question.

It is the square between Saturn and Neptune, however, that tells the larger story. Recall that when two planets are square, one can overcompensate as a defense against the other while simultaneously being influenced by the repressed planet at an unconscious level. For example, Saturn in Sagittarius could signify an authority figure taking the moral high ground while projecting responsibility for the tragic outcomes of her own wrongdoing onto a convenient scapegoat. At a conscious level, she (Saturn) presents herself as wise and truthful (Sagittarius); yet, unconsciously is plagued by guilt (Neptune) that must be exported into the environment.

A more integrated version would entail an honest and humble admission of mistakes with a willingness to suffer the consequences, even if it means a momentary loss of status. However, until and unless Saturn’s square to Neptune is integrated, we can expect authority figures to employ false narratives as a defense against loss, suffering, and guilt.

In the Benghazi incident, all of this is immediately evident. Saturn is represented by Hillary and the Obama administration. Their foreign policy of leading from behind―anti-imperialist ethics, minimizing America’s influence abroad, and pulling back troops―is consistent with Saturn in Sagittarius square Neptune. According to the House Select Committee on Benghazi, a major reason for the attack was Hillary’s failure to provide requested troops for fear of offending Muslims.

As a result of this lead-from-behind foreign policy…[and] although the State Department considered Libya a grave risk to American diplomats in 2011 and 2012, our people remained in a largely unprotected, unofficial facility that one diplomatic security agent the committee interviewed characterized as ‘a suicide mission.’ ^[18]

This is especially interesting in light of Saturn’s square to Neptune. Recall that Neptune’s prime directive is transcendence such that all divisions that separate races, religions, and cultures are reconciled into a common unity. Applied to politics, this is a formula for world peace―the ultimate Neptunian ideal. Yet, a mature spirituality recognizes that the journey to world peace necessarily and inescapably involves suffering and the gradual dissolution of attachments that maintain separateness. Realistically, such a goal may require innumerable just wars and be thousands of years in the making from where we are now.^[19] Global unity is not something that can be forced; you cannot push the river and accelerate the pace of human evolution to comply with your political ambitions.

This is what I alluded to earlier when I said that planets in square operate at cross purposes. The Obama administration (Saturn) aspired to world peace (Neptune). Ending wars in the Middle East was a primary objective; yet, Obama did not want to endure the necessary suffering over the long term that such an ideal would exact. So, by forcing the issue and pulling out troops prematurely from Iraq, not holding the “red line” with Syria, and generally weakening our position in the Middle East, it created a power vacuum that al Qaeda and ISIS rushed in to fill.

The tragedy of Benghazi is symptomatic of a larger problem―a misguided attempt to force a premature unity―that has characterized the Obama administration from the beginning and, by implication, liberal foreign policy in general.^[20] Peace politics and the anti-war movement has always been linked to the Democratic Party. Yet, innumerable critics and U.S. Military leaders have pointed out that Obama’s legacy will be “endless war” precisely because he was afraid to actually fight one.^[21] As former Defense Secretary Robert Gates put it, “President Obama simply wanted the ‘bad’ war in Iraq to be ended.”^[22]

What I wish to suggest here is how Saturn’s resistance to Neptunian hardship (unintegrated square) is what brought hardship about. I am not proposing that loss and suffering of the sort that occurred in Benghazi is inevitable and thus we should do nothing. Rather, it is the failure to allow for at least some loss and suffering―that is, to be adequately prepared for it―that renders a system more vulnerable to the thing avoided. Hillary’s failure to protect the Embassy in Benghazi by providing adequate troops made working there a virtual “suicide mission” according to one of her own agents. And this says nothing about the mysterious stand down orders and failure to deploy U.S. military assets during the 13 hour siege.

Neptune’s signature strategy of denial and avoidance was further evident in the cover-up that followed. Rather than admit that the Benghazi tragedy was due to “a broader failure of policy,” as Ben Rhodes put it, Hillary and Obama doubled down and scapegoated the filmmaker who uploaded the anti-Islamist video. In so doing, they constructed an illusion (Neptune) that their authority (Saturn) was unimpeachable and their ideology (Sagittarius) unassailable, while projecting moral failure onto the makers of “a crude and disgusting video”. Their attempt to avoid a humiliating loss of political power echoed their larger strategy of wanting to achieve a premature global unity while avoiding the risks and hardships of war.

Jung’s dictum that “neurosis is born from a failure to endure legitimate suffering” applies equally well to the political arena. In Part II, we will examine the Saturn-Neptune origins of what may well be a political neurosis that has afflicted western culture for more than a century.

To be continued…

References

[1] Koestler, A. (1978).  Janus: A summing up.  New York: Vintage Books, p. 67

[2] “Select Committee on Benghazi Releases Proposed Report,” from The Select Committee on Benghazi, U.S. House of Representatives, July 8, 2016. http://benghazi.house.gov/NewInfo

[3] Kessler, Glenn. “From video to terrorist attack: a definitive timeline of administration statements on the Libya attack,” in The Washington Post, September 27, 2012. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html?tid=a_inl

[4] Ibid.

[5] Kessler, Glenn. “Is Hillary Clinton a ‘liar’ on Benghazi?” in The Washington Post, October 30, 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/30/is-hillary-clinton-a-liar-on-benghazi/

[6] Hemingway, Mollie. “5 Big Takeaways From The House Benghazi Report,” in the Federalist, June 28, 2016. http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/28/5-big-takeaways-from-the-house-benghazi-report/

[7] Kessler, Glenn. “From video to terrorist attack: a definitive timeline of administration statements on the Libya attack,” in The Washington Post, September 27, 2012. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html?tid=a_inl

[8] Halper, Daniel. “FBI: Clinton was ‘extremely careless’ with email, but no charges,” New York Post, July 5, 2016. http://nypost.com/2016/07/05/fbi-wont-recommend-charges-in-clinton-email-probe/

 [9] Kessler, Glenn. “Is Hillary Clinton a ‘liar’ on Benghazi?” in The Washington Post, October 30, 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/30/is-hillary-clinton-a-liar-on-benghazi/

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] “Reviews of the Benghazi Attacks and Unanswered Questions,” First Session, September 19, 2013. http://www.gop.gov/resources/library/documents/benghazi/ogr-reviews-of-the-benghazi-attacks-and-unanswered-questions.pdf

[13] Kessler, Glenn. “Is Hillary Clinton a ‘liar’ on Benghazi?” in The Washington Post, October 30, 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/30/is-hillary-clinton-a-liar-on-benghazi/

[14] Kamisar, Ben. “Clinton denies lying to Benghazi victim’s families,” in The Hill, March 09, 2016 at: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/272483-clinton-denies-lying-to-benghazi-victims-families

[15] “Select Committee on Benghazi Releases Proposed Report,” from The Select Committee on Benghazi, U.S. House of Representatives, July 8, 2016. http://benghazi.house.gov/NewInfo

[16] Bade, Rachel. “White House refuses Benghazi questions for Obama,” in Politico, 06/26/16, at: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/white-house-benghazi-obama-224813

[17] Bade, Rachel. Ibid

[18] Select Committee on Benghazi Releases Proposed Report,” from The Select Committee on Benghazi, U.S. House of Representatives, July 8, 2016. http://benghazi.house.gov/NewInfo

[19] Walzer, Michael. (2015). Just and unjust wars: A moral argument with historical illustrations. New York: Basic Books

[20] Obama, Barack, “Breaking the War Mentality,” Sundial, March 10, 1983, http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/obama-sundial.pdf

[21] Woodward, Bob. 2010. Obama’s Wars. New York: Simon and Schuster

[22] Gates, Robert. (2015). Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War. New York: Vintage Books