, , , ,

We may wonder in our own world which side of the power struggle is Jacob, which one the Angel? 'Jacob Wrestling with the Angel' by Léon Bonnat 1875 {{PD}}

We may wonder in our own world which side of the power struggle is Jacob, which one the Angel? ‘Jacob Wrestling with the Angel’ by Léon Bonnat 1875 {{PD}}

Merc and Pluto both show up for this meeting in button down shirts, clutching their wallets and pearls, equipment for weighing and measuring carefully calibrated, posture rigid and eyes glazed over with ‘the rules’–they’re ready for business. Mercury has finally given up flight and is headed back to where he left off; he’s ready to talk, to negotiate, to inform, as long as things stay on topic, and he’s aware of the status quo, conscious of the need to deliver the establishment’s message. Pluto is out to change the system, destroy boundaries, and he’s been in this territory for a while; once he’s altered or transformed what is, a strange thing happens: the destructive energy is dissipated, and expressions of power come forward, power that enforces a new set of rules, boundaries, and installs a new authority in place of the old. The question is, where do these two meet in expression? Capricorn gives them both a tone, a background, a set of attitudes to play with, but each carries its own essence, bringing about a kind of chemical reaction that, despite their meeting in the same sign, may bring confrontation.

The root of the conflict may be this: Mercury is messenger of those who hold the reins right now; Pluto, half way through the sign, has already thrown the acid, the Molotov cocktail, and is in the process of taking the ruin of what was and constructing something new from it. That, my friends, is a fundamental conflict of interest. These two come together, and one, the quicker-moving one, is interested in making the argument for keeping things as they are; the other has been at work for quite a while, and is in the midst of creating a kind of re-birth in our ideas of authority, boundaries, and restraint. And both claim practicality, and the health of both personal life structures and those of governments, countries, and large systems, are best served by their methods.

What can we expect? The voice of current power-holders may carefully craft their message, with restrictions on who knows what, meant to keep things static, for safety, for the well-being of all, and of course, to retain power; the agents of change may claim a moral superiority in their very existence, a ‘change for change’s sake’ stance that does not acknowledge the new authorities rising from the ashes, intent on replacing the old, are just as distorted in priorities and viewpoint as the previous holders of power were. In other words, change does not equalize anything, nor does becoming part of the current power structure, because both are intent on grabbing power and keeping it–and when that is the goal, no message will assuage those without influence, and no revolution will make the situation more equitable.

So, what we may witness today are communications that have power acquisition and retention at their core–and this may be played a thousand ways, with harsh or destructive words, transformational ideas, the resurrection of concepts we thought were surely gone, and the obliteration of the old rules–but all of it concealing, one way or another, the power struggle currently at the heart of the Universe. In your own life an awareness that power is behind literally everything we deal with at this time will help reveal the layers of meaning. We need to understand that there’s an intensity to this (thanks, Pluto!) that goes beyond the normal level of power-seeking we see everyday, giving even the simplest exchanges a life-or-death tone that may seem over the top–but if we purge our minds of clutter and propaganda, we see the Truth of what’s being negotiated beneath.