BLAIR'S 'LIE'

I have always found Tony Blair’s exaggeration of the case for the Iraq War to be thought-provoking. This has been the main cause of the British public’s loss of trust in him. Blair made the case for war around the central assertion that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The Intelligence Services had been tentative about the possibility of Saddam having WMD, and in relaying this to Parliament, Blair converted this tentative conclusion into a certainty. This, to many people, constituted a lie over a very serious matter, hence the loss of trust. That happened 4 years ago, and since then I’ve regularly turned Blair’s ‘lie’ over in my mind. On the face of it, it is a lie, and a big one. On the other hand, politicians habitually say one thing and mean another, and their fellow MPs all know the language, they know what is really being said and what the speaker’s real intentions are, and the speaker knows they know this. In this context, what is ordinarily a lie is not so. So it’s not necessarily a simple matter. The way the system works is adversarial. We have an Opposition, and this is a good thing, and we have a ‘free press’, which again is a good thing, for between them they help keep the government accountable. But they habitually give the worst possible interpretation of anything the government might do, and twist the meaning of anything they might say. In this context, it is not a simple matter for a member of the government to speak the truth. In the case of Iraq, a clear motive for the government was that of staying ‘onside’ with America. All British governments have wanted to do this (and Blair recently actually stated the importance of being ‘in’ with the US: it opens lots of doors, he said). Harold Wilson wasn’t prepared to go as far as Blair, for he refused to join the US in Vietnam; and Margaret Thatcher was known for not giving Reagan an easy time of it, despite the closeness of their relationship. So we can criticise Blair for being too subservient, but not necessarily for the basic intention of staying onside with America. But he couldn’t say this. If he had given this as a reason for going to war, he would have found himself out of office. It would have been too humiliating for the country, even though everyone knew that was what was going on. So he had to give another reason for going to war, for which he has subsequently been hounded by the public but not, interestingly, by Parliament, for they know and accept the game. I have been watching Andrew Marr’s ‘A History of Modern Britain’, and last night’s episode included the Suez Crisis of 1956, when Marr said (very topically) that Britain went to war on the basis of a lie. Nasser of Egypt had nationalised the Suez Canal, and Britain wanted to claim back its control of the canal. To do this they cooked up a plot with the French and Israelis whereby the Israelis would find a pretext for attacking Egypt, and the French and British would join in to support them. In those days you didn’t have a vote in Parliament about going to war, and the war's failure, under American pressure, led to the resignation of Eden, the Prime Minister. The crisis made clear that Britain was no longer a major player in the world. Eden had a Sun-Neptune conjunction in Gemini, and at the time of the war, Mars in Pisces was squaring this conjunction: a war (Mars) based on deception (Neptune). In the run-up to Iraq, Tony Blair had transiting Neptune conjoining his Moon, so again we have the element of Neptunian deception; as for the ‘war’ bit, Blair has Mars Rising, so he’s in his element anyway. But for the record, Mars in Capricorn was a few weeks off joining his Capricorn MC. The point here is that in constructing a pretext for war, Tony Blair wasn’t doing anything new. It’s just that it was no longer politically acceptable to do so, which I think is a good thing. It is one of the outcomes of Pluto’s passage through Sagittarius, a sign that values honesty and truth: this, I think, is the cultural and political significance of Blair’s ‘Lie’. The trouble is, it wasn’t just ‘A Convenient Untruth’ (to paraphrase Gore). Blair seemed entirely convinced that Saddam had these weapons and was an imminent threat. I dislike, but kind of understand, why politicians lie in the ordinary sense. What makes me scratch my head is how Blair convinced himself that the pretext was the reality. And why he had this trusting and appreciative relationship with Bush. They are part of the same package, I think. I recently saw Lord Kinnock, a previous Labour leader, also failing to understand Blair’s relationship with Bush. So while I very reluctantly accept that politicians often have to say one thing and mean another, and that this was probably an inevitable part of going to war with Iraq (and that DOESN’T mean I agree with the real reasons for that war), I still don’t understand why Blair brought such a flimsy pretext before Parliament (he didn’t have to) and persuaded himself to believe in it. It was asking for trouble. It was wilfully self-destructive. I tend to think that what we’re looking at it not so much a moral issue, but some sort of psycho-pathology in Blair which he is blind to, and which I for one don’t yet understand. But it has the character of religious extremism: the passionate certainty under the influence of a higher authority (the will of God, as manifest through the person of both himself and the more powerful Bush). And for Blair, I suggest that loyalty to this authority transcended ordinary political loyalties. It also seemed to blind him, as religion often does, to ordinary considerations of truth. I think people are right not to trust Blair over this issue. But not because he ‘lied’ in the sense of being deliberately deceptive. He can’t be trusted because to some extent he is a mole, a foreign agent, whose loyalties lie, in the last resort, not with his country but with what he imagines to be ‘God’.

SATURN-NEPTUNE & PARENTAL FANTASIES

Last Wednesday, Lynn at astrodynamics did an interesting blog on the health of John F Kennedy. Not being familiar with his chart, what stayed in my mind was his Saturn-Neptune conjunction on the Midheaven. As Lynn put it, “Saturn [is] right on the MC where it reflects the pressure of his father (Saturn) pushing him into public life (MC). And in Cancer no less, demonstrating that his public life was part of the family dynamic and not just an individual ambition.”

I have heard it suggested elsewhere that left to himself, Kennedy’s natural leaning would have been to become something like an academic, and that it was mainly family expectation that pushed him into politics. The dreams (Neptune) of the father (Saturn) and family (Cancer). Or even the unreal (Neptune) expectations of the father (Saturn).

John F Kennedy 29 May 1917 15.00 Brookline MA

He had no fire planets in his chart, and an unaspected Sun and unaspected Pluto! You would expect to find Fire – a sense of vision, direction, leadership – in a President (like Bush’s Leo Rising or Clinton’s Leo Sun). Unaspected planets can manifest in various ways – they can, for example, be apparently absent, or they can take over (like Hitler’s unaspected Neptune-Pluto conjunction, which made him the undiscerning voice of the German Unconscious.) In the case of JFK, we could speculate that in manifesting his Saturn-Neptune, he never found his real individual destiny (unaspected Sun), and that Pluto, again unaspected, and the only planet in a fire house (the 9th), was able to manifest as a raw drive for power, independently of his personal needs and wishes. No wonder he had health problems! Maybe, even, no wonder he died young.

I have been struck lately, through personal experience, by the extent to which members of an ambitious family can subsume their own identities in the collective consciousness of the family, leading lives that are the same down to ridiculous details, and espousing identical, unexamined values. It is no different to the dynamics within a religious cult. It gives psychological security, but it is also based on fear, which the worldly success can mask, for to question such a family’s values inevitably leads to ostracism, to what would be experienced as psychological annihilation. And such families usually have one or two members who suffer this fate.

Back to Saturn-Neptune. It is interesting that Kennedy didn’t just carry the dreams of his father, he also carried the dreams of a nation, the Cancer nation to which he belonged. He was built for this, as we can see from his chart. And he wasn’t just the victim of family pressure: the Saturn-Neptune-MC is also HIS Saturn-Neptune-MC, he had a propensity to carry the unreal expectations of others (‘Camelot’) at the expense of his personal destiny (unaspected Sun).

Tony Blair also has a Saturn-Neptune conjunction (opposite Mercury and Venus in Aries) and he too has been the carrier of the dreams of the collective, and the original expectations of him were way beyond what a human could deliver. Saturn-Neptune can raise you to god-like status, and if you don’t die young (which many of them do), you are likely to eventually encounter a huge backlash as people feel let down. This happened to Blair over Iraq, and would almost certainly have happened to JFK had he lived: archetypal patterns have an inevitability about them. It is interesting that David Cameron was elected leader of the Conservative Party under a Saturn-Neptune opposition, because he is seen by many as the Tories’ answer to Blair, the young saviour of the Party (who will inevitably let them down in the end.)

The Dalai Lama was born under a Saturn-Neptune opposition, and his life from the word go has been devoted to living out the dream/fantasy which his religious tradition (Saturn in the 9th) and the Tibetan people have of him: the god-king. It is amazing he has done so well on it, as this level of expectation would twist most of us right out of shape. Maybe those who brought him up knew what they were doing. I think the Tibetan tradition does have a lot of good stuff in it, but it is also an organised religion, and prone to exactly the same weaknesses as other religions.

Venus Williams, the former world number one women’s tennis player, was born under a Mars/Saturn-Neptune square, and her and her younger sister are well-known for being the products of their father’s ambition. Mars gives the sporting drive and ability, but it is interesting that her reign at the top has been short-lived and erratic, and she is known for pursuing other interests: this suggests to me that Venus has been breaking away from the dream (Neptune) of her father (Saturn).

On 22 May this year, twins were born to a 60-year old woman in New Jersey. I read this in a blog by a lady named Out the Comet's Ass. Now I don’t want to rush in and judge, and only time will tell how wise it is to have kids at such an age. But the astrology doesn’t look entirely promising. The twins have no earth planets (though they do have earth ASC and MC), suggesting there may be a problem about their connection to the earth and to nature, but which their Angles (which are doorways, rather than part of us, unlike the planets) will require them to develop. This interpretation is backed up by a Moon-Saturn conjunction in 12th House Leo, opposite Neptune and Chiron. At worst, this indicates that they are the product of the damaged fantasy (Neptune/Chiron) of a self-centred (Leo) unconscious (12th) Mother (Moon/Saturn). This is a harsh thing to say, but there may well be an element of truth in it. And again we have Saturn-Neptune, the dreams, even fantasies, of the parent, which these twins will be carrying - they'll have to live up to being 'miracle babies', or something like that.

I think it’s natural for parents to have hopes and dreams for their kids, even unrealistic ones, dreams that perhaps compensate for what they haven’t managed to achieve. If you’ve built up a business, you’re probably going to want one of your kids to join it and build it further – and at the same time, you may be jealous of their youth and success, and you may try to undermine them. We’re a bundle of contradictions, with feet of clay (Saturn) and dreaming of the stars (Neptune).

When I was young I was at the receiving end of some pretty powerful and unconscious parental fantasies which, with the Saturn-Neptune opposition currently hitting my Sun-Chiron, I’m doing a further stage of untangling. It can take decades! But I’m not kidding myself that I can decide not to have my own set of fantasies for my 6 year old. I can try to minimise them by being fulfilled in my own life, but beyond that it’s probably just a matter of finding out in 35 years what those fantasies were when he presents me with the bill for his therapist. (Joke)

As always, it’s good to have a bit of myth around these things so we can see the universal pattern that we fit into. In their book ‘The Mythic Journey’, Liz Greene and Juliet Sharman-Burke begin with the myth of Thetis and Achilles, which they subtitle ‘Great Expectations’ – “How parents expect nothing less than everything from their children”.

“Thetis was the great goddess of the sea and ruled over all that moved in its depths. But it was time she married, and Zeus, king of the gods, had received a prophecy that, if Thetis married a god, she would bear a son who would be greater than Zeus himself. Worried about losing his position, Zeus espoused the sea-goddess to a mortal man called Peleus. This mixed marriage was not unsuccessful, and the two settled down relatively comfortably – although Peleus sometimes resented his wife’s supernatural powers, and Thetis sometimes felt she had married beneath her station.

In time, Thetis bore a son, whom she called Achilles. Because he was fathered by a mortal, he was a mortal child, allotted his time on earth by the Fates, as are all mortal beings. But Thetis was not content with this prospect. Being immortal herself, she did not wish to remain eternally young while watching her son grow old and die. So she secretly carried the newborn child to the River Styx, in whose waters lay the gift of immortality. She held the child by one heel and dipped him in the waters, believing thereby that she had made him immortal. But the heel by which she held him remained untouched by the waters of the Styx, and therefore Achilles was vulnerable through this one place.

When he reached adulthood and fought in the Trojan War, Achilles received his death wound through an arrow in the heel. Although Achilles achieved great glory and was remembered forever, Thetis could not cheat the Fates, nor turn that which was human into the stuff of the gods.”

PRINCE WILLIAM

Today's blog is also being posted at astrodynamics while Lynn has a short vacation. As she is American, and as the Queen has just visited the US (obliging George Bush to hold his first white tie dinner), I thought I’d say a few things about Prince William, the Queen's grandson and second in line to the throne. If he lives long enough, he will become King.

People in the UK are divided about the monarchy, but perhaps less than they think they are, because the attachment to it runs deep. I’m in favour of the monarchy, not because I ‘believe’ in it, but because I think it takes some of the weight of projection off the Prime Minister. It seems to be part of human nature that we collectively assign semi-divine qualities to certain people and then worship them – and celebrities catch a lot of this, which many of them are only too happy to do – so the more we can take this off our political leaders so that they can get on with the job of running the country, the better. Though the USA broke with Britain and its monarchy 231 years ago, some of its roots are still there, and we can see that in the ongoing level of interest in Princess Diana – and even in ‘Fergie’, the ex-wife of Prince Andrew, who managed to get her own TV show in the USA.

Prince William is 24 years old and currently in the army, with which the Royal family has strong links. Before that he was at university for 4 years, where in 2003 he began a relationship with Kate Middleton, that lasted until a few weeks ago. It seems to have been him that ended the relationship. She was always portrayed as this straightforward middle-class girl who just happened to have met up with William at university, and for the last year or two the media had been endlessly predicting an engagement.

About a month ago I read a magazine article about her background. It wasn’t a critical article, but I found it revealing. Her family are well-off and live in Berkshire, near London. They have a mail order business. It turns out that her younger sister has been going out with a ‘wealthy aristocrat’ and shares a flat with a son of the Duke of Northumberland and a son of the Duke of Roxburghe. The Middleton family are also applying to have a coat of arms. In this light, Kate’s involvement with Prince William doesn’t look so innocent. Nor does her decision to attend St Andrew’s University, all the way up in Scotland, where Prince William just happened to be going. Her previous relationship just happened to end at a point where William was single, and it was probably a case of “He chased her until she caught him.”

Not that any of this was probably very conscious in her, young as she was. Kate Middleton was born on 9 January 1982 (no birth time), and what is screaming out from the chart is Sun in Capricorn square to Saturn-Pluto and quite possibly making a t-square to Moon in Cancer. This woman thinks hierarchically through and through, a high social position is very important to her. And important to her family. She didn’t want to marry William, she wanted to marry a Prince, and she thought she’d landed one. Not that she would have seen it like that. She was also no doubt doing exactly what her family wanted and expected her to do, without anything needing to be said. Since university she seems to have fiddled around in London, having recently taken up a pseudo-job through family connections, but in reality waiting for her real goal to unfold: marriage to the Prince. Kate's chart also suggests the possibility of real achievement, rather than the mere pursuit of status, so you never know, this knock-back might change something for her.

So it may be that William has had a lucky escape, even though he might not yet see it like this, and the experience may help him avoid the mistake his father made in marrying Diana: Charles was under pressure to produce an heir, and Diana was aged 20 and clueless (like many of us at that age) about what she was doing.

Prince William was born on 21 June 1982 at 21.03 in London, England. His chart is striking, with a Sun-Moon conjunction in Cancer on the Gemini Desc opposite Neptune Rising in Sag. With this chart, William will have unusual abilities to involve himself with others in a compassionate and nurturing way. Relationships with others, whether with a big or small ‘R’, will be central to him, they will be how he comes to know himself. With Jupiter on the Midheaven trining his Sun (a charmed aspect for a King), he will probably be very popular and loved by the people – “the people’s prince”, in the way that Tony Blair called his mother "the people’s princess" after she was killed. Like his mother, he has Sun in Cancer and Sag Rising, and he will have the burden of being not just William but also Diana’s son, Diana resurrected.

This is pointing to his Neptune Rising, which may make it difficult for people to see him as he is. Amongst other things, they will see Diana. And while his Sun-Moon in the 7th will on the one hand be his path to self-knowledge, Neptune Rising is also saying that he can lose himself in his ability to involve and give himself to others.

The next few years will be defining for him, as Pluto first crosses his ASC (this year) then opposes his Sun (next year) and then opposes his Moon (2010). We don’t yet have much idea of who William is – and nor does he, probably – but we certainly will in a few years time. It is not the chart of a soldier (unlike his younger brother Harry - see my posting of 1st May - who has Sun in the 8th square Mars in Sag), so he probably won’t stay in the army for very long. What William HAS been good at so far is staying out of the public eye (relatively speaking) and leading as normal a life as he can before he is drawn into public life: he clearly has some idea how to use his Neptune Rising to his advantage, as a cloak of invisibility.

Prince William was also born on an eclipse. Eclipses occur in series, known as Saros Series, that run for up to around 1400 years. The first eclipse in the cycle sets the character for the whole cycle, so Prince William’s life will reflect this first eclipse, which occurred on June 24 792AD at 6.03 GMT. This chart has a Sun-Moon conjunction (naturally) at 6 Cancer, close to William’s Sun-Moon conjunction at 0 – 5 Cancer, emphasising William’s connection to this series.

In her interpretation of the chart for this series, Bernadette Brady says: “This is a difficult eclipse family, as its members bring unfortunate news concerning friendships or relationships [me: or family - Cancer]. You will be dealing with ideas of separation or the ending of a union. However, although the picture may look quite glum as the eclipse takes effect, the actual results are quite positive. You will quickly grasp what has to be done and fast action can bring quick results. The theme of this eclipse is action concerning personal relationships.”

The aspects Brady uses for her interpretation are: Sun-Moon-Jupiter conjunct Mars/Uranus midpoint; and Mercury conjunct Venus/Saturn midpoint.

The death of his mother Diana in 1997 indicates that Prince William is indeed connected to this eclipse series, and we may see it in action again if his brother Harry goes to Iraq, which any good astrologer would advise him against. (Listen, Harry!) Next year not only does William have transiting Pluto opposing his family-oriented Cancer Sun, but Pluto will also be squaring his 3rd House cusp – siblings – at 0 Aries.

This Saros Series is coming to an end. It began in 792, around the time of what was arguably the beginning of the British monarchy (King Ecgberht in 802 AD). It will end in 2036, when William is 54 years old, and the monarchy as we know it may end around then, particularly if we consider the interpretation given above for the series (“ending of a union.”) On the other hand, the eclipse chart also suggests the ability to “quickly grasp what has to be done and fast action can bring quick results.” So William may successfully adapt to the changes.

I have taken my eclipse material from Brady’s ‘The Eagle and the Lark’, published 1992 by Weiser.

PRINCE HARRY THE SOLDIER

Prince Harry is the Spare to the British throne. His brother William is the Heir, he is the Spare, and Prince Charles is the breeding male who has done his duty by the herd. I don’t wish to disparage Prince Charles, as I admire him in some ways, despite his manner, but the fact is that as a young man he was led by the ring in his nose and mated to the much younger Diana Spencer, a woman with whom he had nothing in common.

25 years on and Charles is married to Camilla, and as a couple they seem very suited. At last, after all the divorces and infidelities, we have a royal marriage that works. And how does the great British public respond? They are cross. What they want are fairy tale weddings and tears over the death of a silly princess, not a real relationship that actually works. Actually I don’t want to be too hard on Diana either, she was an essentially ordinary girl who found herself in a very difficult position. And how many girls aged 20 would turn down the chance to be future Queen of England?

Prince Harry, known in the army as Cornet Harry Wales, is due to be deployed to Iraq this year, along with his regiment. He has said that if he is not sent to Iraq, he will leave the army. There has been a lot of speculation recently that he won’t be sent to Iraq, because his regiment will become a target and because of the huge political fall-out if he is killed or captured. Yesterday the head of the army confirmed that he will be going to Iraq (though it always remains under review), while Harry has let it be known that he won’t leave the army if he is not sent.

Harry was born 15th Sept 1984 at 16.20 in London, UK.

He is a Virgo with Capricorn Rising and Moon in Taurus. Very earthy and practical, and so you can understand him saying, “Well I’m a soldier and if I can’t do what a soldier does, which is to fight, then I’ll do something else.” Which I can understand. Either you do something or you don’t do something, you don’t faff.

But it’s more than that. His Sun is in the 8th square to Mars in Sagittarius in the 11th. This man really is a soldier, he would be devastated if he felt he had to leave the army or that he couldn’t fight. With Sun in the 8th, it is natural, even necessary for him, to encounter death. His Mars is in the 11th, so he leads his regiment. And Mars in Sag are the most feared and deadly warriors of all. In the constellation Sagittarius we see the figure of a centaur, a man on horseback: when these warriors on horseback first appeared, they were awesome, they could not be stopped, it was like having the first nuclear bomb.

I admire Mars-Warrior energy. It’s total, it’s fearless, it's superhuman, it doesn’t care if it dies, it’s doing something that’s more important than either death or its own narrow self-interest. And it can do spectacular things. Like the Israelis, with their mighty Mars in Leo, beating back a host of nations as soon as they had been born. Even though the Israelis can behave like Nazis, I admire them for that.

So Prince Harry has this. With Mars conjunct Uranus, he can be impetuous and wilful, not helpful in a soldier, but he has his own way of soldiering, and can explode into action. With his Moon in Taurus (like his Dad) conjunct IC, he loves his country and has his feet on the ground. His Node is also in Taurus in the 4th, making a yod through its inconjunctions to Pluto in the 9th and Neptune in the 12th. So there is some kind of fate around Harry going to Iraq, expressing his love of his homeland (Node) through serving the collective dream/fantasy (Neptune in the 12th) by encountering death in a foreign land (Pluto in the 9th).

For astrological reasons (as well as common sense) we can’t rule out his death. His progressed Chart currently has 5 planets in the 8th: Sun, Mercury, Venus, Saturn and Pluto, so he is strongly drawn to situations of death. His Prog Moon is at 26 Pisces, which will square transiting Pluto and conjoin the Iraq War Sun over the next few months. His Prog Uranus will exactly oppose his Prog IC (beginnings and endings) over the next 18 months. (Its conjunction to the MC reflects the ongoing uncertainty around his deployment to Iraq).

By transit, Neptune will continue this year to be within range of squaring his IC at 17 Taurus, while next year Uranus will be very close to an exact opposition to his 8th House Sun at 22.57 Virgo: sudden death is the way of it in war. Jupiter is also associated with death, and will spend next year conjoining his ASC at 11.27 Capricorn.

I’m starting to feel like I shouldn’t be writing this, publicly predicting death for a young man. But it’s not quite like that. I am saying there is a choice. Harry, I know you can’t help yourself, but if you go to Iraq, there is a good chance you will be killed. Those who are deciding on his deployment, please take note. Just look at the transits to his Dad’s chart next year: regarding his natal 5th House (children), he has Sun on the cusp at 22 Scorpio, conjunct 5th House Chiron, and being squared by tr Neptune; Mars at 20 Sag, being squared by tr Uranus; and Jupiter at 30 Sag, being conjoined by tr Pluto. Even his dead mother has Neptune conjoining her Aquarian Moon next year. Don’t do it, Harry!

Prince Charles: 14 Nov 1948, 21.14 London, UK

I wrote earlier about my admiration for the warrior energy. I also have a reservation. The Warrior is not the King, he serves the King, he does unquestioningly whatever the King asks of him. A soldier obeys orders, this is seen as a moral good, and it is not his place to question. If you are deployed to Iraq, you go there, you do your job, and you do not question the justice or purpose of the war.

This quality of obeying orders unquestioningly (or if you have doubts, you act as if you don’t) is not a moral quality, it is pure expedience. Without it, the army couldn’t get the job done. And it is manipulative to make people feel like they are bad for questioning.

The young warrior often doesn’t want to question. What he wants is the certainty that he is clearly on the side of right against wrong, otherwise he could not use his Mars. So if there is an authority prepared to re-assure him that he is on the side of right, he is quite happy to believe them. People are very vulnerable to this kind of authority. Look at the Millgram experiments, in which volunteers willingly gave other volunteers painful electric shocks (so they thought) because they were told to by an ‘authority’.

So this is what Mars has to work out as he gets older: his relationship with authority, with the King. This is why Mars is exalted in Capricorn: Saturn, the King, is there working alongside Mars instead of being sought outside.

So this is my main reservation around soldiering: it’s not the killing and slaughter, though that’s bad enough. It’s the deeper question of “Who is in charge of my life?”

THE ASTROLOGY OF SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE

The Scottish National Party (SNP) is a centre-left political party which campaigns for Scottish independence. It currently regularly polls the second highest number of votes [after Labour] for a political party in Scotland. The SNP has 6 of 59 Scottish seats in the UK Parliament, and 25 of 129 seats in the Scottish Parliament, where they are the official opposition. (Wiki)

This Thursday 3rd May, elections are being held for the Scottish Parliament, which was established in 1999 under the present Labour government, devolving certain powers to Scotland. All the signs are that the SNP will emerge from the election as the largest single party in the Parliament, displacing Labour, though without a majority. Polls among Scottish people have regularly begun to show a majority wanting full independence.

This is not good news for Labour, as it currently has 39 MPs in Scottish seats (compared to the Tories’ single seat), and independence will make it that much harder for them to win general elections in England. There does seem to be an unstoppable momentum developing, however, and I think it is a good thing. Small countries (like Ireland) seem to do well economically within the EU, so I don’t think they will have to worry on that score. But more importantly, the Scottish are a separate race to the English, by whom they have been effectively ruled for centuries, and I always think it’s a good thing if a people can govern themselves. I think it’ll be good for England too.

I also think that the smaller the country is, the easier it is for the individual to feel that they count, that they can make a difference. In a democracy, what does an individual vote count for? Absolutely nothing. It makes no difference at all. The individual is powerless at a national level, and often at a local level, and the outcome you are therefore most likely to get in an election is herd-think, rule by the unconscious mob-mind – and remember Hitler was initially elected democratically. Of course, democracy does have the ability to chuck out a leader who is a bad lot, and that is a strength. But as Churchill said, Democracy is the worst sort of political system - apart from all the rest!

I digress. Time for some astrology, and a chart for Scotland. This is not easy, as we can't be entirely confident of the year of its founding (842 AD), let alone the actual date. Scotland was formed from the conquest of the Pictish kingdom by the Irish kingdom of Dalradia (in what is now Argyle) by Kenneth MacAlpin. In his ‘Book of World Horoscopes’ (from which the above information comes), Nicholas Campion says: “We do not know precisely which year the union took place. However, if we set a chart for the Aries ingress of 842, that would fit with the astrological practice of the time, as practised in the Arab world, in which the Aries ingress prior to an important political event would have signified that event. Given that military campaigns usually took place in the summer, there is an excellent chance that the Aries ingress of 842 immediately preceded the Dalridian conquest of Pictavia.”

So we have a chart for March 16 842, 16.21, Edinburgh.

Click to Enlarge

In my blog of 18th March, I pointed out that the next day’s partial solar eclipse at 28 Pisces was conjunct the UK Moon at 29 Pisces (1066 chart) and square the UK Uranus at 29 Sag. I continued: “Uranus is, amongst other things, about splitting, and only today Alex Salmond, the leader of the Scottish Nationalist party, has been announcing his plans for how a Scottish government would work and his plans for a referendum.”

So there you have it, with the added point, that I hadn’t clocked at the time, that the Scottish Pluto is at 27 Pisces! So that eclipse really did have a lot to do with Scotland’s desire to break away from England (Uranus) and assert its own power (Pluto). On top of this, Pluto is squaring the Scottish natal Pluto by transit this year. So the astrology seems to suggest that this week's elections are likely to play a crucial role in Scotland’s moves towards independence. And the Scottish chart, artificial as it is, is already looking like it might work.

The Scottish chart has Moon at 7 Aries conjunct Uranus at 13 Aries (an interesting correspondence with the UK 1066 chart Moon square Uranus). Freedom and independence are important to the Scottish people. This Moon-Uranus in Aries is square to Mars at 14 Cancer, showing that we are dealing with a warrior race. If we add on Saturn-Neptune in Capricorn, we have a Cardinal t-square, which becomes a Cardinal Grand Cross if you add on Node in Libra. With this sort of astrology, I am amazed there haven’t been more rebellions, and given that conditions are now right, it can only be a matter of time before Scotland is independent. Maybe it is their Saturn in Capricorn that has kept them realistic about independence and actually quite at home in the Union, through the Protestant work ethic that they share with England (1801 chart - UK Sun at 10 Capricorn conjunct IC).

What about timing? By transit, Pluto and then Uranus will be hitting this Moon-Uranus-Mars-Saturn-Neptune-Node from 2011 onwards, at the time of the next Scottish elections, and a year or two after the next UK general election. So the move towards independence will probably be greatly empowered by these transits and the run-up to them: it seems reasonable to suppose that these 2 elections will result in greatly increased numbers of SNP MPs in both the British and Scottish Parliaments, with probably a clear majority for the SNP in the Scottish Parliament from the 2011 election onwards. This will only be the start of the Pluto transit, and we can expect to see full independence as the Pluto transit to the Grand Cross finishes about 5 years later, around 2015/2016.

Interestingly, Alex Salmond, the leader of the SNP, was born on 31 Dec 1954, giving him Sun at about 9 Capricorn conjunct Node at 5 Capricorn, which interacts strongly with the Scottish Grand Cross, and indicates a re-empowerment for him, through Pluto, from about 2011 onwards as well.

Back to the Scottish Chart. The Progressed Chart has Node conjunct MC in 2010, and the converse Progressed has Pluto conjunct MC in 2010. So the Government (MC) will have some sort of encounter with its destiny (Node) and be re-empowered (Pluto) around 2010.

So the astrology for Scotland around both the 2007 and 2011 elections suggest to me that the SNP is going to gain considerable ground in both, probably becoming the largest party this time, becoming the majority party in 2011, and this setting the stage for moves towards full independence in the succeeding few years. Looking at it the other way round, events now and where they seem to be going lend plausibility to the 842 Aries ingress chart for Scotland.

SATURN-NEPTUNE AND THE SELF

Buddhism has what is known as the ‘no-self’ doctrine which, applied to all phenomena, becomes the doctrine of emptiness (of which there are a number of kinds!) It’s easy for all this to become very heady – which some Buddhists can be very prone to – but the basic idea is that our sense of who we are is not fixed and enduring. As astrologers we’re on familiar territory here, because we regularly observe ourselves and others changing in times of major transits. But we only believe it partially: if we feel criticised, for example, we tend to want to defend ourselves, to protect our sense of who we are, instead of looking at the criticism with equanimity, and taking it on or discarding it as we feel appropriate.

So this is the reason for the ‘no-self’ doctrine: as human beings we treat what is a working construct – the self or ego – as something permanent, something that gives us a sense of security in an uncertain universe.

And this easily translates into the interplay between Saturn and Neptune. We do need a sense of self, a sense of ourselves as a centre of experience, but we need to get it right. Too much Neptune, and you’ve got someone who isn’t very present, who is too dreamy, lacks a strong sense of what they think and feel, and cannot achieve practical results; they find it hard to take responsibility for their lives, and may become parasitic and manipulative. Too much Saturn and you have someone who certainly knows what they think and believe, but their self is rigid, it is like a great wall around them, and it tends to be based mainly on their ability to earn money and recognition and respectability, along with a sense of superiority to others who are less ‘successful’. OK, I admit it, I’ve just had an encounter with someone like this, who has Sun-Saturn-Jupiter conjunct in Capricorn, and it was bruising!

So while we’re here on this planet we need an ego, a sense of self. There may be other realities before or after death where we don’t need a sense of self, but I wouldn’t know about that. If consciousness continues after death, it’s quite possible that Saturn as embodiment disappears, and we are just left with Neptune, in which we do not experience ourselves as being at the centre of things, and there is no protective barrier between ourselves and reality. That is the Buddhist view, along with the idea that we cannot handle it, and we flee back to embodied existence. That is where I part company with e.g. The Tibetan Book of the Dead, because I don’t believe that I was born just because I couldn’t handle Reality. I’m on this earth because it’s a beautiful place to be, and I want to fully appreciate that before I die. Nor do I believe I have a ‘purpose’ being here: that seems to me to be a bit of an abstraction, it takes me away from my experience, which is that I do what I do, and I feel very happy about quite a lot of it.

So whether or not anything continues after death, what I do know is that I’m here, and that I need a strong yet flexible sense of myself. I need Saturn in order to feel I’ve arrived, that I’m real, and that I am building and creating myself; but I also need Neptune to let go of all that, not to take it too seriously (“It’s only money,” as I said last night to someone who had lost some), to allow in new experiences and perspectives, and to remember that others, with equal validity, are also centres of experience.

And it’s not just an intellectual exercise in having the right attitude. In a society based on a one-sided Saturn, I think that generous actions, doing stuff for other people purely because you want to (NOT ‘ought to’ – that’s Saturn) helps get the balance right. Because practically speaking, the best way to understand the no-self doctrine is to be unselfish, but not in a self-sacrificing way.

I think a good image for a balanced Saturn-Neptune, and a balanced self, is a cell membrane. It’s tough, it lasts for years, it contains, yet it is flexible and delicate and porous.

SATURN AND WALLS

Astrological symbolism can sometimes work itself out very literally. I have noticed this in the case of Saturn, whose presence can result in the building or demolition of walls (one of Saturn’s meanings is to do with defensive boundaries).

Israel was founded in 1948 with Saturn at 16 Leo. The country has just finished its second Saturn Return, and during this period has been erecting the Israeli West Bank Barrier which, whatever the rights and wrongs of it, has succeeded in reducing terrorist attacks on Israel.

Construction of the Berlin Wall began on Aug 13 1961, with Saturn at 24 Capricorn. Demolition began in November 1989, 5 months short of its 1st Saturn Return. This wall was erected to stop defections from East to West Germany, and was known in the East as “The Anti-Fascist Protective Rampart”.

Glastonbury Festival, now the largest Festival of its kind in the world (and down the road from me) began as Glastonbury Fayre in June 1971. In the year 2000 100,000 tickets were sold and there were a further 150,000 gatecrashers. This caused such public safety concerns that its future was under threat, so the outcome of the Festival’s Saturn Return was the erection of a huge fence in time for the 2002 Festival. It certainly worked, but my experience at the Festival was that while the criminal element was hugely reduced, which was a relief, a lot of the interesting characters were also not there. I guess this is the price of Saturn: he is needed for social order, there is no way round that, but that means rules that edit out whatever doesn’t fit, which can be interesting, wacky and creative as well as criminal. But in myth he did eat his own children, so we have to expect it.

On April 10 this year, the Americans began the construction of a wall around a Sunni district in Baghdad. The chart for America’s efforts in Iraq – the Iraq War – is set for 5.33am, 20/3/2003, Baghdad. This chart has Saturn at 22.45 Gemini closely conjunct the IC. The Moon, being the closest ‘planet’ to the earth, triggers the energy of all the other planets. On April 10, the Progressed Moon of the Iraq War chart was at 21.28 Sag, almost exactly opposing the natal Saturn. So again we have a connection between Saturn and the erection of walls/boundaries.

Will the Baghdad Wall be successful? Saturn in the April 10 Chart is of course opposite Neptune, which must be the stupidest time conceivable to start building a wall. What has become apparent lately is that despite the hugely heightened security in Baghdad as a result of the American ‘surge’, the bombers are still getting through, the most prominent case being the bombing of the Parliament building. This is probably a function of Mars’ present passage through Pisces. Mars was in Pisces in the Baghdad Wall chart, and in this sign is probably very good at flowing through walls if it needs to. So the Baghdad Wall probably won’t work very well.

GLASTONBURY CALLING

A short article on the front page of the local newspaper is announcing a house for sale that has a front door carved in the shape of female genitalia, while the inside of the house has been turned into a Tantric Sex Temple. It’s business as usual in Glastonbury, UK. The local Catholic Church has a youth march up the High St every year, but last year proved to be the final one, due to those nice young Christians confronting many of the crystal-selling wand-purveying shop staff in the High St, spitting at them and calling them Satanists etc. This event made the headlines of the local paper.

Glastonbury has been a place of pilgrimage for centuries, and in the Middle Ages it was home to Glastonbury Abbey, one of the 2 great places of Christian power in England, along with Canterbury. All that changed in the Reformation, and all we have now are the ruins. It’s a small town in Somerset with a huge number of healers, astrologers, shamans, charlatans, tarot readers, psychics, mediums and just about every religion you can think of. The High St, according to Vajramala, is like Diagon Alley in Harry Potter, and she complains that you can’t even buy a pair of knickers. Mind you, it gives me an enhanced appreciation for Woolworths and Morrisons, which someone once described to me as “Gateways to Ordinary Reality.”

Of course we get a lot of tourists, and just as a lot of Brits are prepared to believe the wild claims that Native Americans sometimes make, so too are many Americans prepared to believe the invented religions and spurious claims to authenticity that you get in Glastonbury. There is, for example, an artefact called ‘The Blue Bowl’ that was arranged to be ‘discovered’ 100 years ago, and it’s put about that it is the Holy Grail. One American I know felt very disillusioned when a group of us were looking at the chart for the ‘discovery’, and not taking remotely seriously this claim. She had thought for years that it was literally true, and had brought over parties of tourists from the USA where she introduced them to the ‘Holy Grail’. Mind you, there are plenty of Brits who are prepared to believe this sort of stuff, often members of what I call the English Head-mysticism tradition. They’ve often got degrees, they know about lots of ‘occult’ things, often spurious (in my opinion), such as the Glastonbury Zodiac, and they mistake their ‘knowledge’, which is endless, for wisdom. My considered response is a desire to strangle and pulverise and dismember these people, not out of hatred, but from a sincere wish that out of such annihilation something real may emerge.

I think, though, if you leave something spurious for long enough, what you get is an established religion that does act as a genuine vehicle for something more profound. Who says mythology has to be based on historical fact? Let’s just not confuse the two. But I’ll never be able to take seriously the idea that Christ or the Buddha, who were only in their early 30s, could possibly have had the level of wisdom they are credited with. At a certain age you have to start trusting your own experience, and I ask, has anyone reading this ever met anyone in their early 30s with a full quota of the sort of experience-based insight that you can very occasionally get in old people? And how could you tell, apart from knowing someone well? I also find hard to take seriously the idea that a military general, i.e. Mohammed, could have been God’s special messenger, unless it was the Old Testament God, which fits quite well.

In our astrology discussion group, which meets every couple of weeks and is generally quite anarchic but fruitful, the subject of a chart for Glastonbury keeps coming up. We base it on the date when Glastonbury was given its charter, which was on 23rd June 1705. The calendar has shunted forward by 11 days since then (it seems to have taken us a long time to establish exactly how many days!) giving 4th July 1705. But there’s no time of day given. But there is a traditional technique of putting on the ASC the planet that you reckon rules the chart or the event. This is how one of the Gemini Rising charts for the USA was generated: Uranus, the planet of revolution, was held to have ruled the Declaration of Independence, and it was in Gemini at the time. And why not? Astrology is based on the idea that there is a relationship between symbolic reality and experiential reality, and which end you want to start from seems to me a matter of choice. Which isn’t the same as fiddling the chart to fit the facts, i.e. the dark art of rectification, which I nevertheless practice, intellectually indefensible (to quote Nick Campion) as it is.

So what we were left with was deciding what planet to put on the ASC. Neptune seemed the obvious choice, Glastonbury being genuinely a place of pilgrimage, psychic experiences, multiple religions and candy-floss spirituality. We kept returning to this one every so often, and of course plenty of bits fitted, but we weren’t going Wow! Apart from anything, it made the ASC Aries, while Glastonbury can be a very hard place to make anything happen.

A friend reminded me a couple of months back that Glastonbury is traditionally the Isle of the Dead. I’d never really thought about it before (having been here 8 years) but I realised that yes, Glastonbury is a kind of Underworld, people are drawn to live here for reasons they don’t understand (or sometimes spat out very quickly), and almost invariably get immediately shoved into some deep transformational process, often painful, and at double the usual rate of intensity. That’s what happened to me when I moved here in Oct 1998, and things haven’t slowed down since. And now it’s feeling like time to go, I’m realising that I have been in an Underworld all this time without quite knowing it, and that I’m slowly emerging into a more ordinary, concrete, collectively-lived reality again. And because it’s an Underworld, it’s not a place for overt achievement, for 10th House stuff. I’ve found it’s been a good place to build up skills, and do some good work, but it’s always held back, I can keep things ticking over but not much more. If you want to achieve things while living in Glastonbury, I think you often need to have your work elsewhere. And that, I think, is why you get so many wonky projects going on in Glastonbury, all these courses and teachers, for example, where more often than not there’s something a bit odd about them. And plenty of people who can’t see that.

So yes, Glastonbury is an Underworld, and therefore you can argue it should have Pluto on the ASC at 18 Leo. As soon as we looked at this one, everyone started going Yes! This one feels right! There’s still some questions about the Moon, but not on my part: 4th House Sag, it welcomes pilgrims and visitors from afar by the bucket-load. And Moon conjunct Chiron: I notice it time and again when people visit, something gets moved on or healed for them. And Sun conjunct Jupiter in 11th House Cancer: there is a strong community dimension to Glastonbury. It’s square to 9th House Neptune: it’s a ‘spiritually’(Neptune) based community, a good bit of it daft and weird (Neptune). There’s plenty more I could say, but I’ll leave it there.

GORDON BROWN AND CHIRON

For the last 10 years, the relationship between Tony Blair and his Chancellor Gordon Brown has defined the British Labour Government. Despite his unprecedented success in winning 3 consecutive Labour victories and his huge majorities in Parliament, Tony Blair has at the same time been at the mercy of his Chancellor in a way no other British Prime Minister has ever been. Gordon Brown has a big following of his own within the party, and for Blair to have sacked him at any point would have made it extremely difficult for him to govern. And Gordon Brown has used his position as Chancellor to control the other ministerial departments to a degree that is also unprecedented.

In the election to become leader of the party in 1994, Brown did not stand so as not to divide the party (so he said: he would have lost had he stood). He has since built on this myth that he sacrificed his own ambitions for the sake of the party, and has made it seem like he has a right to be the next leader, and that Blair has been repeatedly treacherous in not standing aside for him.

It looks like his moment will finally arrive during the course of this year. There have been mutterings about someone standing against him in an election to be leader, but no prominent MP has put their name forward yet. If one did stand and lost, he/she could expect no largesse from Gordon Brown: their ministerial career would be over.

If I admire anything about Tony Blair, it is his ability to contain the feud with Gordon Brown. Unlike Brown, Tony Blair is not vindictive. I don’t think Gordon Brown is a leader of people – I think he is tyrannical – and I think his reputation as a brilliant Chancellor, so necessary for his self-esteem, is overblown. The fact is that the West has been in a period of sustained economic growth for a long time now, and Brown has managed not to get in the way of that. It was the Tories who set up the conditions for the boom in the UK. If he has achieved anything, it has been in raising large amounts of cash through taxes to put into the public services, without alienating the voters by raising personal income tax.

There seems to be a widespread perception that the man is ‘not right’, and also a sense that we have no choice but to have him as our next leader. This is not a good omen, and the opinion polls put the Tories well ahead if Brown becomes leader.

Astrologically, he continues the Chiron/Damage theme that we have seen in both Bush and Blair. Both men have a prominent Chiron, and in both cases the transits to or from Chiron have reflected the irrevocable and self-inflicted damage they have done to their reputations through the Iraq War.

Bush’s Chiron is central to his chart, being both conjunct his Moon and square to his Sun, and the failure of his Iraq venture has fatally damaged his whole Presidency. In 2003, as the Iraq War got under way, transiting Chiron in Capricorn squared his natal Moon-Chiron and opposed his Sun. This was not a good omen, and as Chiron moved on to conjoin his Descendant at 7 Aquarius in 2006, the chickens came home to roost. Public opinion turned decisively away from him, and he is now a lame-duck, ‘damaged’ President.

Blair’s Chiron is not so central to his chart, but it is conjunct his MC in Capricorn. And we see the same pattern as with Bush. In 2003 Blair had his Chiron return, and in 2004 Chiron conjoined his MC. In 2006, as the failure of the Iraq War became accepted politically, Chiron conjoined Blair’s North Node at 7 Aquarius. This year it conjoins his Moon. The Iraq War has not been central to Blair’s leadership in the way that it has been with Bush, but it has still done him enormous damage. Apart from the damage to national self-respect that his toadying to Bush has caused, the huge issue has been the falsification of evidence in order to provide grounds for war. To my mind, there could hardly be a more serious offence than this, and a lengthy jail-term should be the outcome. But it won’t be, and I think Blair has that common psychopathic ability to cheerfully carry on as though he’s done nothing wrong.

Gordon Brown has natal Chiron at 1 Capricorn, conjunct his MC at 5 Capricorn. Given that his leadership appears flawed before it has even begun, it is not hard to predict that Chiron is going to play a major part in his trajectory as PM. Blair had 5 years as PM before Chiron was activated and damaged his premiership. In Brown’s case, the transits to and from Chiron will begin almost straight away. Being PM is not going to be a happy experience for him. He has lusted after the job for years, and it is going to turn into ashes. And it will be a self-inflicted wound.

When I do readings for people, Chiron normally reflects some psychological injury early in life, and not of one’s own making. So it is interesting to see, through these political figures, Chiron representing the self-inflicted damage we can bring about later in life, if we don’t develop the self-awareness that Chiron necessitates.

From Brown’s progressions and transits, we can see that 2007 is mainly about the ascent to power, but that the trouble will begin straight away.

Gordon Brown: 20 Feb 1951 8.40am, Giffnock, Scotland. (See also my 2 earlier blogs on Gordon Brown, Should Gordon Brown Be Leader? and The Sexy Mr Brown.)

This year he has the following: Prog Moon opposite Prog MC and natal Sun, and Prog MC conjunct natal Sun. His solar return (SR) has Sun sextile Pluto and (a bit of trouble here) Moon and Venus square to Pluto. His converse SR has Pluto and Neptune conjunct the MC. Tr Chiron is opposing his natal Moon all year. So he certainly looks likely to become PM, but he will have problems around people accepting him and liking him – popular appeal – from the word go (the Venus, Moon, Pluto trouble in the SR, tr Chiron opposite Moon).

Brown has a natal 12th House Mercury (much of his chart is hidden in the 12th) opposite a Moon-Pluto conjunction, which describes his continual power-seeking and plotting. In 2008 Chiron will conjoin his Mercury and oppose his Pluto. This way he has of going about things is likely to seriously damage him next year. Pluto will also be conjoining his natal Chiron all of 2008. With natal Chiron conjunct MC, his general reputation will become damaged. This theme is repeated in Converse Prog Chiron conjunct CP ASC all year.

Uranus will also be conjoining his passive-aggressive 12th House Mars in Pisces in 2008, reflecting the infighting that will be going on, and his difficulties in genuinely asserting himself in relation to others. His Solar Return for 2008 has Pluto conjunct ASC opposite Mars conjunct DESC, further confirmation of the likely power struggles and infighting within his government. This SR chart repeats the Chiron theme through Moon opposite Chiron, and reflects his difficulty in governing through a Sun-Saturn opposition.

Brown’s astrology for 2008 suggests his premiership will be everything one might have feared from his current reputation. He will be forced to call an election by 2010 at the latest, and that year he will have transiting Pluto conjoining his MC. It seems to me that this will signify him losing the general election.

There is, of course, a very slim chance that Labour will come to its senses and not elect Brown as their leader this year. This would be extremely difficult for him to accept, and in this case I think his upcoming astrology would reflect that lack of acceptance, and the damage it will do to his reputation.

THE US PLUTO RETURN

According to one poll last year, 27% of 18-26 year old college students in the USA had doubts that NASA went to the Moon. In another 2006 poll, 38% of Americans suspected that the government assisted in some way with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A 2003 poll found that 70% of respondents believed there was a plot to kill Kennedy.

I’m not concerned here to pass any sort of favourable or unfavourable comment on these beliefs. What I’m more interested in for now is the enduring level of mistrust in the US government that these beliefs reflect – a level of mistrust that may or may not be justified. This mistrust, if anything, is intensifying. The 27% who doubt the Moon Landings are educated college students from the younger generation, a sign of things to come. And the level of mistrust over 9/11 is phenomenal.

It is not just this particular Bush administration that is mistrusted: it seems there has been a heightened mistrust ever since the cover-ups over both Vietnam and Watergate. (I didn’t know it, but the young Colin Powell was involved in the My Lai cover-up). But it is reaching new heights as Pluto finishes his time in Sagittarius and moves on into Capricorn. Pluto in Sagittarius demands the Truth, and in the UK Blair’s lies over Iraq have become an honesty issue in an unprecedented way. But in the UK we do not have the level of mistrust in the government per se as you get in the USA.

What occurred to me recently is that this level of mistrust cannot endure indefinitely, something has to give, and with Pluto soon to enter Capricorn, it is likely to be the form of government itself that changes. AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AS WE KNOW IT MAY WELL NOT SURVIVE THE PASSAGE OF PLUTO THROUGH CAPRICORN.

The planet Uranus was discovered in 1781, 5 years after the American Declaration of Independence, and just before the conclusion of the War of Independence. The revolutionary nature of this struggle is rightly associated with this planet, particularly as it was discovered during this period. But Pluto was at 28 Capricorn at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and I think this is just as important. Pluto is also revolutionary, but not in the sudden, precipitate, ideological way of Uranus. Pluto change tends to be more of a gradual process with an enduring outcome, in which the old is completely cleansed and a new centre of power is established – either within oneself, or in this case, within a nation. And it was in Capricorn, the sign of government.

In the US, Independence was not just about the country ridding itself of rule by what had over time become a foreign power – i.e. the British. It was also the British – and European – form of rule, monarchy, that was overthrown, to be replaced by elected government (even then there were many who didn’t have the vote.) It was a shift of power (Pluto) to the people (Moon): Moon conjunct Pluto in the July 2 chart, Moon in Aquarius – democracy – in the July 4 charts. It also emerged as a radical de-centralising of power, which was spread between the legislature, the executive, the judiciary, and the individual states.

So with Pluto returning to Capricorn next year, and reaching its natal position of 28 Capricorn in 15 years time, America is about to complete its first full Pluto cycle as a Democracy. It seems to me that the system was very well thought through and in many ways works well. I like, for example, the fact that Senators are only elected every 6 years. This means they have the leisure to take a considered, long-term view, without having to worry all the time about responding to changeable public opinion. And I also like the fact that members of the House of Representatives are re-elected every 2 years. This means that in an urgent situation such as Iraq, where the national self-interest is being harmed by an intransigent President, the situation can be addressed relatively quickly via the ballot box.

But there is also this huge mistrust, which Pluto in Sag has revealed and heightened, and which I think Pluto in Capricorn is likely to address – gradually, culminating around 2022 as Pluto reaches its natal position. What form this will take is anybody’s guess.

Revolutionary activity began in America long before 1776. It started around 1760, with Pluto in late Sag conjunct the Galactic Centre, which is what we have now. So the Revolution itself was the outcome of Pluto’s journey through Capricorn over about 16 years, having been seeded by Pluto’s conjunction to the GC. When the time was ripe, Uranus joined in, and the USA was born.

It might be worth asking: is the current level of antipathy and mistrust towards the US government comparable to that felt towards the British in the run-up to 1776?

What, I wondered, might be going on around 2022, when the US has its Pluto return?

First of all, the Presidency itself has a transit of Uranus conjoining the MC in 2023.

The US Sibly Chart has Prog Uranus conjunct Prog MC in 2023-4.

The Sibly also has a converse Prog Pluto, Moon and MC conjunction in 2024, all around 25 Cap, near the degree of natal Pluto, and within 1/2 a degree of each other. (Converse Progressions are calculated by going backwards a day for a year instead of forwards, and they can indicate conditioning from the past that is influencing the current situation.) With the MC signifying the government, this converse line-up suggests that around 2024 the US government will be experiencing a shake-up that was inherent in its founding.

The 2 July 4pm chart has a natal Moon conjunct Pluto (the chart ruler) in Capricorn, and in 2022 this chart will have Prog Moon conjunct Prog Pluto.

The list seems to just keep running. There is going to be a big shake-up, some fundamental re-thinking of the way America is governed, around 2022/3, and there will be a long process between now and then to get to there.

Other charts also say something similar. The chart for the Federal Constitution in 1787 has a conjunction of Prog Uranus, MC and Moon in 2023-4. In 2020/1, Prog Neptune conjoins Prog ASC.

The Presidential inauguration chart for 2021 has Pluto conjunct MC at 26 Capricorn. And a LOT of tension: Sun, Saturn, Jupiter conjunction all square to a Moon, Mars, Uranus conjunction. Also Sun conjunct Pluto, Moon square Pluto.

The inauguration chart for 2025 (assuming there still is a President by then) has Sun conjunct Pluto conjunct MC opposite a Mars-IC conjunction. So these Presidents won't be having an easy time of it.

The thing about Progressions is that they take centuries or even thousands of years to repeat themselves (except the Moon). If we were dealing with transits, we could more easily say oh, this is a cycle the US has been through before. But with progressions, we are encountering something entirely new, partly because America is a young country. For example, the US Sibly Prog Mars went retrograde for the 1st time ever in 2006, and will remain so until 2087: and what we may be seeing, via Iraq, is a long-term military reversal - the first ever - for the USA.

So with all these Progressions around Pluto, Uranus, the MC and the Moon ganging up in 2022/3, we are likely to see something completely new come into being, a whole new phase, a reformed governmental system. And it's likely that the process is beginning around now.