The Difference between Uranus and Eris


One day this past October, my partner had described a crazy day he’d had. Eventually, I said, “That’s what we might call Uranian.”

His first assumption was that I was referring to Eris, as he was more acquainted with Eris by way of the Pricipia Discordia than he was with Uranus in astrology — he insists that he doesn’t understand astrology, and I take that sometimes as a hint not to talk about it and sometimes as a challenge to get him to understand it.

When he realized what I had actually said he asked what Uranus was about and I tried to explain with emphasis on the differences between Uranus and Eris. I struggled. What were the differences between Uranus and Eris and why had his day been Uranian rather than Erisian?

My first thought was that I had said his day had been Uranian because I am more acquainted with Uranus than Eris, thus Uranus comes readily to mind while Eris does not. However, I did continue to wonder. I needed to sort this out.

Eris, I believe, does indeed signify chaos, though, of course, not only. Uranus signifies disruption of old patterns. Often, Uranus is associated with what is referred to as the “Promethean principle,” that is, to liberation, surprises, flashes of insight, and the like.

Now the question. If a pattern is given and it is interrupted, is this due to the principle of chaos or to a principle of “liberation” from the old pattern? Is this due to a disruption of the old pattern or to the introduction of chaos?

Let me rephrase that last question. If a pattern is given and it is interrupted, is this due to the introduction of chaos or to a disruption of the old pattern… making way for the new?

Let’s consider this with a few examples. Note the differences.

Example 1



Which of these is Uranian and which is Erisian? Okay, now I’ll show it in a different way with another example.

Example 2

1: YHRYHRYHRY4529703845


One more, just to confuse you a bit.

Example 3



Okay, let’s unpack this. In each example the first item is Uranian and the second is Erisian. Example 1 should be easy to understand. Uranus changed the pattern to another pattern while Eris changed the pattern to chaos. Eris obliterated the pattern entirely. Uranus merely introduced a new one to replace the prior one.

Example 2 I hear is a bit trickier. Uranus does more than merely switch one pattern to another. Uranus switches categories entirely from letters to numbers. Notice that there is no pattern in the second category. There is no pattern to the numbers, but the category remains thereafter. Eris obliterates the pattern without introducing anything new.

I think Example 3 should be easier to understand. Uranus simply reverses the pattern. You see the sudden shift there in the center without introducing anything new. Eris, however, didn’t simply remove the pattern from existing elements as in Example 2, but introduced total chaos. Any given character might have been included, but without a pattern.

So what do we learn here?

Eris obliterates patterns. I highlighted a few of the many ways that could be done. Uranus obliterates patterns, too, but the similarity with Eris ends there. What I show is that Uranus introduces something new. In the first example it was a new letter while maintaining the overall structure. In the second example it was simply a new category — numbers — and in the third it was the direction of the pattern. Neither Uranus nor Eris imply a pattern, however, a pattern may be found after a Uranian event, but almost never after an Erisian event — such is the nature of chaos.

The essence of Uranus is not inherently creative, but revealing. Uranus pulls the rug out from under you, flips the light switch, opens the trap door, drops the lightning bolt, blows up the volcano, lifts that writer’s block, and meows pitifully at your door in the cold to change your life forever. Uranus releases, surprises, and brings in the new. Uranus is freedom in the form of lifted restraint.

Eris is chaos, yes. Gleeful destruction. But not only. Eris is freedom. Eris is freedom in its truest, fullest, most complete form. Eris is absence of bounds, completely, a failure to comprehend restraint altogether, but Eris is not content merely to sit in the midst of formlessness like Neptune. Eris needs a new thing to destroy, and here is the great paradox of the Erisian impulse. Eris needs restraint. Eris needs to walk within a world of order if she is to have any fun, if she is to have any meaning. Eris must understand order if she is to smash it to pieces. Eris must be insightful. This is why Eris would choose to do such a thing as toss an apple.

Eris revealed herself to the human psyche after New Horizons was launched, before it arrived, and after astronomers had grown uncomfortable with such an odd thing as Pluto being a planet. Eris upstaged Pluto, with Mike Brown’s help “killed” him, and attempted to pull him out of our collective psyche, overturning our deepest, most intense motives and… generating discord about it. Eris rolled the apple and caused us to turn away from our shadows, from our psychic underworlds, from our deepest fears and desires. Turning away from our fears doesn’t make them go away. If we bury an impulse it invariably sprouts somewhere else. These are the seeds sown of chaos.

Ten years later, here they come. Have you seen the fear in the news?

The point of confusion, I find, is a tendency to associate Uranus with disorder, which I believe is incorrect. When Uranus drops a flash of insight, disorder may result, but the Uranian part of it — the sudden insight — is not an act of disorder of itself. Nor is it an ordered act. It is a flash, and order may be contained within the insight, but the content of the insight is not necessarily the Uranian aspect of it.

If you need a bit more convincing, please consider this: Uranus is associated with such things as the Copernican revolution. Did Uranus create the entire new world, the entire new way of seeing our place in the Universe, or did Uranus simply open our eyes to it?

To finish. Eris: insightful discord. Uranus: a flash and a new thing.

On Bernie: Countering Common Criticism

I’m going to address some common criticism from Hillary supporters.

Hillary supporter says, “You mustn’t vote for Bernie because he isn’t electable.”

First, I think this is flat-out false. Second, it’s poor reasoning. Think about this for a moment.

Person A wants to vote for Person D, but thinks Person B will vote for Person C, so Person A votes for Person C instead. Person B wants to vote for Person D, but thinks Person A will vote for Person C, so Person B votes for Person C instead.

Did that work out for anyone? Yes. Only Person C. Because of a lie.

That’s oversimplified, I get it. Really, they’re afraid that Person D can not defeat Person E or F, which is the real goal, but the problem is the same: voting on the basis of what you think others will vote.

Ignoring all of the poor logic of it, what we wind up with is the “lesser of two evils” argument. It’s been useful in the past, but it doesn’t work here. It doesn’t work now. Hillary would be the lesser of two evils, sure. Bernie would not. Bernie is that rare precious, decent politician one would actively want to vote for, not one to use to vote against someone else, though that will be a very important side effect. Look at it this way. Bernie can’t be allowed to not be elected. This is too important, and too rare of an opportunity.

Still there remains the fear that Bernie can’t defeat the Republican candidate and Hillary can.

First, I believe that’s just wrong. Those on the right may disagree with some of Bernie’s methods more than Hillary’s, but they tend to hate her more, personally. Isn’t that right? Hillary has decades of dislike piled upon her, and Bernie’s already proving himself to exceed expectations — don’t believe everything you think. Further, if the “millennials” get out to vote, Bernie will win, no contest. The question is whether they will or not.

Second. This is another instance of poor reasoning. Here’s an analogy to help. You’ve noticed that an apple has fallen from a tree and you’re really hungry. You’d really like to eat this apple. You go after it, but see that a rock is closer and there might possibly be an obstacle to getting the apple — a boulder or a tree root; use  your imagination. So you pick up the rock because it’s more obtainable.

Did that work out for you? Let me know how that rock tastes. Like sweet, sweet victory, right? Right?

Bernie is the only candidate who has not been bought out. He refuses money from super PAC’s and the big corporations. This is the primary reason I took interest in him, and then everything else became a reason to take interest in him. Roughly everything that comes out of his mouth is almost exactly what I would want a candidate to say. He’s direct and clear in his meaning. He is genuine.

Hillary, on the other hand, speaks in buzzwords and frequently all of her words put together don’t mean much of anything. This is standard speech from a politician, and I think we all have very good reason not to trust it. You never get that from Bernie.

I do not trust Hillary. It is the case that Hilary is old-school. Hilary is “establishment”. Hilary is a part of the problem that Bernie seeks to solve. You’ve probably heard these arguments before. You’re welcome for hearing them again.

So this is what you do. You climb over that boulder and get the apple. If it has rolled away or been carried off by a raccoon before you could get to it, that’s unfortunate, but the only correct course of action is to climb over the boulder and look. You have to try.

Not climbing over the boulder and picking up the rock instead is a complete waste of your time. Hillary is not an apple.

I distrust every part of the political process as we know it. I have felt nothing but complete apathy regarding politics my entire life until Bernie showed up. Now I feel a strong compulsion to pour everything I have into supporting him, which, so far, isn’t much, but isn’t nothing.

Now here is another thing commonly said of Bernie: “He’ll never actually get done all the things he claims he’ll get done.”

Response: Yeah. I know. So what?

The thing is that Bernie knows there are apples on the other side of the boulder. What is he going to do? Climb over it and look. I expect Hillary to chip a tooth in the name of victory for the Democratic party.

An Astrologer Begins to Look at the Election

I came across this in the Guardian.

I am only an amateur astrologer, but this analysis seemed especially amateurish itself. First reason: Sun Signs. Typically I write someone off right there, but I’ve learned not to do that, just to be nice and for the sake of curiosity. Then I hit ctrl+f and typed in “Moon”. Nothing. Thus, what we are looking at is an attempt at mundane astrology without a single mention of the Moon. Strikes me as odd.

The image is that the Moon draws down to Earth what happens above. The Moon is taken as a bridge. It is the nearest and the fastest. Electional and mundane astrology, as I understand, can not be done without reference to the moon. It seems what we have here is a case of the modern astrologer looking for any kind of connection whatsoever and running with it.

The third reason and the strongest: the astrologer in the article claims that Mars will be in Aquarius on Election Day. That’s not entirely false, but very nearly. Mars does move into Aquarius on November 8th, but not until 9 minutes to midnight. Christopher Renstrom gets an extra hour for being in Salt Lake City, sure, but most people will not be voting at that time. 10:51 pm is not the time we should be looking at.

The moment the results are announced are not the proper moment to be looking at anyway, symbolically speaking, though I doubt Mr. Renstrom even considered that. The moment the results are announced is the symbolic moment for the people’s relationship to the announcement of the next president. It is nearly a symbolic moment for the presidency, but the inauguration is much more useful for that.

My point just now is that Mr. Renstrom shamelessly moved the data to fit his theory. He practically lied when he said Mars will be in Aquarius on Election Day.

Now that I’ve spent all of this time talking about it, what time do we look at? Given that there is no one time that everyone will be voting, unless we have a good guess about when most of them will, which may not be useful anyway, probably the most fruitful thing to do would be to take a look at a Sunrise chart. If you need an explanation for that, the Sunrise chart is like the natal chart for the whole day. The houses are like a symbolic imprint of the Sunrise upon the sky. Think about that for a moment. I hope it becomes clear. If not, just recognize that it’s standard procedure when there is no exact time for an event. I do assert again that there is no exact time for this event.

Okay. Sunrise over where? The proper symbolic location would be Washington, D.C., would it not?

Here it is.


Presidential Election 2016 - 2

I’ll first just give a quick overview of my method and what I’m showing you, as this is my first post on the subject. Keep in mind that I am 100% self taught.

On the outside of the big wheel are the twelve sections of the ecliptic named for constellations and created by the seasons. This is the tropical zodiac. Cancer is the summer solstice. Capricorn is the winter solstice. Aries and Libra the equinoxes, spring and autumn respectively.

Just inside that is another ring. Those are the terms. I won’t explain them here. We can also see the wheel is divided by twelve in another way. The lines radiating from the center of the circle demarcate the houses. The zodiac relates to the year just as the houses relate to the day. The houses are like the zodiac of the day, and they are the reason it is so important for an astrologer to have an exact time for the event he or she is looking at, in most cases the time of birth.

Within the houses are the planets. I primarily use the traditional septenary of planets — everything up to Saturn, which can be seen without a telescope — but I think it’s a huge mistake to disregard the others entirely. Ceres and Eris are in here as well simply because I feel that they are significant, even though I don’t quite know what to make of them yet. I do feel that most astrologers who have used Ceres in their charts have done so incorrectly; they just fail to understand her. Sedna is in there just for kicks. I usually never include Sedna and you will hear nothing about her here.

I do use only the five Ptolemaic aspects. What David Cochrane gets from his efforts, if anything, will not be what he set out to find.

One last thing, just to give you a look. These are most of the other pieces of information I look to when interpreting a chart:

Election Data

Very quickly. Planets and houses, positions, non-Ptolemaic essential dignities, planets’ distances from the ecliptic, planets’ speeds relative to average, and antiscia. Chain of disposition and chain of detriment are a bit like the chain of command among the planets, which changes continually. These charts given by the program are simplified but definitely useful.

Okay. Now, let’s do what Mr. Renstrom did and look at the chart for New Hampshire for today, the Primary.

New Hampshire Primary 2016

Here, the Sun is in very poor condition and afflicted by a strong Mars. A very strong Mars. Second, I’ll point out that the Moon is just barely past new, but essentially lost, and applying to Neptune by way of Ceres, weakened by proximity to the Sun.

Mars is in charge in this chart, in the ninth house, the house of philosophy, lording over Mercury, Venus, and Pluto. Mercury, in turn, rules over a Jupiter in very poor condition, except for his conjunction with the north node, and his strong placement in an angular house.

The Uranus-Pluto square continues on top of Mercury and Venus.

Now, let’s return to election day. This is examining the claim that whoever wins New Hampshire wins the election.

Presidential Election 2

The first thing to look at is the Moon. She is just past waxing quarter at the Immum Coeli, in friendly aspect to Venus, Uranus, Ceres, and Eris. Uranus, Ceres, and Eris are united just there. Make of it what you will because I won’t.

Mars is again in good strength but essentially impotent. He’s shouting and boasting but no one hears him. No one cares. It is notable that he characterizes matters of communication in this chart.

The most interesting thing here is the mutual reception between Jupiter and Saturn. Jupiter is Saturn’s supporter and doesn’t understand it but moves along joyfully anyway:

Tradition walks through growth, which enthusiastically, if clumsily, works on behalf of this tradition and the greater public.

Mercury is in poor condition, at odds with the Moon, who is only accidentally in a strong position.

The Moon seeks to bring the conversation to foundations, families, wealth that doesn’t come in the form of coins or numbers in the computer, however, those are not necessarily things to be absent — this very probably is still referring to material wealth.

The conversation is brought to an understanding of the difficult, ugly, uncomfortable things that need to be done — that need to be done — and the many changes of many kinds required of them. Uranus is exactly on the cusp of the house that rules manual labor as well as illness. As I see it, the sixth house in the context of mundane astrology is always a good indicator of the working class. It is an indication of those who work hard in poor conditions doing things no one else would like to do.

The Sun, the central figure of the whole ordeal, is regarded positively by forces of upheaval.

Back to the primary. A short, simple analysis:

Enemies of the authority work openly and in secret to forcefully confront it with powerful ideas in cooperation with the forces that have already long been in play to disrupt and overturn. The election characterizes the working class as weakened, but with greater than expected strength, moving by necessity toward a nebulous ideal.

Condense the message of Election Day:

Tradition walks through growth, which enthusiastically, if clumsily, works on behalf of this tradition and the greater public. The conversation is brought to families and material wealth as it relates to difficult, ugly, uncomfortable things that must be done and the many changes required of them, with an emphasis on the needs of working class. That which is in power has potential to be overturned easily, or possibly will easily overturn.

These were the two messages I was able to interpret the charts. I don’t see a clear connection, not only in the messages, but in the structure of the charts themselves, which Renstrom pretended to have done. Really, Renstrom was just bullshitting everything, so far as I can tell.


Iowa Caucuses 2016

Now for the caucuses, for completeness.

The biggest difference here is the Moon, as it’s a difference of only a few days. A powerful idea was felt, as according to the last analysis, though it was poorly expressed, lacking coordination. Here is an indication of having acted immaturely.

I don’t want this post to be too much longer. Later I’ll post charts for each of the candidates as I’m able to find them.

Now, to end, to wrap up this analysis of this article, let’s look at each of Mr. Renstrom’s claims, one by one.

For the New Hampshire primary and election night, “the planets mirror each other, which is really quite surprising,” said Renstrom.

This is the basis for his entire claim. I don’t think he says any other thing but this. Do they mirror each other? For the primary, Mars is in the twentieth degree of Scorpio and the Sun is in the twenty first degree of Aquarius. In November the Sun is in the seventeenth degree of Scorpio and Mars is in the thirtieth degree of Capricorn. That’s a difference of three degrees, and a whopping twenty-two degrees. This is not all that remarkable. I had complained earlier that he hadn’t mentioned the Moon. Yet further, he might have found the Moon’s position in Aquarius, much closer to the Sun’s today, also significant. Not a word of it.

Next: People with a really strong Mars signature will do well.

Hillary very much is not one of them, nor is Rubio. Saying that Rubio’s Mars in Aquarius is astrologically significant is bullshit. Straight up. Mars is strong with Bernie and Cruz, but for neither of them so much as Jeb (but we can’t be sure without Bernie’s birthtime). Trump’s Mars is very weak. But there’s no point to considering any of this in this context because the first claim, that the Sun and Mars mirror each other, is wrong and would not be particularly important if it were true. Remember, Mars is unaspected on Election Day. Mars will not be calling the shots then.

Now my favorite. That Jupiter moving through Virgo is good for Bernie because he’s a Virgo.

First, he is not a Virgo. His Sun is in Virgo. Here’s another way of looking at it, assuming that the birth time guess I got from astrodienst is correct (It’s probably not): Jupiter has moved through his ninth house, emphasizing his philosophy and extending his reach and his voice. Then it moves on to the midheaven and his north node, with the north node during a nodal return, during the New Hampshire primary. It only gets better from there as Jupiter even touches on the significator for his career, and then does the exact same thing into his eleventh house when Jupiter takes a special focus on the wider population. How about that?

The only thing Renstrom really gets right, though, is Cruz’s strong birth potential for economic disaster, and not just for himself. It seems clear enough to me.

Okay. Last but not least. Prepare yourself. This one is really bad.

Seriously, it will hurt if you know anything about astrology. So brace yourself for the stupid.

‘Who’s going to win come November? The planets vote Clinton.’


“The presidential election takes place when the sun is in Scorpio.”

W. T. F…

It hurts. It hurts so much.

Renstrom is so full of shit.

2016 Election Season Kraken Analogy

I am going to use an analogy to explain why I am so excited about Bernie Sanders.


This is what the election season looks like to me so far:


We are on a ship being attacked by the Kraken.

Hillary says, “Hey, I have another boat. Let’s all get on it.”

Bernie says, “How about we get away from the great big monster? I propose we use my helicopter. Let’s all get on that.”

Some guys off to the right are shouting, “Yeah, go, Kraken!” There is no use even listening to them. They just think the giant tentacles are neat or something.

If it were any of Team Kraken versus Hillary, I might vote. And if I did it would be against team Kraken. I would still expect us to go down.

If it were any of Team Kraken versus Bernie, I would vote enthusiastically for Bernie. We might still go down, but there is at least a sliver of hope that we won’t.

Plan A is not an option; we’re sinking. We have been sinking for a long while. Plan A assures that we are destroyed. Playing it safe assures destruction, slowly but certainly. Who is proposing a plan B? Anyone?