Yesterday’s Daily Telegraph had an opinion peace headlined “The Prime Minister has suffered a humiliating defeat. She misread the EU, misread her party and misread Parliament”. For a politician, it’s very bad to misread things. Your success depends on having your finger on the pulse. You know you can’t please everyone, but you need to maintain a minimum level of support. Furthermore, you have to understand your enemies and their weaknesses. Theresa May made a number of misreadings. In the 2017 election, she proposed that elderly people pay more for their care, if they have available funds. This single suggestion destroyed her campaign. Then in her handling of Brexit negotionations, she seemed to understand neither the EU negotiators nor her own party. But to make matters worse, she persisted in pushing a Brexit deal that had minimal support in parliament. In other words, she tried to push through a piece of legislation that had no chance of winning through. As a result, she crashed to a major defeat.
From an astrological view, we don’t know Theresa May’s birth time. However we do know that she was born on October 1 1956, making her a Libra. In many cases Librans make excellent politicians, because they can charm enough people to put themselves in power. May’s predecessor, David Cameron, was a Libran, and he had amazing social skills. In fact, his ascent up the political ladder appeared to be effortless – he really was to the manner born. However Cameron, having facilitated the Brexit referendum in 2016, resigned the moment it went against him. We’ll therefore never know how his Libran Sun would have dealt with the challenges of negotiating with the EU and with parliament. But I am sure he would have done a better job than Theresa May.
If you’re a Libra, particularly in politics, you have to understand the golden rule. You cannot please everyone – because if you try you’ll end up pleasing no-one. Theresa May tried to please everyone, and as a result got nowhere. Supporters of Brexit regarded her compromise with the EU as being too weak, while supporters of Remain saw her weakness a chance to water down or even stop Britain’s exit. May should have identified her own position, early in her premership, and stuck with it.
Another feature of Librans which I have noticed is that they like going behind people’s back. I think this is because they want to make everyone happy. They will tell people what they want to hear, but their actions won’t match their words. In May’s case, this means that she undercut members of her own cabininet – agreeing a position with them, and then contradicting it through her own actions.
However, I don’t want to push May’s Libran Sun too hard. In female charts the Moon is usually more important then the Sun. Unfortunately, we don’t know what her birth time was, and we don’t know where her Moon is. If we set the chart for noon on October 1 1956 the Moon is in Virgo. Indeed, if she was born after 9.30 am her Moon would still be in this sign. On the other hand, if May was born before 9.30 am she would have the Moon in Leo. This does mean that May’s Moon is close to Margaret Thatcher’s, which was at 28 degrees 38 minutes Leo.
This mean that whatever May’s Moon sign, it is close to Regulus, the royal star, associated with kingship. It was not only Margaret Thatcher who had the Moon on Regulus, but also Winston Churchill. Clearly May is not of their calibre, yet having the Moon on Regulus allowed a politician of mediocre ability to reach the top. Overall, I think May has her Moon in Virgo rather than Leo. If she did have her Moon in Leo, I would have expected a little more star quality.
Virgo is a sign that can be mechanistic. It goes through the stages of a process, one step at a time. It’s the details that matter. Unfortunately the broader picture can often be ignored, and that includes the vagaries of human nature. May has often been described as robotic – for example, being called “Maybot”. But perhaps it’s just a case of her not seeing the wood for the trees. Matters aren’t helped by the fact that she her Moon makes a square aspect with Saturn in Scorpio. This blocks her emotional responsiveness, and makes her seem rather wooden. She goes through the script, in a Virgoan way, but it’s not smooth-flowing and it’s far from natural.
The sign Virgo is well represented in May’s chart, whether or not her Moon is here. She has both Mercury and Jupiter in this sign. Jupiter is not happy in Virgo – it is in its detriment. In itself this is not a big deal, because Jupiter is a slow-moving planet, and many people born in 1956 will have this placement. However not everyone is British Prime Minsiter. Jupiter is an expansive planet, which focuses on the big idea. When it is placed in meticulous Virgo it is caged. May has limited vision, and wants to focus on the details. This is a good character trait for a middle manager, but not good if you’re at the helm of a country that is trying to enact something as massive as Brexit.
Matter’s aren’t helped by the fact that her Jupiter in Virgo is in opposition aspect with Mars in Pisces. Astrologer Charles Carter described the Mars-Jupiter opposition as the worst in the book. May’s Mars and Jupiter are in mutable signs, and this opposition seems almost a separate aspect of her personality, that’s poorly integrated with the whole. A sensible woman, who sometimes takes surpising initiatives, that are not grounded in reality. May’s decision to call an election in 2017 might be connected with this aspect, likewise her suggestion that the elderly have to use more of their savings to fund their care. And when this suggestion caused a negative reaction among the electorate, she straight away changed her mind. Very mutable.
One can dig deeper into the Mars-Jupiter opposition. Neptune makes a 135-degree aspect to Mars, and it is passably close to a 45-degree aspect with the Mars-Jupiter midpoint. This highlights May’s capacity for taking the wrong initiatives – she gets confused, or listens to the wrong people, and as a result gets herself into trouble. Alfred Witte writes of this combination “Dissolution of promises. Misunderstandings. A hopeless relationship. Intentions are not executed”. So we have a woman who finds it difficult to deliver, and her promises should be treated with the greatest of caution.