David Myatt And Anton LaVey

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

°°°°°°°°°

Traditional And Modern: The Two Types Of Satanism

There are basically two types of Satanism: (i) the ‘modern American’ type manufactured and propagated by Howard Stanton Levey – better known under his aliases of Anton LaVey and Anton Szandor LaVey – and (ii) the ‘traditional Satanism’ as manifest in the Occult philosophy and the praxis of the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) as developed and expounded by the pseudonymous “Anton Long” which is widely believed to be {1}{2} a pseudonym used by the neo-nazi extremist, and “theoretician of terror” {3}, David Myatt.

The Satanism Of Levey

The modern Satanism of Levey is based on the premise that Satan is a symbol of the carnal, the selfish, the egoistic, nature of human beings, with satanism understood as manifesting the raison d’êtres of ‘might is right’, of ‘lex talionis’, and of the individualistic ideas expressed in Ayn Rand’s Objectivism {4}.

This type of Satanism promotes “the total satisfaction of the ego” {5} and obeying the law of the land {6}.

The Satanism Of Anton Long

The traditional Satanism of Anton Long is based on the scholarly premise that – as described in the O9A text The Geryne of Satan {7} – (i) hasatan – the satan – refers (in the Septuagint) to the chief adversary (of the so-called ‘chosen ones’) and to the chief schemer against those who regard themselves as the chosen people of God/Jehovah, and (ii) “a satan” historically (in the Septuagint) refers to someone who is an adversary of and who thus is pejoratively regarded (by those so opposed) as scheming, as plotting against those who regard themselves as the chosen people of God/Jehovah.

Thus, for the O9A, a satanist is someone who is heretically opposed to those who believe they are the chosen people of God/Jehovah, with O9A satanism understood as an antinomian – amoral, heretical – means to such exeatic personal experiences as shape and evolve an individual’s character and understanding. {8}{9}.

The contrast between the Satanism manufactured and propagated by Howard Stanton Levey and the Satanism developed and expounded by Anton Long is perhaps best illustrated by comparing their respective lives and their respective writings, for one would expect their respective types of Satanism to be reflected in their own lives and in their writings.

A Contrast Of Lives

The life of Howard Stanton Levey consisted of conducting carnivalesque – and sometimes fetishistic – ‘satanic’ rituals while dressed like Mephistopheles in some amateur production of Marlowe’s Faust; selling membership in his showmanry Church of Satan while telling members to “obey the law”; pontificating – and giving lectures – about his type of satanism; giving interviews to journalists; hosting parties for hedonists and Hollywood-types, and boasting about his past.

Levey, for instance, boasted that as a seventeen year old he worked in the Beatty circus and handled lions and tigers, although circus records from that time showed that no one named Levey or LaVey worked for them. He boasted that he had worked as a photographer for the San Francisco police department although they had no record of anyone called Levey or LaVey working for them.

Levey boasted that he had an affair with Marilyn Monroe, and yet again there is no documentary evidence to substantiate his claim. He boasted that he worked in a burlesque theatre called Mayan and met Marilyn Monroe there whom he claimed worked as a striptease artiste although the owner of the theatre at the time – Paul Valentine – denied it was a burlesque theatre, stated Levey never worked there, with there also being no documentary evidence that Monroe worked there as a striptease artiste.

Levey boasted that he enrolled on a criminology course at the City College in San Francisco although the college had no record of his enrolment under his real name, Levey, or under the La Vey alias he often used.

Thus the life of Howard Stanton Levey does indeed exemplify his type of Satanism: hedonistic, egoistic, boastful, materialistic, and showmanry. In common parlance: all mouth and trousers.

            In contrast to Levey, “Anton Long” – aka David Myatt – is a “principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution” {10}, was “the mentor” who drove someone to kill three people {11}, who before and after 9/11 publicly praised bin Laden and al Qaeda, called the 9/11 attacks ‘acts of heroism’ and urged the killing of Jews {12}, who preached “race war and terrorism” {13}, who wrote “a detailed step-by-step guide for terrorist insurrection with advice on assassination targets, rationale for bombing and sabotage campaigns, and rules of engagement” {14}, who travelled and spoke in several Arab countries about Jihad {15}, who was a bodyguard of England’s principle neo-nazi activist, Colin Jordan {16}, who took over the leadership of the violent neo-nazi group Combat 18 when its previous leader was jailed for murder {17}, who is an “example of the axis between right-wing extremists and Islamists” {17}, who is a Martial Arts expert {18}, who was imprisoned twice for violent offences in connection with his neo-nazi activism {17}, and who in 1998 was arrested for conspiracy to murder and for other offences {14}{19}.

The life of Myatt does indeed exemplify O9A Satanism: actually or potentially harmful, destructive, pernicious, baleful, misleading, deadly; bad in moral character; malevolent, offensive, sly; and hard and difficult. In common parlance: extremist, violent, and terrorist.

A Contrast Of Writings

The sources used by Howard Levey – evident in his much-vaunted ‘satanic bible’ and in his letters – are populist interpretations of the likes of Nietzsche and Ayn Rand, populist books about psychology, with the anonymous polemic titled Might Is Right much plagiarized. Since Levey could not read Ancient Greek, Latin, and Arabic, when writing about Satan, Iblis (Shaitan) and the medieval “grimoire” tradition of magic(k) that derived from such earlier Arabic works as Ghayat al-Ḥakim and also from some medieval Latin esoteric texts – such as those of Marsilio Ficino – Levey had no knowledge of such primary sources and had to rely on populist books and the interpretations and interpolations of others. Thus in his understanding of the Biblical Satan he had to rely on translations, unable as he was to read the κοινή Greek of the Septuagint.

Such sources and populist interpretations are also much in evidence in texts written by Aquino, who according to his own account {20} aided and contributed to the production of Levey’s ‘satanic bible’ and his ‘satanic rituals’ books. Like Levey, Aquino could not read Ancient Greek, Latin, and Arabic, and also used populist summaries of philosophies and weltanschauungen, ancient and modern. Thus, in his The Crystal Tablet of Set, populist summaries of philosophies and weltanschauungen, ancient and modern, precede a quite minimalist and vague presentation of ‘satanist’ and/or of Temple of Set ideas. Thus, a chapter on ‘ethics’ consists of 12 pages of populist summaries of the likes of Plato, Hegel, Marx, et al, followed by a meagre few paragraphs concerning good and evil in an occult context, and which paragraphs merely present rather cliched personal opinions, such as that “there is thus no easy answer to the question of whether a given magical act is good or evil” and that “it is up to the magician to determine what judgments – by which judges – will be important”. As befits such pseudo-intellectualism, the references in such texts are often to populist works (such as The Social Contract by Robert Ardrey) just as quotations from such people as Plato are invariably in translations, not by Aquino, but by someone else.

Thus the writings of Howard Stanton Levey – and those of Aquino, his helper – do indeed exemplify the type of Satanism found in The Church Of Satan: populist, plagiaristic, reliant on the interpretations and interpolations of others, and unoriginal. In common parlance: plebeian, mundane.

            In complete contrast, Myatt has “fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic and possibly Persian, [and is] possessed of a gifted intellect and apparently a polymath,” {21} and thus can read primary esoteric, classical, and alchemical sources, and the Greek texts of the Septuagint (the Old Testament) and the New Testament, in their original language. Thus when “Anton Long” writes in the O9A text The Geryne of Satan about Satan he does so based on a scholarly knowledge of the Greek text of the Old Testament.

In addition, when Myatt – in contrast to both Levey and Aquino – writes of ethics and about ‘good and evil’ in, for example, chapter IV – Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God – of his 2013 book Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos, he provides passages in Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic, along with his own translations. Similarly, when discussing ethics in his recent book Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, Myatt provides the relevant Greek texts (such as from the Gospel of John) and his own translations.

Thus the O9A writings of Anton Long do indeed exemplify O9A Satanism: intellectually and historically based {22}, scholarly, original. In common parlance: a cut above the rest.

Conclusion

The contrast between the life and writings of Howard Levey and Anton Long could not be more stark.

Levey was a showman, a dilettante, a plagiarist, a charlatan, and a mundane.

Anton Long, however, was a practical – a hands-on – extremist and Faustian man as well as an intellectual, a scholar, a martial arts expert {18}, “emblematic of the modern syncretism of radical ideologies” {23}, and well-described as an “extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual” {24} who undertook “a global odyssey which took him on extended stays in the Middle East and East Asia, accompanied by studies of religions ranging from Christianity to Islam in the Western tradition and Taoism and Buddhism in the Eastern path. In the course of this Siddhartha-like search for truth, Myatt sampled the life of the monastery in both its Christian and Buddhist forms.” {25}.

Which global odyssey formed only part of his fifty year quest – his personal hermetic anados (ἄνοδος) {26} – along the Seven Fold (Sinisterly-Numinous) Way of the O9A culminating in his discovery of Lapis Philosophicus {27} and thence the living of the life of a reclusive Mage, and thus who is a modern example of the ancient Rounwytha tradition, whose

            “perceiveration is of the nameless, wordless, unity beyond our mortal, abstract, ideations of ‘sinister’ and ‘numinous’, of Left Hand Path and Right Hand Path, and also – and importantly – of ‘time’. For it is our ideation of ‘time’ – with its assumption of a possible temporal progression, via various temporary causal forms, toward something ‘better’ or more ‘advanced’ or more ‘perfect’ (in personal or supra-personal terms) – that underlies the magian/patriarchal/masculous approach that has dominated, and still dominates, Western occultism and esotericism in general, fundamental to which is a hubriatic egoism: the illusion that is the individual will.” {28}

Such is the modern heresy of the O9A which esoterically and exoterically contradicts the modern Satanism of Levey based as the Satanism of Levey is on the premise that Satan is a symbol for plebeians, and thus of the carnal, the selfish, the egoistic, the mundane, nature of human beings.

In stark contrast, the Satanism of the O9A is of a Faustian, a Promethean, and life-long endeavour to defy all ideations, all causal forms, and reach out to personally and in practical ways experience and learn from both the ‘sinister’ and the ‘numinous’ and to thus discover Lapis Philosophicus.

T.W.S. Nexion
July 2018 ev

This is a revised and enlarged extract from an article first published in May 2018 ev.

°°°

{1} Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas (2003). Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press.

{2} Senholt, Jacob C. (2013). Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles. The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors). Oxford University Press. pp. 250–274.

{3} “Theoretician of Terror”, Searchlight, July 2000.

{4} According to Levey, his satanism is “Ayn Rand with trappings,” qv. K. Klein, The Washington Post, May 10, 1970: The Witches Are Back and So Are Satanists.

{5} Categorizing Modern Satanism, in The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press, 2012, p.92.

{6} The Black Pope and the Church of Satan, in The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press, 2012, p.80.

{7} The text The Geryne of Satan is available from https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/geryne-of-satan/

{8} The Place Of Satanism in the Order of Nine Angles, in The Joy Of The Sinister: The Traditional Satanism Of The Order Of Nine Angles. e-text, 2015. Available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/joy-of-the-sinister.pdf

{9} Pathei-Mathos and The Initiatory Occult Quest, in The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles. e-text, 2016. Available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/the-esoteric-hermeticism-of-the-order-of-nine-angles/

{10} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (United States Air Force), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{11} Sunday Mercury, July 9, 2000.

{12} Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2.

{13} Searchlight, July 2000.

{14} Whine, Michael. Cyberspace: A New Medium for Communication, Command and Control by Extremists, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 22, Issue 3. Taylor & Francis. 1999.

{15} Mark Weitzmann, Anti-Semitism and Terrorism, in Dienel, Hans-Liudger (editor), Terrorism and the Internet: Threats, Target Groups, Deradicalisation Strategies. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series, vol. 67. IOS Press, 2010. pp.16-17.

{16} Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. Hitler’s Priestess: Savitri Devi, the Hindu-Aryan Myth and Neo-Nazism, NYU Press, 2000, p.215

{17} Michael, George. (2006) The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas, p. 142ff.

{18} “Right here, right now”, The Observer newspaper, February 9, 2003.

{19} Vacca, John R. Computer Forensics: Computer Crime Scene Investigation, Charles River Media, 2005, p.420.

{20} See, for example, his two volume book The Church Of Satan, published in 2013, which documents the history of Levey’s Church of Satan.

{21} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the 21st Century, Sirius Academic Press, 2013. pp. 85-122.

{22} qv. (i) The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles. e-text, 2016. Available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/the-esoteric-hermeticism-of-the-order-of-nine-angles/ and (ii) https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/11/20/western-paganism-and-hermeticism/

{23} Perdue, Jon B. The War of All the People: The Nexus of Latin American Radicalism and Middle Eastern Terrorism. Potomac Books, 2012. p.70-71.

{24} Raine, Susan. The Devil’s Party (Book review). Religion, Volume 44, Issue 3, July 2014, pp. 529-533.

{25} Kaplan, Jeffrey. Encyclopedia of white power: a sourcebook on the radical racist right. Rowman & Littlefield, 2000. p. 216ff; p.512f

{26} In regard to the hermetic anados, qv. Myatt’s translation of and commentary on the Poemandres tractate of the ancient Corpus Hermeticum, included in Myatt, David, Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates, 2017, ISBN 978-1976452369.

{27} qv. https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/the-enigmatic-truth/

{28} https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/the-rounwytha-way/


Article Source:

https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/traditional-and-modern-the-two-types-of-satanism/


Advertisements

More Academic Inaccuracies

David Myatt

David Myatt

More Academic Inaccuracies

Given the lamentable state of modern academic research into esotericism, as highlighted in several previous articles such as the one titled The Occult And Academia {1}, it was no surprise to read the many mistakes about the Order of Nine Angles and about Mr David Myatt in a recently published book by a major and well-respected academic publisher.

The book in question is Satanism: A Social History written by Massimo Introvigne (professor of Sociology of Religions at Pontifical Salesian University, Torino) and published in 2016 by Brill, Leiden, as volume 21 in the series Texts and Studies in Western Esotericism. The book consists of 651 pages and retails in the UK for around £156.

A section of the book – under the heading Satan The Prophet – is devoted to the Order of Nine Angles (pp. 357-364) with Introvigne writing, among other things,

1. That Myatt was Anton Long was “confirmed” by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke in his 2003 book Black Sun.
2. That Myatt’s middle name is “William”.
3. That Senholt “offered a number of elements confirming that Long was indeed Myatt”.
4. That the ONA “acknowledged that Anton Long was a nom de plume of Myatt”.
5. That Myatt joined Jordan’s British Movement in 1969.
6. That the ONA Black Mass “derived from Huysmans and the rituals of the Church of Satan.
7. That the Temple of Set “perceived the competition [the ONA] as dangerous, particularly when in the late 1980s some members of the Temple of Set started considering themselves members of the ONA at the same time. In 1992, Aquino and his British representative David Austen launched an internal purge, expelling from the Temple of Set those members who also wanted to remain in the ONA.”

In respect of his claims:

§ Introvigne not only, due to a lack of detailed research, gets several facts wrong – for instance, Myatt’s middle name is Wulstan, not William; he joined British Movement in 1968 not 1969 – but also does not provide any evidence from primary sources (or indeed from any sources) in support of several of his claims, such as the claim regarding the ONA Black Mass, and the claim regarding the Temple of Set. His claims are just stated as if they were fact. In the matter of the claim about Aquino, for example, it seems that Introvigne did not bother to contact Aquino himself to ask for his side of the story.

§ In addition, Goodrick-Clarke did not confirm anything regarding Myatt being Long, he merely stated that Myatt was Long and accepted without question that the MS titled Diablerie – a notorious forgery {2} – was written by Myatt and that it recounted details of Myatt’s early life. Goodrick-Clarke did not provide any evidence from primary sources that Myatt was Anton Long nor regarding Myatt having written that MS.

§ Likewise in respect of Senholt, for Senholt also provided no evidence from primary sources that Myatt was Anton Long. Instead, he claimed – without providing any evidence from forensic linguistics – that there was a similarity of writing style between works by Myatt and Long, a claim disputed by several other academics (Monette, Sieg, Kaplan), and also claimed that Myatt’s extremist adventures (neo-nazi followed by radical Muslim) were ONA Insight Roles and thus linked Myatt to the ONA even though such Insight Roles only last around a year while Myatt’s neo-nazi adventures lasted thirty years (1968-1998) with his time as a radical Muslim lasting over ten years (1998-2009). Furthermore, Senholt made no mention of the many things about Myatt’s life which contradict his thesis, such as Myatt’s marriage in a Christian church and his writings praising Christianity and especially Catholicism. {3}

§ As a source for his claim that the ONA “acknowledged that Anton Long was a nom de plume of Myatt” Introvigne cites the text A Modern Mage: Anton Long and the Order of Nine Angles, neglecting to mention four important facts.

(1) “That since Anton Long retired in 2011 no one publicly speaks ‘on behalf of the O9A’. Nor can anyone now or in the future speak ‘on behalf of the O9A’. As befits the O9A principle of ‘the authority of individual judgement’. For even if the person is O9A, as the author of that book is, they are just presenting their own opinion, their own interpretation, just as these answers – and the earlier ones – are someone’s opinion, their interpretation, of matters O9A.” {4}

(2) That the authors of that text are presenting their personal opinions about Myatt and Long and provide no evidence from primary sources in support of such opinions.

(3) That others associated with the ONA have lambasted that text, writing that “the authors seem to have committed the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc; concluding that Anton Long is (or must be) Myatt because his publicly documented life apparently fits the paradigm of what someone ONA should be like and should do in the real world.” {5}

(4) That the nature of the ONA – with its independent nexions and its principle of the authority of individual judgement – means that those associating with the ONA have diverse and often different opinions about various matters, including about whether Myatt=Long and including about the ONA itself. {6}

Conclusion

As noted in a recent ONA polemic,

“Correctly understood, a scholarly approach means undertaking a meticulous, unbiased, research into a specific subject over a period of some years using, wherever possible, primary sources; formulating an opinion based on such learning, such knowledge, as results from such research, and in respect of writing academic papers and books about the subject providing copious, accurate, references to the source material.

Primary sources include direct evidence such as original documents dating from the period under study, and accounts and works (written, verbal, published or unpublished) by such individuals whose life or whose writings or whose works form part of the research. In addition, if such sources – documents or accounts or writings – are in another language, then it is incumbent upon the scholar to have knowledge of that language and thus be able to translate such documents themselves, for a reliance upon the translations of others relegates such sources from the position of primary ones to secondary ones.

Hence, if the author of an academic book or academic paper writes about a person and/or about their works, or about an event, using only secondary sources – sources containing the opinions, the interpretations, or the conclusions of others – then the opinion, the interpretation, the conclusions of that author about such a person and/or about their works, or about an event, are unauthoritative because unscholarly.” {7}

The last paragraph sums up what Introvigne writes about the ONA and about Mr Myatt, for since Introvigne only offers the opinions, the interpretations, or the conclusions of others, providing no evidence from primary sources, his own opinion is unauthoritative because unscholarly. That he also makes some basic factual errors and obviously has not done detailed research into the ONA (as evident in not knowing about the authority of individual judgement and other matters) highlight once again the shoddy nature of quite a lot of academic research into Western esotericism in general and modern Satanism in particular.

K.S.
2017

{1} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/more-unscholarly-research/
{2} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/about/a-sceptics-review-of-diablerie/
{3} The facts which contradict Senholt’s thesis are enumerated by Myatt is his essay A Matter of Honour available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/myatt-a-matter-of-honour/
{4} Some Questions About The Order of Nine Angles (2016), Part One. Available (April 2017) at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/o9a-q-a/
{5} https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/review-of-the-radical-philosophy-of-anton-long/
{6} A classic example of differing ONA views is given in the text at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2017/02/15/aristocracy-anarchy-or-nihilism/
{7} https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/another-typical-anti-o9a-example/


Related:

Academia, David Myatt, And The Order of Nine Angles
(pdf)

David Myatt And Satanism
(pdf)


Michael Aquino And David Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt

 

For a long time I, personally, have always respected Michael Aquino, founder of the Occult group the Temple of Set. Why such respect? Because, judged by his actions over some forty years and judged by what individuals who have known him have personally said or written about him to me, I judged him to be a person of integrity. Someone, that is, who would not knowingly besmirch a person’s reputation and someone who had and who upheld certain moral standards. Which is most befitting given that he was for years an officer in the United States military.

Thus it is with pleasure that my attention was drawn, by a comrade, to a posting that Aquino (on the 11th of October 2016) made on an internet forum and in which posting he not only reproduced a letter he had received, in the 1990s, from David Myatt but also mentioned that his correspondence with Myatt was “mutually courteous and respectful.”

Since some people who have associated themselves with the Order of Nine Angles seem intent on maligning and mocking Aquino, I reproduce in full here the aforementioned posting in which Aquino quotes from a letter he received from Myatt. The posting is as follows:


[Begin quotation]

My last correspondence with David Myatt [under his own name] occurred in February-March 1998 and was mutually courteous and respectful.

°°°

 David Myatt to M.A. 2/28/98:

Sir: It has come to my attention that you have frequently mentioned my name in connection with a certain “occult” group, alleging among other things that I am some sort of leader or sole member of this group. This is completely untrue. I am not “Anton Long” nor “Stephen Brown”. Neither am I an occultist. As for Mr C Beest, if you know people who had ever met him, you would know he is not yet thirty years old and could not possibly be me, being as I am almost fifty years old.

I am certainly a National-Socialist – that is, a Nazi. I have been a Nationalist-Socialist since I was sixteen years old. For your information I once many years ago infiltrated an occult group in the hope of using that group for NS ends – to propagate National-Socialism. It seemed a good idea at the time.

As far as I am concerned, National-Socialism and the occult are incompatible, and NS and Satanism certainly are. No one can be both a NS and a Satanist – you are either one or the other.

Yours, etc.
D. Myatt

°°°

So let us take Mr. Myatt at his word: that he is not “Long/Brown/Beest”, has no connection with “ONA”, and as he is a professed Nazi considers that it would be impossible for him to simultaneously be a Satanist.

In this case my disapproval of the “ONA” consequent to both the writings under its name and the manners of its professed adherents, are no reflection on Mr. Myatt. I do not know him personally beyond our brief, courteous correspondence almost two decades ago. I have absolutely no reason to wish him ill.

[End quotation]


While a few O9A’ers will doubtless believe that Aquino has fabricated that letter from Myatt, I personally am of the opinion that it is genuine since I accept Aquino’s honesty in this matter and know that Myatt’s letter expresses what Myatt has consistently written and said over many decades. For instance, that Myatt did “infiltrate an occult group in the hope of using that group for NS ends” and that he did believe that “National-Socialism and the occult are incompatible” as evidenced by his 1990s text  Occultism and National-Socialism (pdf).

What I find of particular interest is that the letter from Myatt apparently dates from shortly before – or shortly after – he was arrested for ‘incitement to murder’ following a Dawn Raid on his home by police officers from S012 (Special Branch) stationed at Scotland Yard.

Richard Stirling
2016


The Question of Anton Long And David Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

The following essay is included in the pdf compilation A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A.

°°°°°°°°°

The Question of Anton Long And David Myatt

 

For decades allegations have been made that Anton Long – founder of the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) in the early 1970s {1}{2} and author of most of its Occult texts {3} – was the pseudonym of David Myatt, a former neo-nazi activist regarded as “the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s” {4} and as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” {5}

Such allegations – including the one that since Myatt is Long he is also a Satanist – have led to some academics, and many Occultists, to assume – or to accept without question – that Myatt is Long {6}, despite Myatt’s persistent denials and despite no one, in some thirty years, having provided any credible evidence based on research using primary sources {7}. The only detailed examination, so far, of a possible connection has been by Senholt who devoted some 24 pages to the topic {8} although his conclusion that there is a connection is ‘not proven’ because his analysis is based on secondary – not primary – sources and he relies on various assumptions, such as there being some similarity between some events in Myatt’s life (neo-nazi activism and involvement with radical Islam) and some of the Insight Roles suggested by the O9A, and that Myatt’s idea of a ‘Galactic Imperium’ is echoed in some texts written by Anton Long.

As JR Wright mentioned in her essay about Myatt and the ONA {9}, those who accept that Myatt is Anton Long and therefore a Satanist have to explain:

not only the lack of factual evidence proving he is a satanist but also many other things about Myatt’s life, among which are the following:
1) His time as a Christian monk and his many subsequent writings praising Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general.
2) His Occultism and National-Socialism text – written in the 1980’s and republished in the 1990’s and again around 2006 – and in which he denounced occultism.
3) The “small matter” of him being married in Church in accordance with the Christian ceremony of marriage.
4) His semi-autobiographical poetry.
5) His voluminous writings about the hubris of extremism, and about his rejection of and his remorse concerning his extremist past.
6) An extensive seven hour search of his home by six Detectives from Scotland Yard in 1998 failed to find any occult items or literature.
7) A forensic analysis, by the police, of Myatt’s seized computers following his arrest in 1998 failed to find any occult material.


The Early Life Of David Myatt

Several academics have referred to Myatt’s early life {1}{8}{10}(11}(12}, stating that he was born, in 1950, in Tanganyika (now known as Tanzania) when that land was still under British control; that he was educated there; that he later lived in the Far East, and came to live in England in the late 1960s. While these details are sketchy, Myatt himself in his autobiography Myngath provides a few more details {13}. He relates, for example, that he was privately educated in Africa, and that during his teens in the Far East he studied Ancient Greek and learned to read Sanskrit. In several letters and later writings he mentions trips, in the early 1970s, to the Middle East and Iran accompanied on at least one trip by a gay female (possibly Iranian) friend he had met at university. {14} In addition Myatt has mentioned that his father provided him, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, with an allowance sufficient to enable him to travel where he liked and purchase whatever books he happened to be interested in.

This rather eclectic, somewhat itinerant, and possibly privileged early life (in a letter to one correspondent Myatt mentions his family having servants), is certainly interesting and most certainly deserves further research based on primary sources. Which research might provide some clarification in respect of the assumption that Myatt was/is Anton and thus that “the role of David Myatt [is] paramount to the whole creation and existence of the ONA.” {15}

Preliminary research by several academics has cast doubt on the rumour that David Myatt is Anton Long. For instance, George Sieg wrote that he considered the identification to be “implausible and untenable based on the extent of variance in writing style, personality, and tone” between Myatt and Long’s writings. {16} Jeffrey Kaplan also suggested that Myatt and Long are separate people, {17} as did Connell R. Monette who wrote that it was quite possible that ‘Anton Long’ was a pseudonym used by multiple individuals over the last 30 years. {18}

Hearsay And Rumours

For decades, individuals such as Michael Aquino – famed for his foundation of the Occult group the Temple of Set and for his earlier friendship with Howard Stanton Levey – have, for whatever personal and/or ideological reasons, circulated rumours about Myatt and about the O9A. Thus, in a recent (2016) posting on some internet forum Aquino not only made known his ignorance of O9A esoteric philosophy but also unequivocally stated, yet again, that “he [Myatt] was confirmed to me as Anton Long,” while failing to provide any evidence from primary sources to confirm such hearsay. {19}

Given such hearsay, and the continued allegations that Myatt is Anton Long, it is incumbent on those who repeat such hearsay and such allegations to provide evidence based on primary sources. Until they do – and until academics  also provide credible evidence based on research using primary sources – it will remain a mystery as to whether David Myatt really is (or was) Anton Long.

R. Parker
2016
v. 1.07

Notes

{1} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the Twenty First Century. Sirius Academic Press, 2013. p.86

{2} Senholt, Jacob. Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles, in Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors), The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Oxford University Press. 2013. pp. 254–256

{3} Senholt, op.cit. p.256; Monette, op.cit. p.86

{4} Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2

{5} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (USAF), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{6} For instance, Goodrick-Clarke, in his book Black Sun simply states that Myatt is Long and then proceeds to use their names interchangeably. Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press. 2003, pp.215-216.

{7} Primary sources include direct evidence such as original documents dating from the period under study, and accounts and works (written, verbal, published or unpublished) by such individuals whose life or whose writings or whose works form part of the research. In addition, if such sources – documents or accounts or writings – are in another language, then it is incumbent upon the scholar to have knowledge of that language and thus be able to translate such documents themselves, for a reliance upon the translations of others relegates such sources from the position of primary ones to secondary ones.

{8} Senholt, op.cit. pp.250–274.

{9} JR Wright. David Myatt, Satanism, and the Order of Nine Angles. e-text, 2012 (revised 2016). A pdf version is currently (September 2016) available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/david-myatt-and-the-o9a/

{10} Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas. 2006. pp. 142-144.

{11}  Kaplan, Jeffrey. Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right. Rowman & Littlefield. 2000. p. 216ff; p.512f

{12} Goodrick-Clarke, op.cit. pp.216ff

{13} Myatt, David. Myngath: Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. 2013. ISBN 9781484110744. It should be noted that, according to academic criteria, an autobiography is a primary source.

{14} Some his letters have been published in a 2009 pdf collection edited by JR Wright and titled Selected Letters of David Myatt, 2002-2008. They are currently (September 2016) available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/selected-letters/

Some of Myatt’s other correspondence is included in part 2 and 3 of his book Understanding and Rejecting Extremism: A Very Strange Peregrination, [ISBN 9781484854266], while many of his post-2012 essays are autobiographical, such as the two Questions for DWM of 2014 and 2015, and the Development Of The Numinous Way, available (as of September 2016) at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/

(15} Senholt, Jacob. The Sinister Tradition. Paper presented at the international conference, Satanism in the Modern World, Trondheim, 19-20th November, 2009.

{16} Sieg, George. Angular Momentum: From Traditional to Progressive Satanism in the Order of Nine Angles. International Journal for the Study of New Religions, volume 4, number 2. 2013. p.257.

{17} Kaplan, Jeffrey. Religiosity and the Radical Right: Toward the Creation of a New Ethnic Identity, in Jeffrey Kaplan and Tore Bjørgo (editors), Nation and Race: The Developing Euro-American Racist Subculture. Northeastern University Press. 1998. p.115

{18} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the 21st Century. 2013. Sirius Academic Press. p.92

{19} In respect of Aquino’s latest rumour-mongering, qv. his recent diatribes about Myatt on some self-described ‘satanic’ internet forum, some of which are reproduced in the “Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again About The Order Of Nine Angles” and the two-part “The Sad Sad Story of Michael Aquino” sections of the following pdf document: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/lambasting-levey.pdf