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)


odal3

Lambasting Levey And Aquino
(pdf)

 

Contents include:

§ Anton LaVey And Anton Long: A Study In Modern Satanism
§ Knowledge And Culture Verses Plebeian Pretentiousness
§ The Satanic Bible
§ Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again About The Order Of Nine Angles
§ The Sad Sad Story of Michael Aquino


O9A. One Image, Ten Thousand Words

O9A Insight Role

 

In The Anonymous Denigration Of Myatt section of our article Modern Satanists And The Green-Eyed Monster we made mention of some allegations about Myatt by some anonymous propagandist and gave facts, omitted by the anonymous propagandist, regarding Myatt’s life. In another more recent article titled Suspicious Propaganda And The Exeatic Life of David Myatt, JB mentioned those comments, and concluded that in her opinion:

“in Myatt you have someone who seems to fit the profile of what an ONA person is or should be, regardless of whether he was or wasn’t Anton Long. That, at least to me and some others, make him someone to be admired and – perhaps – emulated.

That article by JB obviously upset the anonymous propagandist who replied with an article of his/her own, posted on his/her blog. In which article the anonymous propagandist again repeated his/her allegations and made the very silly blunder of claiming that Myatt was never interviewed by the BBC in the year 2000. This led to an exchange of opinions in the ‘comments’ section of his/her blog with the anonymous propagandist resorting to his/her usual tactic of ignoratio elenchi, writing that:

I wonder why even mildest criticism of Myatt and debunking his mythos bothers you. Oh wait, it’s rather obvious

To which we responded:

Once again you fail to admit your mistakes and instead of answering questions about why you continually attack and besmirch Myatt you (yet again) use ignoratio elenchi in an attempt to deflect attention away from yourself.

This led to a further exchange of comments, with the anonymous propagandist of course committing (yet again) the fallacies of argumentum ad hominem, ignoratio elenchi, and argumentum ad nauseam, the latter of which involved the anonymous propagandist repeating their mantra that they are only, really, truly, “demolishing the myths and legends that surround Myatt.”

There are no “myths and legends” surrounding Myatt; no need for such things because the documented facts of his life say all that needs to be said about him. Which is why, of course, the anonymous propagandist tries to discredit some of the sources that document aspects of Myatt’s life, writing as the anonymous propagandist does of “tabloid bloggers and shitty journalists and gullible academics.”

As a summary of the matter of the anonymous denigration of Myatt, and as an expose of the anonymous propagandist, we publish here a detailed reply addressed to him/her:


[quote]
Yet again you ignore the mistakes and the omissions you made about Myatt’s life. Instead, and as usual, you employ ignoratio elenchi and abusive ad hominem hoping that the attention of your readers will be diverted away from you and focus instead on the person who exposed your mistakes and omissions.

Judging by the replies here and elsewhere it’s a successful tactic. Which reveals just how gullible some people are.

It’s a tactic also used by self-described satanists when they, having written in derogatory terms about Myatt and the ONA, are taken to task for their errors and omissions and propaganda.

You wrote about Myatt’s life that {quote} The rest is mythos deliberately perpetrated… {/quote}

Which well describes how you and many latter-day satanists talk about Myatt. You and they perpetrate a myth about Myatt which you and they deliberately, month after month and year after year, propagate.

Your shared myth about Myatt goes like this (and we are paraphrasing your own words), “All Myatt ever did was take part in some minor street fights…talk to some Muslim friends, read Quran, attend mosques and participate in some Muslim forum…and write loads of propaganda.”

This myth – by omitting many documented facts about Myatt’s life – is meant to bring him down to the low level of the likes of Levey and try to show that he had an unremarkable rather ordinary life, and that – in your words – “he’s just an ordinary chap.”

You, however, omit Myatt’s violent years – during which he was arrested and convicted at least six times, and for which violence he served two terms of imprisonment.

You omit Myatt’s upbringing in Africa and the Far East and the fact that he attended a private prep school.

You omit Myatt’s leadership of a gang of thieves for which he was arrested and convicted on almost sixteen counts of “handling and receiving” stolen goods.

You omit what one academic described as “his 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.”

You omit the dawn raid on his four-bedroom detached village house and his arrest there by a Special Operations police unit in 1998 on charges of incitement to murder and his three years on bail following that arrest during which time detectives from Scotland Yard worked with the FBI, Interpol, and RCMP, to find evidence sufficient to convict Myatt in a court of law.

You omit his intellectualism, evident in his translation of and commentary on three of the tractates of the Corpus Hermeticism.

You omit that he publicly and under his real name, and when it was unpopular and dangerous to do so, defended the 9/11 attacks and bin Laden and thus made himself liable to arrest and imprisonment. You omit that he travelled in Muslim lands preaching Jihad when it was dangerous to do so given the Western invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. You omit that an article he wrote about Jihad was for years on the website of Hamas.

You omit his poetry, his published letters, and his post-2011 (rather intellectual) philosophy of pathei mathos. You omit many other documented facts about his life.

Little wonder then, given the facts of his complex, rather extreme and far from ordinary life, why one academic described David Myatt as an “extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual.”

It’s also little wonder why some ONA people – and some academics – consider his documented life as a practical example of what following the ONA Seven Fold Way to the stage of Magus means in real life.

Which brings us to the real reason why you and self-described satanists assiduously propagate your demeaning myth about Myatt. Because if Myatt really was Anton Long, with his life a practical example of the ONA Seven Fold Way, then his life debunks all your and their lies and propaganda about the Order of Nine Angles. Revealing as such a life does what the ONA, and what being ONA, means and implies.

Finally, not content with omitting numerous facts about Myatt’s life you try, just like a propagandist addicted to weasel-words, to discredit objective sources of information about Myatt’s life, calling such sources “tabloid bloggers and shitty journalists and gullible academics.”

All of which are indicative of not only the type of person behind your pseudonym but also of your motives and that of so many self-described satanists.

[/quote]

 

Conclusion

As noted in the above quote, the real reason why the anonymous propagandist – and self-described satanists in general – assiduously propagate their demeaning myth about Myatt is because if Myatt really was Anton Long, with his life a practical example of the ONA Seven Fold Way, then his life debunks all their lies and propaganda about the Order of Nine Angles, revealing as such a life does what the ONA, and what being ONA, means and implies in the real world.

 


Article source: https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/01/14/concerning-an-anonymous-propagandist/


Order of Nine Angles

The O9A Septenary

It really has been revealing how so many self-described satanists – and/or self-described adherents of a Western Left Hand Path – over the past ten or so years have moaned, via the medium of the internet, about the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A).

The following recent example is fairly typical, sent forth into cyberspace by someone who, previously claiming adherence to the ONA, was so disgusted by the apparent actions of the ONA that they declared that they had left the ONA:

“I would challenge a person who keeps tabs on the Satanic community to name a black magickal order besides the ONA which regularly expresses scorn for its own adherents… [several people] have been publicly shamed by more respected ONA members…[One person] joined the Order of the Nine Angles at one point prior to his public career. The nexion he joined plotted and attempted his assassination, as is recommended in some rarely perused ONA manuscripts about running a coven or temple.”

Now, let us re-write a part of that moaning to express the reality:

I would challenge a person who keeps tabs on the Satanic community to name a black magickal order besides the ONA which regularly expresses scorn for those who, desiring to remain anonymous, publicly claim adherence to the ONA. Several such individuals have been publicly shamed by more respected ONA members.

Furthermore, and more importantly, given that the ONA has for decades described itself as a Satanist group and has written thousands of texts about its ‘traditional Satanism’ what is so wrong with it being scornful of and shaming some anonymous individuals who have publicly self-declared that they are ONA?

The ONA is and was simply being Satanic in a practical way. For the ONA understands being Satanic as, among other things, being evil. Now, since evil is defined in the complete Oxford English Dictionary as:

(1) To harm or injure; to ill-treat. (2) Bad, wicked. (3) Doing or tending to do harm; hurtful, mischievous, misleading. (4) Offensive, disagreeable; troublesome. (5) Hard, difficult, deadly.

then the ONA is just being evil.

That latter-day self-described Satanists – following the likes of Howard Stanton Levey, the Yahodi – have attempted to redefine evil so that it does not involve any of the above is most amusing and indicative. That many self-described satanists criticize the ONA for actually preaching and doing evil is also most amusing and indicative.

So when the ONA demand anonymous individuals claiming to be ONA prove themselves and provides them with challenges and tests to ascertain their character, their esoteric knowledge, the ONA is practising Satanism, being Satanic. So when the ONA rounds on such individuals to see how they react, the ONA is practising Satanism, being Satanic. So when the ONA sometimes japes them or sometimes hoaxes them, the ONA is practising Satanism, being Satanic.

Also, let’s assume for the moment that the above fantasy about “assassination” is real and that the ONA actually does suggest that members of a nexion can challenge and attempt to assassinate a member or the leader/founder of that nexion. So what? That is being Satanic, being evil; presenting that member/leader/founder with challenges, with a test of his/her character, with a test of his/her fitness to hold such a position.

What, therefore, are modern self-described Satanists complaining about? That the ONA does not abide by the weedy, tame, definition of Satanism of such self-described Satanists?

True, the ONA does not, never has, and never will accept their weedy, tame, interpretation of Satanism.

Thus, despite all the rumours by self-described Satanists, the Order of Nine Angles has not changed at all over the decades. It is still “a dangerous and extreme form of Satanism.” All the ONA has done is made available more and more of its aural, esoteric, traditions (and the experience Anton Long acquired during his sinister and intellectual peregrinations) given how many individuals, over the last decade, have progressed to Internal Adept and given how many, having undertaken the necessary scholarly learning regarding Western esotericism and acquired the necessary sinister-numinous pathei-mathos, are in the process of approaching The Abyss with its melding of the sinister with the numinous and the consequent going-beyond all abstractions, dispensing as they then do with nomen and nomina.

But of course such a scholarly learning and such a willed, practical, sinister-numinous pathei-mathos are foreign to – unexplored worlds for – the latter day self-described (mostly plebeian) Satanist crowd who still, because of their hubris, wallow in such delusions as “Reality is what I make it… I because I am a self-declared Satanist am the highest embodiment of human life.”

DL9
December 2016 ev


Article source: http://www.o9a.org/2016/12/yet-more-amusement/


Order of Nine Angles

O9A

The Myatt Is Dead Hoax: An Analysis

Background

In early October 2016 a relatively new (free, wordpress) blog – claiming to be associated with Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) ‘insiders’ – published a post about the death of David Myatt in Egypt.

Although the post contained no verifiable information it was picked up by some ONA supporters leading to a thread containing hundreds of posts on a private ONA Facebook group and then to discussions about Myatt – some pro, some contra – on sundry internet forums including some extreme ‘right-wing’ political forums such as Stormfront. The rumor even appeared on social media platforms such as ‘Twitter’.

Just over a month after that initial blog post Myatt himself published, on his ‘official blog’, an item in which he made mention of rumors about his death: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/leaves-are-showering-down/

This quashing of the rumor about his death led to some ‘ONA watchers’ to conclude that some ONA ‘insiders’ has been conducting, via the medium of the internet, either some sort of ‘sinister jape’ or some sort of ‘social experiment’.

Analysis

The people who responded to the initial post neatly divide into four categories. (1) The majority who accepted the announcement as genuine, many of whom lamented Myatt’s death and/or praised his life and writing; (2) a minority who were skeptical and asked for independent proof of the claim; (3) a few individuals who, via internet forums and private e-mails, embellished the initial report in an attempt to besmirch Myatt’s reputation; and (4) some other individuals who reproduced, via the internet, such embellished derogatory reports and/or believed them.

Thus those in categories (3) and (4) were left with egg on their face when it was shown that Myatt was alive and well and dwelling in rural England.

Among ‘ONA watchers’ the consensus now seems to be not only that

“the Myatt is dead affair was also a test designed to check whether the O9A fans believe everything that is written online […] If you start a rumor, other people will repeat it, adding some crap of their own.”

but also that the perpetrators of the hoax did not foresee that some mundane(s) would embellish that hoax with “such crap” as might denigrate Myatt.

Which assumptions apparently ignore what the real consequences of the hoax were. To quote someone with an actual ONA pedigree who posted this on an extreme ‘right-wing’ political forum:

“If this Myatt is dead hoax has proved anything it is (1) that Myatt is still held in high regard by at least some White Nationalists; and (2) that ZOG and their lackeys and agents still hate Myatt with a vengeance and will go to any lengths to discredit him given their motto of “never forget, never forgive”, and (3) that Myatt may still be ‘in our camp’ given that his philosophy of pathei mathos is, albeit a mystical and spiritual philosophy, still firmly rooted in the Western (Greco-Roman) philosophical tradition and thus is part of our Western culture.”

For many White Nationalists rounded on those among their ranks who had spread malicious rumors about Myatt, accusing them of being agents or lackeys of ZOG.

In addition, as a result of the hoax many more people have bought printed books by Myatt and undoubtedly also viewed his website and blog with some of them most probably downloading some of Myatt’s writing from those sites. As a consequence there has also been a splurge of interest in Myatt’s life, in his writings both past and current, and also – most certainly and most importantly – a splurge of interest in the ONA.

A juvenile hoax perpetrated by outsiders? Probably. Because there is no evidence the pseudonyms used belonged to the same people who had used them elsewhere in the past.

But does all the interest generated in Myatt and the ONA, the ‘egg on faces’, the exposure of ZOG agents/lackeys, mean that the hoaxers achieved what they set out to achieve? Possibly, even if they were just some ONA fan-girls conducting some social engineering experiment via the medium of the internet.

R. Parker
2016


Related:

https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2016/10/01/the-sinister-polemics-blog/


Update, November 2016: The ‘sinister polemics’ blog has been deleted by its authors and is no longer available. A suitable end for such a suspicious venture by anonymous persons pretending to be O9A.

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

A recent post on the ‘sinisterpolemics’ blog – about the death of David Myatt, and which report our sources have yet to confirm – raises some interesting issues.

Given the rather anarchic nature of the Order of Nine Angles, and the nature of its Occult philosophy, anyone can associate themselves with the O9A and, claiming to be associated with the O9A, write about it, via the internet or otherwise, and set up an O9A-supporting internet blog or website. They can, anonymously, engage with others on internet forums and post about the O9A on various ‘social media’ platforms.

However, it is quite possible that some individuals doing such things are not really O9A but are intentionally spreading dis-information, providing a false impression of the O9A and its Occult philosophy, or are provoking others into making value judgements about, or inciting them to jump to conclusions about, the O9A and those who are O9A.

What is interesting is that so many modern satanists who are critical of the O9A, for whatever reason, seem to have taken some internet posts, some social media postings, or some blog, by some anonymous persons, seriously: that is, as giving “an O9A view of things” or “as representing the O9A” or, more often, as providing proof of their assumptions about or confirmation of whatever prejudice they harbour regarding the O9A.

How, therefore, can you tell if such blogs, internet posts, websites, comments on social media, and so on, are ‘genuine’ or provide a ‘correct’ view of the O9A? In short, you cannot.

All you can do is be sceptical and take time to consider the content, comparing it, for instance, with the pre-2012 writings of Anton Long and what can be deduced, about O9A Occult philosophy, from those writings. But even then there is no guarantee, given how three of the axioms of the Order of Nine Angles are (i) the authority of individual judgement; (ii) that everything O9A, including its Occult philosophy and its Dark Arts such as the Seven Fold Way, can and should be evolved, and can and should be challenged and changed; and (iii) that what is important is not what Anton Long wrote but pathei-mathos via a personal anados that is both ‘sinister’ and ‘numinous’, both esoteric and exoteric.

Where, then, does that leave such a blog as the ‘sinisterpolemics’ one? With everyone – O9A or O9A critic – rationally assessing it and its contents for themselves, and/or developing such Occult skills as can enable them to intuit the esoteric reality behind outer, exoteric, appearance.

R. Parker
1st October 2016


Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

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}

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. {16}

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

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} 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


David Myatt

David Myatt

It was with some amusement that I read – at disparate times some months apart – what two people wrote this year about Mr Myatt and lying. One blogger questioned how sincere Myatt was in his writings and wondered whether he deliberately spread ‘disinformation’ about himself, while an academic wrote in a recent book that “if scholarship has correctly identified him as the mastermind behind the Order of Nine Angles [then his denial of being Anton Long] does not bode well for his sincerity.”

I was reminded of their words (and so many similar ones) today when reading a column in The Guardian, and suggest that they and others – given their wonderment about and accusations regarding Myatt lying – read what the Guardian columnist Andrew Brown had to say in the Saturday 30 July 2016 edition of that newspaper.

Here, a few quotations from that column which may possibly answer their wonderment regarding and accusations about Mr Myatt lying.

“Why do the English lie so much? […] It’s not a coincidence that one of the classic novels about how to be an English gentleman is Beau Geste, in which the entire plot hinges on the moral necessity of lying. Honour demands all kinds of heroism and horrible deaths from the brothers, but it never asks them to tell the truth […] What makes English manners so peculiarly difficult is that you can never be entirely certain the person you are talking to is in fact lying. Sometimes they will be entirely sincere, even when it is not to their advantage to do so. Sometimes they will mean to be sincere, by saying something that you’re meant to understand is untrue, but fail, because you think they are telling the truth – and then the blame for their insincerity is entirely yours.”

R.P.
July 2016


O9A. One Image, Ten Thousand Words

 

O9A: Managing The Chaos?
(pdf)


Order of Nine Angles

O9A

Anton LaVey And Anton Long
(pdf)
A Study In Modern Satanism