Concerning The Vindex Mythos

David Myatt

Editorial Note: We publish here (in pdf format) an interesting and informative essay about David Myatt’s Vindex mythos, which Reichsfolk essay – with its study of Myatt’s Vindex: Destiny of the West and his Mythos of Vindex – shows that its basis is honor, an appreciation of the numinous, an understanding of the Magian distortion that has afflicted Western civilization, and an affirmation that National Socialist Germany was “fundamentally an instinctive and natural reaction to the dominance of the Magian ethos, and represented a mostly unconscious expression of the numinous, honourable, warrior ethos.”


Related:


One Man Above Time

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

David Myatt, Reichsfolk, Esoteric Hitlerism, and Savitri Devi

David Myatt: One Man Above Time
(pdf)

 


Myatt: Vindex, Destiny of The West

odal3

A facsimile of Myatt’s seminal text Vindex: Destiny Of The West as published in the January 1984 edition of the American Liberty Bell magazine edited by Virginia based George Dietz, a former member of the Hitler Youth who emigrated to America in 1957.

Vindex: Destiny Of The West
(pdf)


The Mythos Of Vindex

odal3

This is the first publication of the complete edition of David Myatt’s text The Mythos of Vindex, although various and sometimes substantial extracts from it have been published over the years. Written between 1998 and 1999, with some parts revised by Myatt between 2002 and 2005, it expands upon, refines, and develops the themes he wrote about in his 1984 pamphlet Vindex: Destiny of The West.

The Mythos Of Vindex
(pdf)


Selected Letters of David Myatt (2002-2008)

David Myatt

David Myatt

 

From the Introduction by JR Wright:

“Included in this volume are a selection of letters that David Myatt has written between the years 2002 and 2008, divided into two sections. These letters reveal a different side of his character – poet, Gnostic, Nature-loving mystic – to his more well known public personae, deriving as these public personae did from his political and religious peregrinations. It is in these letters that the “real” David Myatt speaks, shorn of his varied, and changing, public personae […]

It is my view that these letters are important for not only a correct understanding of Myatt himself, but also for understanding the development of his Numinous Way. Many of the later letters are intensely personal – and remarkably honest – and several deal with his feelings following the suicide, in May 2006, of his fiancée. It is also clear from many of these letters that, already by early 2002, he had begun to develop empathy and compassion as a basis for The Numinous Way and was quite aware of his own mistakes.”

The letters certainly, in my view, document some of the interior, spiritual, struggles that Myatt mentions in works such as his essay The Development of The Numinous Way and his autobiography Myngath
(pdf).


The Natural Balance of Honour

clytemnestra_kills_cassandrared_figure-c-430bce
The Natural Balance of Honour

The personal virtue of honour, and the cultivation of wu-wei, are – together – a practical, a living, manifestation of our understanding and appreciation of the numinous; of how to live, to behave, as empathy intimates we can or should in order to avoid committing the folly, the error, of ὕβρις, in order not to cause suffering, and in order to re-present, to acquire, ἁρμονίη.

For personal honour is essentially a presencing, a grounding, of ψυχή – of Life, of our φύσις [1] – occurring when the insight (the knowing) of a developed empathy inclines us toward a compassion that is, of necessity, balanced by σωφρονεῖν and in accord with δίκη.

This balancing of compassion – of the need not to cause suffering – by σωφρονεῖν and δίκη is perhaps most obvious on that particular occasion when it may be judged necessary to cause suffering to another human being. That is, in honourable self-defence. For it is natural – part of our reasoned, fair, just, human nature – to defend ourselves when attacked and (in the immediacy of the personal moment) to valorously, with chivalry, act in defence of someone close-by who is unfairly  attacked or dishonourably threatened or is being bullied by others, and to thus employ, if our personal judgement of the circumstances deem it necessary, lethal force.

This use of force is, importantly, crucially, restricted – by the individual nature of our judgement, and by the individual nature of our authority – to such personal situations of immediate self-defence and of valorous defence of others, and cannot be extended beyond that, for to so extend it, or attempt to extend it beyond the immediacy of the personal moment of an existing physical threat, is an arrogant presumption – an act of ὕβρις – which negates the fair, the human, presumption of innocence of those we do not personally know, we have no empathic knowledge of, and who present no direct, immediate, personal, threat to us or to others nearby us.

Such personal self-defence and such valorous defence of another in a personal situation are in effect a means to restore the natural balance which the unfair, the dishonourable, behaviour of others upsets. That is, such defence fairly, justly, and naturally in the immediacy of the moment corrects their error of ὕβρις resulting from their bad (their rotten) φύσις; a rotten character evident in their lack of the virtue, the skill, of σωφρονεῖν. For had they possessed that virtue, and if their character was not bad, they would not have undertaken such a dishonourable attack.

David Myatt
2012

Extract from The Numinous Balance of Honour in The Way of Pathei-Mathos – A Philosophical Compendiary (pdf, 2012).

 

Appendix: Some Definitions

It would perhaps be useful to give definitions of some of the terms used since such definitions (and etymologies, if applicable) might help to avoid confusion and mis-understandings in respect of my use of those terms.

Compassion

The English word compassion dates from around 1340 CE and in its original sense (the sense meant in my writings) the words means benignity [2]. Hence, by compassion is meant being kindly disposed toward and/or feeling a sympathy with someone (or some living being) affected by pain/suffering/grief or who is enduring vicissitudes.

The word compassion is derived from com, meaning together-with, combined with pati, meaning to-suffer/to-endure, and thus useful synonyms for compassion, in this original sense, are compassivity and benignity.

Honour

The English word honour dates from around 1200 CE, deriving from the Latin honorem (meaning refined, grace, beauty) via the Old French (and thence Anglo-Norman) onor/onur. By the term honour I mean an instinct for and an adherence to what is fair, dignified, and valourous. An honourable person is thus refined: that is, they are noble and hence distinguished by virtue of their character, which is one of manners, fairness, natural dignity, and valour.

In respect of early usage of the term, two quotes may be of interest. The first, from c. 1393 CE, is taken from a poem, in Middle English, by John Gower:

And riht in such a maner wise
Sche bad thei scholde hire don servise,
So that Achilles underfongeth
As to a yong ladi belongeth
Honour, servise and reverence. [3]

The second is from several centuries later:

” Honour – as something distinct from mere probity, and which supposes in gentlemen a stronger abhorrence of perfidy, falsehood, or cowardice, and a more elevated and delicate sense of the dignity of virtue, than are usually found in vulgar minds.” [4]

Empathy

Etymologically, this fairly recent English word, used to translate the German Einfühlung, derives, via the late Latin sympathia, from the Greek συμπάθεια – συμπαθής – and is thus formed from the prefix σύν (sym) together with παθ- [root of πάθος] meaning enduring/suffering, feeling: πάσχειν, to endure/suffer.

In my writings, empathy – ἐμπάθεια – is used to describe a particular and natural human faculty: that is, a noble intuition about another human being or another living being. When empathy is developed and used, as envisaged by my ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’, it is a specific and extended type of συμπάθεια. That is, it is a type of and a means to knowing and understanding another human being and/or other living beings – and thus differs in nature from compassion.

°°°

Notes

[1] In respect of φύσις, see for example: (i) my brief essay Physis, Nature, Concealment, and Natural Change [Some Notes on Heraclitus Fragment 123] and also (ii) Notes On Aristotle Metaphysics 1015a and (iii) Notes on Aristotle Metaphysics 987b

[2] The word benignity derives from the Latin benignitatem and the sense imputed by the word is of a kind, compassionate, well-mannered character, disposition, or deed. It came into English usage around the same time as compassion; for example, the word occurs in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde [ii. 483] written around 1374 CE.

[3]  John Gower, Confessio Amantis. Liber Quintus vv. 2997-3001 [Macaulay, G.C., ed. The Works of John Gower. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1901]

[4] George Lyttelton. History of the Life of Henry the Second. London, Printed for J. Dodsley. M DCC LXXV II [1777] (A new ed., cor.) vol 3, p.178


Article source: http://www.davidmyatt.info/the-natural-balance-of-honour.html


The Development Of The Numinous Way

Editorial Note: We republish here a most interesting article written some years ago (in 2012) by David Myatt, dealing as the article does with the origins of his ‘Numinous Way’ (2002-2009) and his later (c. 2011) revision of it into his philosophy of pathei-mathos.  Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos is outlined in his https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/compendiary-of-the-way-of-pathei-mathos/ and described in detail in the three texts available here:  https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/writings-concerning-the-philosophy-of-pathei-mathos/

David Myatt

David Myatt

 

Concerning The Development Of The Numinous Way

 

Background

What I term The Numinous Way, as a philosophy and as a way of life, was not the result of a few or many moments of inspiration striking close together in causal Time as measured by a terran-calendar and thus separated from each other by days, weeks, or even a few years.

Rather, it resulted from some nine years of reflexions, intuitions, and experiences, beginning in 2002 when – for quite a few months – I wandered as a vagabond in the hills and fells of Westmorland and lived in a tent, and during which time I communicated some of my musings, by means of handwritten letters, to a lady living in Oxford whom I had first met well over a decade before.

These musing concerned Nature, our place – as humans – in Nature and the Cosmos; the purpose, if any, of our lives; whether or not the five Aristotelian essentials gave a true understanding of the external world; and whether or not God, or Allah, or some sort of divinity or divinities, existed, and thus – if they did not – whence came mystical insight, knowledge, and understanding, and what value or validity, if any, did such mystical insight, knowledge, and understanding, possess.

During the previous thirty or more years I had occasional intuitions concerning, or feelings, regarding, Nature, divinity, the Cosmos, and ‘the numinous’; insights and feelings which led me to study Taoism, Hellenic culture, Buddhism, the Catholic mystic tradition, and become a Catholic monk. Later on, such intuitions concerning the numinous – and travels in the Sahara Desert – led me to begin a serious study of Islam and were part of the process that led me to convert to that way of life.

But these intuitions, feelings – and the understanding and knowledge they engendered – were or always eventually became secondary to what, since around 1964, I had considered or felt was the purpose of my own life. This was to aid, to assist, in some way the exploration and the colonization of Outer Space, and it was enthusiasm for – the inspiration of – that ideal which led me to seriously study the science of Physics, and then to seek to find what type of society might be able to make that ideal a reality, a seeking initially aided by my study of and enthusiasm for Hellenic culture, a culture – manifest in Greek heroes such as Odysseus and in the warrior society home to the likes of the sons of Atreus – which I came to regard as the ideal prototype for this new society of new explorers and new heroes.

After considering, and then rejecting, the communist society of the Soviet Union [1], an intuition regarding National-Socialist Germany [2] led me to seriously study that society and National-Socialism, a study ended when I peremptorily concluded that I had indeed found the right type of modern society. Thus I became a National-Socialist, with my aim – the purpose of my life – being to aid the foundation of a new National-Socialist State as a prelude to the exploration and the colonization of Outer Space, and thus the creation of a Galactic Imperium, a new Galactic, or Cosmic, Reich.

As I wrote in part one of some autobiographical scribblings issued in 1998 and which were based on some writings of mine dating back to the 1970′s:

“It is the vision of a Galactic Empire which runs through my political life just as it is the quest to find and understand our human identity, and my own identity, and our relation to Nature, which runs through my personal and spiritual life, giving me the two aims which I consistently pursued since I was about thirteen years of age, regardless of where I was, what I was doing and how I was described by others or even by myself…”

For it was this aim of the exploration and the colonization of Outer Space, and my rather schoolboyish enthusiasm for it, which – together with the enjoyment of the struggle – inspired my fanaticism, my extremism, and which re-inspired me when, as sometimes occurred during my NS decades, my enthusiasm for politics, for a political revolution, waned, or when my intuitions, my feelings, concerning the numinous and my love of women – the dual inspiration for most of my poetry – became stronger than my political beliefs and my revolutionary fervour.

The aim, the purpose, this idealization, regarding Outer Space even partly motivated my study of and thence my conversion to Islam in 1998. For example, not long before that conversion, in an essay entitled Foreseeing The Future, I wrote:

” I firmly believe that Islam has the potential to create not only a new civilization, governed according to reason, but also a new Empire which could take on and overthrow the established world-order dedicated as this world-order is to usury, decadence and a god-less materialism […] I also believe that a new Islamic Empire could create the Galactic Empire, or at least lay the foundations of it. Perhaps the first human colonies on another world will have as their flag the Islamic crescent, a flag inscribed with the words, in Arabic, In the Name of Allah, The Compassionate, The Merciful.”

Thus, as when a National-Socialist, I dedicated myself to my ‘new cause’, to an ideal I idealistically carried in the headpiece of my head: the cause of Jihad, of disrupting existing societies as a prelude to manufacturing a new one. In this instance, a resurgent Khilafah.

As with National-Socialism, it was the ideal, the goal, the struggle, which was paramount, important; and I – like the extremist I was – hubriatically placed that goal, that ideal, that struggle for victory, before love, fairness, compassion, reason, and truth, and thus engendered and incited violence, hatred, and killing.

In addition, I always felt myself bound by honour to be loyal to either a cause, an ideology, or to certain individuals and so do the duty I had sworn by oath to do and be loyal to those I had sworn to be loyal to. Hence when doubts about my beliefs arose during my decades as a nazi I always had recourse to honour and so considered myself – even during my time as a monk – as a National-Socialist, albeit, when a monk, as a non-active one for whom there was ultimately no contradiction between the NS ethos and the ethos of a traditional Catholicism, for there was the Reichskonkordat and the agreement Pope Pius XII reached with Hitler.

During my Muslim years I felt bound by the oath of my Shahadah; an oath which negated my NS beliefs and led me to reject racism and nationalism, and embrace the multi-racialism of the Ummah; and which general oath, together (and importantly) with a personal oath sworn a few years after my conversion, would always – until 2009 – bring me back, or eventually cause me to drift back, to Islam and always remind me of the duty I felt I was, as a Muslim, honour-bound to do.

2002-2006

This drift back toward Islam is what occurred after my musings in 2002. I tried to forget them, a task made difficult when later that year I went to live on a farm and also work on another nearby farm. For that living and such work brought a deep personal contentment and further intuitions and feelings, and a burgeoning understanding, regarding the numinous, and especially concerning Nature; some of which intuitions and feelings I again communicated by means of handwritten letters, mostly to the aforementioned lady.

For a while I saught to find a synthesis, studied Sufism, but was unable to find any satisfactory answers, and thus began an interior struggle, a personal struggle I made some mention of in Myngath. A struggle, a conflict, between my own intuitions, insights, and burgeoning understanding – regarding the numinous and human beings – and the way of faith and belief; between what I felt was a more natural, a more numinous way, and the necessary belief in Allah, the Quran, the Sunnah that Islam, that being Muslim, required.

For a while, faith and belief and duty triumphed; then I wavered, and began to write in more detail about this still as yet unformed ‘numinous way’. Then, yet again honour, duty, and loyalty triumphed – but only a while – for I chanced to meet and then fell in love with a most beautiful, non-Muslim, lady. And it was our relationship – but most of all her tragic death in May 2006 – that intensified my inner struggle and forced me to ask and then answer certain fundamental questions regarding my past and my own nature.

As I wrote at the time:

” Thus do I feel and now know my own stupidity for my arrogant, vain, belief that I could help, assist, change what was […] I know my blame, my shame, my failure, here. Thus am I fully humbled by my own lack of insight; by my lack of knowing; by an understanding of my selfishness and my failure – knowing myself now for the ignorant, arrogant person I was, and am. How hypocritical to teach, to preach, through writings, feeling as I do now the suffering of words.”

I did not like the answers about myself that this tragedy forced me to find; indeed, I did not like myself and so, for a while, clung onto Islam, onto being Muslim; onto the way of faith, of God, of ignoring my own answers, my own feelings, my own intuitions. For there was – or so it then seemed – expiation, redemption, hope, and even some personal comfort, there. But this return to such surety just felt wrong, deeply wrong.

2006-2009

For there was, as I wrote in Myngath,

” …one uncomfortable truth from which even I with all my sophistry could not contrive to hide from myself, even though I tried, for a while. The truth that I am indebted. That I have a debt of personal honour to both Fran and to Sue, who died – thirteen years apart – leaving me bereft of love, replete with sorrow, and somewhat perplexed. A debt to all those other women who, over four decades, I have hurt in a personal way; a debt to the Cosmos itself for the suffering I have caused and inflicted through the unethical pursuit of abstractions.

A debt somehow and in some way – beyond a simple remembrance of them – to especially make the life and death of Sue and Fran worthwhile and full of meaning, as if their tragic early dying meant something to both me, and through my words, my deeds, to others. A debt of change, of learning – in me, so that from my pathei-mathos I might be, should be, a better person; presencing through words, living, thought, and deeds, that simple purity of life felt, touched, known, in those stark moments of the immediacy of their loss.

But this honour, I have so painfully discovered, is not the abstract honour of years, of decades, past that I in my arrogance and stupid adherence to and love of abstractions so foolishly believed in and upheld, being thus, becoming thus, as I was a cause of suffering. No; this instead is the essence of honour, founded in empathy; in an empathy with and thus a compassion for all life, sentient and otherwise. This is instead a being human; being in symbiosis with that-which is the essence of our humanity and which can, could and should, gently evolve us – far away from the primitive unempathic, uncompassionate, beings we have been, and unfortunately often still are; far away from the primitive unempathic, uncompassionate, often violent, person I had been.”

Thus I was prompted – forced – to continue to develope my understanding in what began to be and became my own ‘numinous way’ and which thus and finally and, in 2009 publicly, took me away from Islam and my life as a Muslim.

2009-2012

Given that the essence of The Numinous Way is individual empathy, an individual understanding, the development of an individual judgement, and the living of an ethical way of life where there is an appreciation of the numinous, the more I reflected upon this ‘numinous way’ between 2011 and Spring 2012, the more I not only realized my mistakes, but also that it was necessary to remove, to excise, the detritus that had accumulated around the basic insights and the personal pathei-mathos that inspired me to develope that ‘numinous way’. Mistakes and detritus because for some time, during the development of that ‘numinous way’, I was still in thrall to some abstractions, still thinking in terms of categories and opposites, and still fond of pontificating and generalizing, especially about The State [3]. I therefore began to re-express, in a more philosophical manner, the personal, the individual, the ontological, the ethical and spiritual nature, of The Numinous Way, and thus emphasized the virtues of humility, love, and of wu-wei – of balance, of tolerance, of non-interference, of individual interior (spiritual) reformation, of non-striving, of admitting one’s own uncertitude of understanding and of knowing.

The year-long [2011-2012] process of refinement, correction, and reflexion resulted in me re-naming what remained of my ‘numinous way’ the ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’, and which philosophy I attempted to outline in the two texts Recuyle of the Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos and Summary of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos, the latter of which was also published under the title Conspectus of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos.

As I mentioned in Society, Politics, Social Reform, and Pathei-Mathos [Part Four of Reculye of the Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos] –

“Given that the concern of the philosophy of pathei-mathos is the individual and their interior, their spiritual, life, and given that (due to the nature of empathy and pathei-mathos) there is respect for individual judgement, the philosophy of pathei-mathos is apolitical, and thus not concerned with such matters as the theory and practice of governance, nor with changing or reforming society by political means […]

This means that there is no desire and no need to use any confrontational means to directly challenge and confront the authority of existing States since numinous reform and change is personal, individual, non-political, and not organized beyond a limited local level of people personally known. That is, it is of and involves individuals who are personally known to each other working together based on the understanding that it is inner, personal, change – in individuals, of their nature, their character – that is is the ethical, the numinous, way to solve such personal and social problems as exist and arise. That such inner change of necessity comes before any striving for outer change by whatever means, whether such means be termed or classified as political, social, economic, religious. That the only effective, long-lasting, change and reform is understood as the one that evolves human beings and thus changes what, in them, predisposes them, or inclines them toward, doing or what urges them to do, what is dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate.

In practice, this evolution means, in the individual, the cultivation and use of the faculty of empathy, and acquiring the personal virtues of compassion, honour, and love. Which means the inner reformation of individuals, as individuals.

Hence the basis for numinous social change and reform is aiding, helping, assisting individuals in a direct and personal manner, and in practical ways, with such help, assistance, and aid arising because we personally know or are personally concerned about or involved with those individuals or the situations those individuals find themselves in. In brief, being compassionate, empathic, understanding, sensitive, kind, and showing by personal example.”

The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos

It is the philosophy of pathei-mathos which represents my weltanschauung. For I now consider that most of my writings, my pontifications, concerning ‘the numinous way’ – written haphazardly between 2002 and Spring 2012 – are unhelpful; or of little account; or irrelevant; or hubriatic; or detract from or obscure the basic simplicity of my weltanschauung, a simplicity I have endeavoured to express in Conspectus of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos.

David Myatt
24th April 2012
(Revised November 2012)

 

Notes

[1] During this study of communism, in the 1960′s, I began to learn Russian and would regularly listen to communist radio broadcasts such as those from Rundfunk der DDR, something I continued to do for a while even after becoming a National-Socialist. Indeed, on one occasion I wrote a letter to Radio Berlin which, to my surprise, was read out with my questions answered.

[2] As I have mentioned elsewhere – for example, in Myngath – this intuition regarding the Third Reich arose as a result of me reading an account of the actions of Otto Ernst Remer in July of 1944. For I admired his honour and his loyalty and his commitment to the duty he had sworn an oath to do. Here, I felt, was a modern-day Greek hero.

[3] These un-numinous, errorful, hubriatic, pontifications about ‘the state’ included essays such as the reprehensible January 2011 text The Failure and Immoral Nature of The State and the February 2011, text A Brief Numinous View of Religion, Politics, and The State.

Among the abstractions (categories) which needed to be excised from a supposedly abstraction-less and empathic numinous way were ‘the clan’, and ‘culture’, and the divisive category ‘homo hubris’, a divisive category I hubriatically pontificated about in essays such as the 2009 text Homo Hubris and the Disruption of the Numinous, based as that text was on an earlier, 2002, essay.

Acknowledgements:

This article is based on – and summarizes and/or quotes from – several replies sent to various correspondents during April of this year (2012)


Article source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/rejecting-extremism/development-of-the-numinous-way/


David Myatt – Varför vi måste återvända till landsbygden

800px-Cumulus_clouds_panorama

Varför vi måste återvända till landsbygden
(Why We Must Return To The Land)

Vi måste återvända till landsbygden, till en mindre materialistisk, och mera jordnära livsstil; därför att det endast är en sådan livsstil, med sin nära och intima kontakt med naturen, och med sitt ofta hårda fysiska arbete, som låter oss leva på ett autentiskt och mänskligt vis. Det moderna levnadssättet – i vidsträckta storstadskomplex med sin kommers, sina industrier och sin lättillgängliga lokaltrafik – är ett disautentiskt och inhumant levnadssätt, som också har uppmuntrat till och faktiskt möjliggjort utvecklingen av en riktigt tyrannisk stat, vars omfattning och lagar är en motsats till allt som är mänskligt.

Mänskligheten är inneboende i förnuftet, i det långsamma förvärvandet av kunskap och visdom genom direkt personlig erfarenhet, och genom den direkta och förståndiga (alltså: vänliga, hedersamma och artiga) kontakten med andra medmänniskor. Bedömandet av andra är därför ett bedömande grundat på personlig erfarenhet och kunskap om dem. Alltså: det mänskliga bedömandet är följden av en långsamt förvärvad erfarenhet, som i första hand är vår egen. Den moderna världens sätt är det ytliga, hastiga sättet, med abstrakta idéer (så som ”ekonomin” med dess ”ekonomiska tillväxt”, eller ett politiskt parti med dess ståndpunkter), med kommers, och med individen som en konsument och medborgare av någon stat. Intresset för majoriteten av individerna i en sådan abstrakt stat är det egna livet, deras egen komfort, deras egna behov; eller i bästa fall intresset för de i dess omedelbara närhet, dvs. familjen.

Medborgarna i en sådan stat införskaffar sin mat i affärer – eller än värre, i ”snabbköp” – liksom deras jobb oftast omfattar kontorsarbete, socialt arbete, kommersiellt arbete eller affärsarbete: med andra ord, arbeten som anknyter till staten, dess kommers, dess industri och dess affärsliv. Det finns därför väldigt liten eller ingen kontakt med landsbygden, med naturen, och definitivt väldigt lite som kan klassas som hårt fysiskt arbete; precis som också dags- och årsrytmen i ett sådant modernt leverne är en abstrakt, hastig rytm, påförd individen genom dess arbete. I tillägg till detta så betraktar och bedömer medborgarna i en sådan stat världen, och andra människor, mest efter det abstrakta ”lärandet”, eller med hjälp av den abstrakta ”kunskapen” de förvärvat vid skolor och kollegium; eller genom en eller flera av de andra ”läroanstalterna” som i sitt överflöd ännu ständigt blir fler och fler.

Så, det har blivit så att dessa medborgare har kommit att använda abstrakta idéer som sin måttstock, precis som deras kunskap för det mesta inte är resultatet av egna erfarenheter, eller deras egna reflektioner av dessa erfarenheter. Och så har det nu också blivit, att det i var och varannan modern stat finns ett ansenligt antal människor som brukar och missbrukar ”droger”, ett ansenligt antal människor som stjäl, bedrar, rånar och utför allsköns fega nidingsdåd, och ett ansenligt antal människor (faktiskt en majoritet) som är ohyfsade och obesvärade över hur deras materialistiska, exploatära livsstil, och deras egen stat, förgör landsbygden och hela naturen som sådan.

I kontrast till detta, står landsbygden – det äkta lantliga levernet – vars hela perspektiv utgår från naturen: från landsbygden som sådan. Detta är levnadssättet där individen lever efter naturens fridfullare tempo, och där den dagliga levnadsrytmen formas efter naturen och årstidernas växlingar.

Ett återvändande till autenticitet

Vi måste återvända till landsbygden, även om det betyder att vi måste avstå från de många lockelserna, bekvämligheterna och ”fördelarna” som det moderna samhället har att erbjuda. För det är det faktiska begäret till sådana lockelser, bekvämligheter och ”fördelar”, som skapat och hjälpt till att forma den disautentiska moderna världen. Den ohöljda sanningen bakom allt detta, är att vår moderna livsstil är omänsklig: faktumet är att den är undervärdig. Den uppmuntrar och har fullt överseende med undervärdigtt beteende, trots all meningslös och abstrakt retorik som politiker och andra spyr ur sig.

Följderna av ett sådant undervärdigt beteende är uppenbart, och möjligt för alla att beskåda i vidsträckta urbana bebyggelser: nedsupna, ohyfsade drägg (både manliga och kvinnliga) som gör vad som faller dem in; ungdomsgäng som driver omkring i bostadsområden och terroriserar folk; gäng och enskilda individer rånar, våldtar och stjäl helt godtyckligt; beväpnade gäng bär handeldvapen, som används i ”gänguppgörelser” om droger; ohyfsade, vårdslösa och aggressiva förare i motorfordon; själviska, ohyfsade och snobbiga ”yuppies” som tror sig vara överlägsna därför att de har gott om pengar… Och så vidare, och så vidare.

Den moderna världen blir mindre och mindre mänsklig: mindre och mindre förnuftig, mindre och mindre fri. Vad är fängelseanstalter om inte inhumana institutioner? Vad är de flesta moderna lagar, om inte ett medel för att förläna staten makt och kontroll? Vad är polisens oerhörda maktresurser, om inte ett redskap för en tyrannisk regering? Vad är ändlösa slakthus, om inte monument över vårt eget omättliga undervärdiga begär? För vi behöver inte föda upp och slakta djur på det sätt den moderna världen gör det, därför att vi inte behöver de ofantliga mängderna kött som en majoritet av oss envisas med att äta; precis som vi knappast behöver alla andra lyxprodukter det moderna samhället erbjuder oss: TV, bilar, eldrivna köksredskap, mobiltelefoner… För att producera sådana produkter, så täcker vi i vår profithunger jorden med fabriker, industriområden och stadskomplex med förorter; precis som vi också girigt utarmar jorden på dess råvaror; och precis som ägarna av sådana fabriker och industrier utnyttjar folket som arbetar för dem, så utnyttjar bankerna – genom sitt inhumana ocker – både fabriksägarna och deras anställda.

Vi människor – och då i synnerhet vi i den utvecklade västvärlden – har blivit till en pest som sveper över jordens yta, efterlämnandes endast död och förödelse i våra spår. Vårt sätt att behandla våra medmänniskor är förskräckligt: inom alla skikt blir folk utnyttjade, människor ses som handelsvaror eller profitverktyg; eller som någon sorts fiende eller ett hot. Var finns anständigheten? Var finns bondförnuftet? Var finns tystnaden, lugnet och tankfullheten som kännetecknar det riktiga lantliga levernet?

Vårt beteende gentemot andra livsformer, som vi lever tillsammans med på denna planet, är lika förskräckligt, om inte än värre. Vi utnyttjar dem hänsynslöst, vi slaktar dem hänsynslöst, och ser dem som ytterligare en handelsvara, som skall prissättas, säljas och konsumeras. Vi behöver inte leva som vi gör nu, och som de flesta av oss vill leva. Vi behöver inte utnyttja andra människor, andra livsformer, eller jorden som sådan. Vi kan behärska oss själva, vi kan vara återhållsamma; vi kan hålla tillbaka vår girighet, våra känslor, vårt begär för materiella varor, lyx och överflöd. Vi kan bete oss på ett förnuftigt och hövligt sätt gentemot andra människor. Sådan självbehärskning, sådan återhållsamhet, sådant hövligt beteende – är det som är mänskligt. Sålunda kan vi välja att leva på ett enkelt lantligt vis, strävsamma i harmoni med naturen för att producera den mat vi behöver för oss själva och för vår familj, precis som andra kan arbeta inom ärlig och hygglig handel för att förse oss med de nödvändigheter vi behöver (så som kläder), som vi själva inte kan tillhandahålla eller producera. Och allt detta kan låta sig göras utan ocker eller exploatering i stora fabriker och industrier. Allt som vi verkligen behöver kan tillverkas småskaligt och på ett naturligt vis, i vår lokala omgivning. Allt som vi inte behöver, kräver industrier,kommers,omfattande affärsverksamhet, fabriker och storskalig exploatering.

Vi har alla ett val, precis som vi alla har förmågan att förändra oss själva till det bättre genom vår egen vilja: genom att behärska våra begär och våra känslor, och genom att vara återhållsamma med våra behov. Vi har alla förmågan att bete oss på ett rationellt, civiliserat sätt gentemot våra medmänniskor, och gentemot andra livsformer med vilka vi delar vår plats på jorden. Den egentliga frågan är: kommer vi att göra detta? Kommer vi att eftersträva att bli mänskliga, och sålunda tygla oss själva? Eller kommer vi bara att fortsätta som vi gör nu, utnyttjandes andra människor, andra livsformer och jorden själv?

David Myatt
1996 ((Revised JD2452043.173)

——-

We must return to the land, to a less materialistic, more rural, way of living, because only such a way of living with its close and intimate contact with Nature and with its often hard manual work enables us to live in an authentic and human way.

The modern way of living – in vast urban sprawls with their commerce, their industry, their easy travel – is an inauthentic and inhuman way of living which has also encouraged, and indeed made possible, the development of a real tyrannical State whose very vastness and laws are a contradiction of everything that is human.

Humanity resides in reason, in the slow accumulation of knowledge and wisdom from direct personal experience, and in the direct and reasoned (that is: hospitable, honourable and well-mannered) contact with fellow human beings. Judgement of others is thus a judgement based on personal knowledge of them. In particular, humanity means a judgement that arises from slowly reflecting upon things that we ourselves have experienced at first hand.

The way of the modern world is the superficial, fast, way of abstract ideas (such as “the economy” with its “economic growth” or the policies of some “political party”), of commerce, of the individual as a consumer and the subject of some State. The perspective of the majority of the individuals of such an abstract State is that of their own lives, their own comforts, their own needs, or at best that of their immediate family.

The denizens of such a modern State get their food from shops, or worse, “supermarkets”, just as their work usually involves office work, or social work, or commercial work, or business work: that is, work connected to the State, or its commerce, its industry, its business. There is therefore little or no contact with the land, with Nature, and certainly little in the way of hard manual toil, just as the daily and yearly rhythm of such a modern living is the abstract, fast, rhythm imposed upon the individual by their modern work. In addition, the denizens of such a modern State view the world, and other human beings, mostly through the abstract “learning” or abstract “knowledge” they acquire in Schools or Colleges, or on one or more of the many “courses of training” which now proliferate in such profusion.

So it is that these denizens come to use abstract ideas as their measure of judgement, just as their knowledge, their learning, is for the most part not the result of their own experience, their own reflection on that experience.  And so it is that we now have, in every single modern nation-State, a considerable number of people using and abusing “drugs”, a considerable number of people stealing, cheating, robbing and doing very cowardly deeds, and a considerable number of people (in fact the majority) who are ill-mannered and unconcerned with how their materialistic, exploitative, way of life, and their own nation-State, are destroying the land and Nature herself.

In contrast, the way of the land – of a real rural living – is the way where the perspective is that of Nature: of the land itself. It is the way where the individual lives in the slower-paced world of Nature, and whose daily rhythm is shaped by Nature and by the changing seasons.

A Return to Authenticity

We must return to the land even if it means that we have to forgo many of the attractions, comforts and conveniences of our modern world. For it is our very desire for such attractions, comforts and conveniences which have created and helped shape the inauthentic modern world.

The stark truth of the matter is that our modern way of living is inhuman: in fact, it is sub-human. It encourages and condones sub-human behaviour, despite all the meaningless abstract political rhetoric spewed forth by politicians and others.

The result of such sub-human behaviour is evident for all to see in the vast urban sprawls: drunken, ill-mannered, louts (both male and female) indulging themselves; gangs of youths roaming urban (and even rural) housing estates, terrorizing people; gangs and individuals robbing, raping and mugging at will; armed gangs carrying guns, and using them, in some “turf war” over drugs; ill-mannered, careless, angry drivers of motor vehicles; selfish, ill-mannered, vainly preening “business-executive” types acting superior because they have money….. And so on, and so on.

The modern world has become less and less human: less and less reasonable, less and less free. What is Prison but an inhuman Institution? What are most modern laws but a means to enforce State-control? What are the enormous powers of the Police but a sign of a tyrannical government? What are the vast animal slaughterhouses but monuments to our own insatiable sub-human desires? For we do not need to breed and slaughter animals in the way the modern world breeds and slaughters them because we do not need the vast quantities of animal flesh the majority of us insist on eating, just as we do not need most if not all of the luxuries of this modern world: TV, cars, fridges, mobile telephones….. To produce such things, we rapaciously cover the Earth in factories, in industries, in urban and rural sprawl, just as we rapaciously consume the raw materials of the Earth itself, and just as the owners of such factories and industries exploit the people who work for them and just as the Banks, through their inhuman usury, exploit both the owners and the workers.

We should know and act upon the truth that every act of bad-manners by us toward another human being is an act of exploitation.

We human beings – and particularly those in the developed Western world – have become like a plague sweeping over the face of this planet, leaving devastation and destruction in our wake. Our treatment of our fellow human beings is appalling: at every level, people are exploited, seen as some sort of commodity, or as some sort of enemy or threat. Where is decency? Where are manners? Where is the slow, quiet, reflection that marks the real rural way of living?

Our treatment of the other life-forms with whom we share this planet is equally appalling, if not more so. We ruthlessly exploit them, as we ruthlessly slaughter them, considering them just another commodity, to be priced and traded and consumed.

We do not have to live as we now live, and as most of us want to live. We do not have to exploit other human beings, and other life-forms, and the Earth itself. We can control ourselves; we can exercise restraint; we can choose to restrain our greed, our emotions, our desire for material goods and luxuries. We can behave in a reasoned and well-mannered way toward other human beings.

Such self-control, such restraint, such well-mannered behaviour, is the human thing to do. Thus, we can choose to live in a simple rural way, toiling in harmony and in rhythm with Nature in order to produce what food we need for ourselves and our family, just as others can work in honest trades supplying the essential things we need (such as clothes) which we ourselves cannot make or produce. And all this without the evil of usury or the exploitation caused by factories and industries. Everything that we really need can be made by hand in a natural way in a natural community in a small area. Everything that we do not need requires industry, commerce, business, factories and exploitation.

We all have a choice, as we all have the capacity to change ourselves for the better by using our will: by restraining our desires, our emotions, our needs. We all have the capacity to behave in a rational, civilized, way toward our fellow human beings, and toward the other life-forms which share this planet which is our home.

The real question is: will we do this? Will we strive to become human and so restrain ourselves? Or will we just carry on as we are, exploiting other human beings, other life-forms, and the Earth itself?

David Myatt
1996 (Revised JD2452043.173)


An Historical Curiosity

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Some Arabic Translations Attributed To David Myatt
(pdf)

Editorial Note

As an historical curiosity relating to Myatt’s days as “a fierce Jihadist” {1} who travelled to and spoke in several Arab countries {2}, we present here a few of the Arabic translations attributed to Myatt during his Muslim years (1998-2009). The translations range from messages by such people as Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, to verses from the Koran to an historical document.

Some of the translations first appeared on various Islamic forums (some of which are now defunct, especially those supportive of Al Qaeda), and in articles written by Myatt using his Muslim name of Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt. The translations we re-publish here were first collected together, and published, by JW Wright on her now long-defunct ‘geocities’ davidmyatt website in late 2003, with one addition made early in 2004.

It is perhaps interesting to note that extracts from Myatt’s translation of the 2003 message from bin Laden reguarly appeared, for several years and unattributed and until around 2011, on Al Qaeda supporting, and some Muslim, forums and websites {3}.

The translations – or perhaps interpretations would be a more accurate description – reveal a rather fluid style as well as a clarity of expression.

RP & PH
2014

References

{1} Martin Amis, The Second Plane. Jonathan Cape, 2008, p.157.

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

{3} For example [URL’s accessed July 7, 2014] –  http://www.shabakataljahad.com/vb/showthread.php?t=8489 and http://prisonerofjoy.blogspot.com/2007/08/battle-of-tora-bora-as-explained-by.html


The Adventures of Hassan and Jorg

stars1

Editorial Note: The four short science-fiction stories that form The Adventures of Hassan and Jorg were written by David Myatt in early 2002, not long after the invasion of Afghanistan by western forces, and were first published, under a Muslim pseudonym, late in 2002 on the (now defunct) Jordanian based website hassanadventures.jeeran.com. According to Myatt they were written for, and were read aloud by him to, the two young children of a Muslim friend of Iraqi origin. Further stories in the series were planned, but never written.

Long neglected, disowned by Myatt himself, and despite in Myatt’s own opinion lacking any literary merit, the stories may be of interest for several reasons. First, because they reflect Myatt’s life-long interest in space travel and the genre of science-fiction. Second, because they could be seen, from a Muslim perspective, as a comment on the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. Third, because they reflect Myatt’s interest at the time in sympathetically portraying Muslims, Islam, and the Mujahideen. Fourth, because they embody the warrior virtues that Myatt has always admired. Fifth, because they show Muslims and non-Muslims co-operating together on the basis of mutual respect. Sixth, because one of the main characters is a female warrior. Seventh, and perhaps most important of all, because they so obviously were – as Myatt admitted – crude propaganda, part of his short-lived campaign, from 2002 to around 2004, for an alliance between radical Muslims and National Socialists.

To accompany the publication of the stories, Myatt produced a note concerning the ‘historical background’ of the events, as well as a glossary for non-Muslim readers, both of which are reproduced in the pdf file below. As with all of Myatt’s writings, the stories are covered by the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License and can be freely copied and distributed, under the terms of that license.

The Adventures Of Hassan And Jorg
(pdf)