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)


National-Socialist Guide to Understanding Islam

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Editorial Preface

The pamphlet The National-Socialist Guide to Understanding Islam (pdf) was written and distributed by Muslim convert Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt (aka David Myatt) in 2003, the same year that, at a UNESCO conference in Paris which concerned the growth of anti-Semitism it was stated that “David Myatt, the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s […] has converted to Islam, praises bin Laden and al Qaeda, calls the 9/11 attacks ‘acts of heroism,’ and urges the killing of Jews. Myatt, under the name Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt supports suicide missions and urges young Muslims to take up Jihad. Observers warn that Myatt is a dangerous man.” [1]

During the previous two or more years, Myatt had not only travelled and spoken in several Arab countries [2] but also had run a somewhat notorious campaign to bring radical Muslims and neo-nazis together in order, in his words, “to fight our common enemy”, and of which campaign Professor Michael wrote that Myatt had “arguably done more than any other theorist to develop a synthesis of the extreme right and Islam.” [3]

The foundation of this synthesis was Myatt’s revisionist version – or rather his new vision – of National Socialism, which he dubbed ‘ethical National-Socialism’ and which vision he, in the year before and the year after his conversion to Islam in 1998, propagated by means of the Reichsfolk group he founded in the 1990s. This vision or version of National Socialism was a non-racist one, of which he wrote, in his essay Why National-Socialist Is Not Racist, that “correctly defined and understood, National-Socialism is an ethnic philosophy which affirms that the different races, the different peoples, which exist are expressions of our human condition, and that these differences, this human diversity, should be treasured in the same way we treasure the diversity of Nature.”

In Myatt’s campaign to bring Muslims and National Socialists together the pamphlet The National-Socialist Guide to Understanding Islam certainly played a role, simplistically and propagandistically written as it was for National Socialists in particular and Western nationalists in general as an introduction to not only Islam but, following 9/11, to topics such as ‘martyrdom operations’. For, in respect of ‘martyrdom operations’, Myatt had already – and for his fellow Muslims – written “one of the most detailed defences in the English language of Islamic suicide attacks” [4] and which defence of such attacks was at the time, and for several years, featured on the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades (the military wing) section of the Hamas website [5]. Given such links to Hamas, and the fact that Myatt was known as “an ardent defender of bin Laden” [2], it is hardly surprising that Myatt merited a mention at an April 2005 NATO conference on terrorism which heard that Myatt had called on “all enemies of the Zionists to embrace the Jihad.” [6]

Therefore, though now somewhat dated in places and, along with all his neo-nazi and Islamic writings, disowned by Myatt himself [7], this propaganda pamphlet – sections of which were featured on the Aryan Nations website run by August Kries – does have some historical interest, in relation to Myatt’s ‘Jihadi years and support for Islamic terrorism’, in relation to Myatt’s ‘synthesis of the extreme right and Islam’, and perhaps especially in relation to the Reichsfolk group and their continuing vision of an ethical National-Socialism.

Richard Stirling
2013 ce

[1] Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2

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

[4] Wistrich, Robert S, A Lethal Obsession: Anti-Semitism from Antiquity to the Global Jihad, Random House, 2010.

[5] Durham, Martin. White Rage: The Extreme Right and American Politics. Routledge, 2007, p.113

[6] Ely Karmon. The Middle East, Iraq, Palestine – Arenas for Radical and Anti-Globalization Groups Activity. NATO Workshop On Terrorism and Communications: Countering the Terrorist Information Cycle, Slovakia, April 2005.

[7] Myatt’s post-2010 writings are full of remorse for what he terms “his extremist past”. In a Disclaimer placed on both his website and his internet blog (davidmyatt.wordpress.com) he writes that:

“I reject and disown all my pre-2011 writings and effusions, with the exception of my Greek translations, the poetry included in the published collection One Exquisite Silence (ISBN 978-1484179932), some private letters written between 2002 and 2011, and those few items about my since revised ‘numinous way’ which are included in post-2012 publications such as The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos (ISBN 978-1484096642). My rejection of all forms of extremism is explained in (i) the 2013 compilation Understanding and Rejecting Extremism (ISBN 978-1484854266) and (ii) Myngath (ISBN 978-1484110744).”



Sed id Quidem in Optima spe Pono

[…] That seeking of – that hope for – a personal love loyally shared. Which seeking and hope for such a love, surely, is one intimation, one sign, of our real human nature; another of which is, surely, to learn about, to appreciate, the numinous treasures that preceding generations have bequeathed to us in and thorough our human cultures – in our Art, literature, music, the ancestral wisdom of the πάθει μάθος of our ancestors, written or aurally transmitted, and in the numinous insights that were the genesis of most if not all those Ways of Life now known by the generic term religion before such insights became enshrined within such dogma and such causal forms as bled away their life-giving Life. Yet another is, surely, to seek to always be honourable and thus to try the live the natural, the balanced, middle way between ascetic self-denial and the excess, the lack of self-control, that leads to ὕβρις, to personal arrogance and to indifference to suffering. This is the middle way of empathy, personal love, personal honour, and appreciation of the numinous, of the natural distinction between the sacred and the profane.

These hopes, desires, these reasons to possibly be optimistic, are the essence of The Numinous Way; of the very individual reformation and evolution of ourselves by means of empathy, honour, compassion and love. And it is this individual reformation, this individual change, by such means, which in my admittedly fallible view is important, which is numinous, which expresses the essence of our human nature as consciously aware human beings possessed of the faculties of empathy, of reason, and of will; and which is the summation of my own learning from over forty years of diverse experiences and the making of so many mistakes, of transgressing so many limits.

Thus, what I now feel is irrelevant is politics – of whatever type or form; what is equally unimportant are religious dogma, creeds, and such impersonal conflict as arises from all causal abstractions. For all of these are causes of, the genesis of, suffering and all involve and all have involved the loss of personal love, the loss of compassion, the loss of empathy, and the loss of reason. All plant the seed of ὕβρις within us.

For we human beings – being capable of using reason, possessed of empathy, able to be compassionate and honourable and needful of the numinosity of a personal love – do not need, and never really have needed, speeches, propaganda, manifestos, a sense of destiny, the machinations and promises of political and religious leaders, or social, political, or even religious, reforms.

All we need is to know, to feel, the beauty of a personal love loyally shared; to use and develope our empathy, and to be honourable. Thus can we know, feel, the numinous – and thus can we avoid the error of ὕβρις. And thus if I have some last words to write, to say, it is these.

What, therefore, remains? Only such hope that such words, that such a numinous way as I have somehow managed to uncover, might inspire some, or perchance provoke a reasoned and thoughtful response in some others. What is there now, and what has there been? One genesis, and one ending, of one nexion whose perception by almost all others is now of one who lived and who wrote ἐξ αἰνιγμάτων.

τό θ᾽ ὑπέργηρων φυλλάδος ἤδηκατακαρφομένης τρίποδας μὲν ὁδοὺς
στείχει, παιδὸς δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἀρείων
ὄναρ ἡμερόφαντον ἀλαίνει.    [1]

 

David Myatt
March 2011

Extract from a letter to a friend

[1]  Thus, he of great Age, his foliage drying up
And no stronger than a child, with three feet to guide him on his travels,
Wanders – appearing a shadow in the light of day.

               Aesch. Ag 79-82

 


Source – http://www.davidmyatt.info/sed-id-quidem.html


David Myatt and Satanism

David Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt, Satanism, and Anton Long

Analysis of Some Rumors

 

Regarding the much discussed question of Myatt and his alleged involvement with the sinister group the Order of Nine Angles (ONA), in my opinion there are three alternative scenarios.

Possible Myatt Scenarios

1) Individuals can choose to accept David Myatt’s consistent and decades long denial regarding being ‘Anton Long’, and his claim that his occult involvement (such as it was) was brief and – as he mentioned in Ethos of Extremism and (decades ago) to people like Professor Kaplan – occurred in the 1970s when he participated in a clandestine occult honeytrap for the sole purpose of subversively aiding his then fanatical nazism 1. Thus, as he outlined in his autobiography Myngath, in his Ethos of Extremism, and in many other of his writings, (i) for 30 years he sincerely believed in nazi ideology, in a neo-nazi revolution, as evidenced by his political and para-military activities, by his imprisonment, his writings, and his leadership of the NSM and Reichsfolk; and (ii) that following a decade of travels in lands such as Egypt 2 and a growing admiration of Muslims he personally met, he converted to Islam and spent many years sincerely trying to live the Muslim way of life; (iii) that following the death of his then partner he was forced to re-evaluate his life and beliefs and which re-evaluation led to him rejecting all forms of extremism and developing the personal weltanschauung he termed ‘the numinous way’ (aka the philosophy of pathei-mathos).

In this first scenario Myatt was a fallible if arrogant trouble maker – a rebel and a fanatic – who gradually learned humility 3 after an eventful life, and who rediscovers his humanity, and admits his mistakes, following a personal tragedy.

2) Individuals can choose to believe that David Myatt was and is Anton Long and that his 30 years as a nazi and his 10 years as a Muslim were part of some life-long sinister and cunning plan of his to subvert society and that he was so sinister and so skilled at deception and so charismatic that he could: (i) initially convince people about his sincerity regarding being a nazi fanatic and then a sincere Muslim, and (ii) also fool scores of people consistently for 30 years (in the case of NS) and 10 years (in the case of Islam) and (iii) that in order to maintain the charade he was prepared to and did endure imprisonment (in the case of NS) and was prepared (in the case of Islam) to be regarded by various governments as a terrorist and so be liable to arrest, interrogation, extradition, and imprisonment, and (iv) while doing all the foregoing also managed to create, expand, write for and run the ONA.

In this second scenario he is some kind of evil genius (with good acting skills) involved in a decades long and international sinister conspiracy; someone who, astonishingly 4, is capable of living a double (or triple) life for years on end and capable of manipulating and duping (for years on end) all kinds of people from hardened criminals to neo-nazi ruffians to devout Muslims to believing Christians to intellectuals.

3) Individuals can choose to believe – as some conspiracy minded individuals have suggested 5 – that David Myatt has spent most of his adult life as some kind of government/state asset, undercover operative, or agent provocateur, having been recruited either at University or during his time with the underground paramilitary group Column 88 (part of NATO’s secret anti-communist Gladio network).

In this third scenario he is a loyal servant of the British state – a patriot, a ruthless operative (inciting violence, disorder, subversion, and terrorism) – who obeys a covert chain of command, and which British state indulges in and has indulged in ‘dirty tricks’ in order to protect its security and its interests, and which ‘dirty tricks’ include undercover surveillance, entrapment, infiltration and disruption of groups perceived to be a threat and/or terrorist, and – possibly – using terrorist (and extremist) groups/the threat of terrorism as a pretext for greater surveillance and government control.

Explanations Required

Those who believe versions/scenarios 3 and 2 (the agent provocateur and the satanist scenarios) have to explain Myatt’s life – and his philosophy, his personal letters, and his mystical writings – since 2006, and which life and which writings (many of which writings deal with humility, compassion, his remorse about his extremist past, and his mistakes) do not fit the theory of Myatt being either a life-long satanist or some dedicated ruthless covert government asset. The only explanations consistent with those versions of Myatt’s life are the following additional assumptions: (i) that his numinous way/philosophy of pathei-mathos is something he does not personally believe in, and he diabolically constructed it as some sort of smokescreen or jape and (ii) that his personal writings are all lies, some clever attempt (by an amoral genius) at obfuscation 6 to divert attention from ‘the sinister deeds’/the covert ops such believers believe he has done and probably is still doing, or was doing until very recently; or (iii) in the particular case of the agent provocateur theory, that c.2006 he ‘retired’ and devoted himself to expressing what he really believed in all along or what he came to believe following a lifetime of state-sponsored covert activity.

Furthermore, those who accept version 2 (the satanist scenario) have additionally to explain not only the lack of factual evidence proving he is a satanist 7 but also many other things about Myatt’s life, among which are the following 8,

1) His time as a Christian monk and his many subsequent writings praising Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general 9.

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 10.

5) His voluminous writings about the hubris of extremism, and about his rejection of and his remorse concerning his extremist past 11.

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.

Again, the only explanation of all these things consistent with the Myatt as satanist scenario is that he is and was not only the astonishingly cunning, duplicitous, evil genius mentioned above, but also someone who has now (again astonishingly) contrived to create yet another persona for himself (as philosopher of ‘the numinous way’ and humble penitent) and which persona he has managed to rather convincingly and certainly consistently portray through letters, poems, and scores of essays, spanning some six years (2006 -2012) 12.

Conclusion

We basically have a choice between:

(i) believing Myatt is an astonishingly diabolical, duplicitous, creative, polymathical genius who over four decades has been playing ‘sinister games’ and who has not deviated from his youthful sinister cunning plan, and which diabolical genius makes the likes of Crowley and LaVey (and everyone else associated with modern Satanism and the ‘left hand path’) seem pathetic and mundane; or

(ii) assuming Myatt has spent most of his adult life as a covert servant of the British state; or

(iii) accepting that Myatt has lived a quite adventurous (but not an exceptionally amazing) life, has made mistakes, has suffered a personal tragedy, and has learned from and been changed by his experiences and by that tragedy.

How do we choose? I have always admired Isaac Newton’s Rules of Reasoning of which the first is:

“We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.

To this purpose the philosophers say that Nature does nothing in vain, and more is in vain when less will serve; for Nature is pleased with simplicity, and affects not the pomp of superfluous causes.”

To guide us toward choosing one of the three suggested explanations of Myatt’s diverse life we might profitably apply this rule of reasoning. Which of the above three scenarios is therefore the most plausible? Which offers the most simple, the most rational, explanation for Myatt’s peregrinations? Which require the pomp of conspiracy theory, and which involve superfluous causes, and (sometimes bizarre, sometimes astonishing) ad hoc assumptions and claims?

I know which one I favor.

JR Wright

2012

Footnotes

[1] In part two of his political memoir Ethos of Extremism – covering the years 1973-1975 -Myatt wrote:

” There also developed in me during this time, and because of my involvement with C88, a realization that both covert action and terrorism were or might be useful tactics to employ in the struggle for victory, a struggle which I – extremist and fanatic that I was – accepted would be brutal, violent, and bloody, and thus possibly cost the lives of some of us, some of our opponents, and even some non-combatants […]

In respect of covert action, I came to the conclusion, following some discussions with some C88 members, that two different types of covert groups, with different strategy and tactics, might be very useful in our struggle and thus aid us directly or aid whatever right-wing political party might serve as a cover for introducing NS policies or which could be used to advance our cause. These covert groups would not be paramilitary and thus would not resort to using armed force since that option was already covered, so far as I was then concerned, by C88.

The first type of covert group would essentially be a honeytrap, to attract non-political people who might be or who had the potential to be useful to the cause even if, or especially if, they had to be ‘blackmailed’ or persuaded into doing so at some future time. The second type of covert group would be devoted to establishing a small cadre of NS fanatics, of ‘sleepers’, to – when the time was right – be disruptive or generally subversive.

Nothing came of this second idea, and the few people I recruited during 1974 for the second group, migrated to help the first group, established the previous year. However, from the outset this first group was beset with problems for – in retrospect – two quite simple reasons, both down to me. First, my lack of leadership skills, and, second, the outer nature chosen for the group which was of a secret Occult group with the ‘offer’, the temptation, of sexual favours from female members in a ritualized Occult setting, with some of these female members being ‘on the game’ and associated with someone who was associated with my small gang of thieves […]

For some time, this underground group appeared to flourish, with some ‘respectable’ people recruited – initially a lecturer, a solicitor, a teacher, among others – with some of the recruits becoming converts to or in some way helping our political cause, and with such clandestine recruitment aided, later on, by some unexpected, non-factual, unwanted, publicity.

But what happened was that, over time and under the guidance of its mentor, the Occult and especially the hedonistic aspects came to dominate over the political and subversive intent, with the raisons d’etat of blackmail and persuasion, of recruiting useful, respectable, people thus lost. Hence, while I still considered, then and for quite some time afterwards, that the basic idea of such a subversive group, such a honeytrap, was sound, I gradually lost interest in this particular immoral honeytrap project until another spell in prison for an assortment of offences took me away from Leeds and my life as a violent neo-nazi activist.”

[2] In part six of Ethos of Extremism – dealing with the years 1998-1992 – Myatt wrote:

” There was no sudden decision to convert to Islam. Rather, it was the culmination of a process that began a decade earlier with travels in the Sahara Desert. During the decade before my conversion I regularly travelled abroad, with this travel including well-over a dozen visits to Egypt and a few visits to other lands where the majority of the population were Muslim.

Egypt, especially, enchanted me; and not because of the profundity of ancient monuments. Rather because of the people, their culture, and the land itself. How life, outside of Cairo, seemed to mostly cling to the Nile – small settlements, patches and strips of verdanity, beside the flowing water and hemmed in by dry desert. I loved the silence, the solitude, the heat, of the desert; the feeling of there being precariously balanced between life and death, dependant on carried water, food; the feeling of smallness, a minute and fragile speck of life; the vast panorama of sky. There was a purity there, human life in its essence, and it was so easy, so very easy, to feel in such a stark environment that there was, must be, a God, a Creator, who could decide if one lived or died.

Once, after a long trip into the Western Desert, I returned to Cairo to stay at some small quite run-down hotel: on one side, a Mosque, while not that far away on the other side was a night-club. A strange, quixotic, juxtaposition that seemed to capture something of the real modern Egypt. Of course, very early next morning the Adhaan from the mosque woke me. I did not mind. Indeed, I found it hauntingly beautiful and, strangely, not strange at all; as if it was some long-forgotten and happy memory, from childhood perhaps.

Once, I happened to be cycling from Cairo airport to the centre of the city as dawn broke, my route taking me past several Mosques. So timeless, so beautiful, the architecture, the minarets, framed by the rising sun…

Once, and many years before my conversion, I bought from a bookshop in Cairo a copy of the Quran containing the text in Arabic with a parallel English interpretation, and would occasionally read parts of it, and although I found several passages interesting, intriguing, I then had no desire, felt no need, to study Islam further. Similarly, the many friendly conversations I had with Egyptians during such travels – about their land, their culture, and occasionally about Islam – were for me just informative, only the interest of a curious outsider, and did not engender any desire to study such matters in detail.

However, all these experiences, of a decade and more, engendered in me a feeling which seemed to grow stronger year by year with every new trip. This was the feeling that somehow in some strange haunting way I belonged there, in such places, as part of such a culture. A feeling which caused me – some time after the tragic death of Sue (aged 39) from cancer in the early 1990’s – to enrol on, and begin, an honours course in Arabic at a British university.

Thus, suffice to say that a decade of such travel brought a feeling of familiarity and resonance with Egypt, its people, its culture, that land, and with the Islam that suffused it, so that when in the Summer of 1998 I seriously began to study Islam, to read Ahadith, Seerah, and the whole Quran, I had at least some context from practical experience. Furthermore, the more I studied Islam in England in those Summer months the more I felt, remembered, the sound of the beautiful Adhaan; remembered the desert – that ætherial purity, that sense of God, there; and remembered that haunting feeling of perhaps already belonging to such a culture, such a way of life.

Hence my conversion to Islam, then, in September of that year, seemed somehow fated, wyrdful.”

[3] Of this learning of humility, Myatt – in his Pathei-Mathos, A Path To Humility – writes:

“In terms of my own pathei-mathos, the culture of Islam – manifest in Adab, in Namaz, and in a reliance on only Allah, and a culture lived, experienced, by me over a period of some nine years – was not only a new revelation of the numinous but also a grounding in practical humility. The very performance of Namaz requires and cultivates an attitude of personal humility, most obvious in Sajdah, the prostration to and in the presence of Allah, Ar-Rahman, Ar-Raheem; a personal humility encouraged by Adab, and shared in Jummah Namaz in a Masjid and during Ramadan.”

[4] Even adherents of the Myatt is a satanist scenario are forced to admit that this kind of supposition is astonishing:

“Even more astonishing than this transition [from neo-nazi to Muslim], is that it seems both his Nazism and Islamism are merely instruments for the ONA’s underlying sinister esoteric plots.” Per Faxneld: Post-Satanism, Left Hand Paths, and Beyond in Per Faxneld & Jesper Petersen (eds) The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press (2012), p.207. ISBN 9780199779246

[5] As the Canadian author and satirist Jeff Wells wrote:

“Is Myatt an agent provocateur, a shit-disturber who can’t settle upon a radical philosophy, something more, or something less? It’s difficult to assess motive, but consider that he has been arrested numerous times for such things as writing and disseminating ‘practical terrorist guides’ [and] on suspicion of conspiracy to murder. These cases have always been dropped due to ‘lack of evidence’. Does he enjoy protection? The record is suggestive that he does…

So again: whose interests are served by there being a David Myatt? Is he is own man – or men – or does he belong to someone else? Or is it something else – an intelligence service perhaps?” Nine Angles of Separation, 2005.

An overview of the theory of Myatt as agent provocateur is given in the 2009 text David Myatt: Agent Provocateur?

[6] As one exponent of the Myatt is a satanist scenario states in respect of Myatt himself and some of Myatt’s writings: “[The article] appears to be part of the game that Myatt is playing with the media […] His conversion to Islam was probably nothing more than a game of make-believe […] It is my claim that Myatt’s move to Islam is part of a sinister strategy that has its roots in the insight roles and idea of sinister dialectics within the ONA […] Myatt’s life-long devotion to various extreme ideologies has been part of a sinister game that is at the heart of the ONA.” 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 & Jesper Petersen (eds) The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press (2012), pp. 266, 267, 269.

The relevant expressions in the above quotation are ‘appears to be’, ‘probably nothing more than’, and ‘my claim’. For no evidence is adduced. Is it tendentious to claim, as Senholt does, that Myatt’s years as a Muslim were ‘nothing more than a game of make-believe’ given that Myatt put himself at risk of arrest, interrogation, extradition, and imprisonment, by preaching Jihad, meeting with Islamists, and penning texts supporting suicide attacks and bin Laden, and thus merited a mention at NATO conferences on terrorism in 2005, in 2006, and again in 2010?

It would be interesting to know how the exponents of the Myatt is a satanist and Myatt is Anton Long scenarios explain the contents of the two volumes of Myatt’s personal letters that have been published, since these letters – just like Myatt’s poetry – portray a person very different from a satanist playing ‘sinister games’. Would they claim these letters were ‘nothing more than make-believe’ and thus part of the sinister game they allege Myatt is playing? The two volumes in question are Selected Letters, 2002-2008 (pdf) and Extracts from Letters to Friends, 2008-2011 (pdf).

[7] In A Matter of Honour Myatt wrote:

Since at least 1997 I have no doubt been under regular covert surveillance by Special Branch and MI5 – and especially so since 9/11 given some statements I made while a Muslim – with all my communications (internet, telephonic) monitored via GCHQ. Indeed, following my conversion to Islam and during the time I seemed to be, for the security services and the Police, ‘a significant person of interest’, I recall many meetings and friendly conversations with one of the Special Branch officers on attachment to the city near where I was then living.

Given such surveillance and interest, no doubt there are records somewhere of my activities as a neo-nazi extremist; of my subsequent life as a radical Muslim supporting Jihad, and finally of my life as a reclusive philosopher, a friend of σοφόν who seeks, throughλόγος, to uncover – to understand – Being and beings, and who thus suggests or proposes an ontology of Being. What there will not be, will be any records of ‘Myatt as Satanist’.

As I mentioned in my article Polemos Our Genesis in respect of such surveillance:

‘I have [since at least 1997] worked on the assumption that my communications are monitored, so I have restricted my internet and telephonic communications to friends, family, and to people I personally know or who are personally known to someone I trust. This means two things. That all I communicate is personal, open, transparent, and honest; and that if someone not belonging to this small circle of contacts claims to have had some communication from me – either sent with my name or sent using some pseudonym – then it is bogus.’

[8] q.v. David Myatt: A Matter of Honour (e-text 2012).

[9] These writings include The Pursuit of Wisdom (2011), Just My Fallible Views, Again, and the collection Pathei-Mathos – A Path To Humility (2010-2012).

[10] According to Myatt his poetry “was composed between the years 1971-2012, and is of varying quality. Having undertaken the onerous task of re-reading those poems that I still have copies of, there are in my fallible view only around a dozen that I consider may possibly be good enough to be read by others. This collection [‘Relict’] contains these few poems, and most are autobiographical in nature.”

[11] These writings about his rejection of extremism include (i) A Rejection of Extremism (pdf), (ii) Meditations on Extremism, Remorse, and The Numinosity of Love, (iii) De Novo Caelo (pdf).

A selection of quotations about extremism taken from Myatt’s recent writings are given in the e-text Concerning Extremism.

For Myatt’s analysis of extremism as hubris see (i) Some Personal Musings On Empathy, in relation to the philosophy of πάθει μάθος [Part Two of Myatt’s Recuyle Of The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos] and (ii) Enantiodromia and The Reformation of The Individual [Part Three of Recuyle Of The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos].

[12] Some of his letters from this period are included in the collection Extracts from Letters to Friends. Selected Letters of David Myatt, 2008-2011.


This work is issued under the Creative Commons (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0) License
and can be freely copied and distributed, under the terms of that license.

The Numinous Balance of Honour

David Myatt

David Myatt

The Numinous Balance of Honour
by David Myatt

In many ways, 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 – 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.

ΔΔΔ

Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/honour-the-numinous-balance/