Some Problems With Modern Democracy

David Myatt

Editorial Note: Although this 2010 essay by Myatt pre-dates his philosophy of pathei mathos and may therefore fall into the category of writings disowned by him, we republish it here as in our view it offers some interesting insights into modern democracy.

RDM Crew
May 2018 ev

Article source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/the-moment-of-my-reading/

°°°°°°°°°

A Moment Among My Reading

Some Problems With Modern Democracy

For the past few weeks I have been re-reading classical authors such as Thucydides, Herodotus, Pliny, and Tacitus. Which reading led to me to reflect upon the histories of the nations of the modern West and the form of government – the modern democracy – that they have developed and whether such problems as I, personally, perceive that such a form of government has may be detrimental to Western societies in the future.

Some Basic Problems

1. The first problem I perceive with modern democracy is that a country generally gets the leaders – presidents, prime ministers – and the government who and which tend to reflect, in their words, promises, and policies, the often changeable fears, hopes, and emotions of a majority of people at election time or at least of the percentage necessary to win an election; with such fears, hopes, and emotions often engendered by the Media, by a specific political party, by a ‘social movement’, and by ‘special interest’ (advocacy) groups or individuals with their own agendas, all of whom seek to influence ‘public opinion’ and the policies of politicians and governments. Such ‘special interest’ groups invariably include those with particular business and political concerns who have the financial resources to employ professional lobbyists, Media consultants, and propagandists.

The result is that the political party and/or particular advocacy groups who have the most money during elections campaigns, and who have the support of a substantial part of the Media, and/or who have a candidate for high office who is a persuasive public speaker, influence the result of elections, having persuaded or influenced the percentage of people necessary to win an election.

In other words, modern elections have become an often cynical process of targeting, persuading, and influencing, people (or specific types of people) by appealing to their fears, their hopes, their emotions, based on specific – and supra-personal – political, social, and business, agendas and interests.

In practical terms this means that the leaders tend to represent their own personal (sometimes emotive) and/or political agenda and/or the agendas of whatever ‘special interest’ groups have helped them get elected. Naturally they deny this, since they invariably and cynically declare that their policies and actions represent “the will of the people” – and thus that they have a mandate for those policies and actions – or they rather naively do believe that they have a mandate having a personality or the personal vanity which has made them a mere figurehead for ‘special interest’ groups and/or the political magnates of their own political party who themselves have their own agendas.

Over decades, the cynical process of targeting, persuading, and influencing, people results in changing governments, for with each new election a majority of people are persuaded or believe that “it will be better, different, next time” and that their hopes will be realized by electing a different president or a different political party or even by electing the same political party but with a different prime minister and some different politicians. Meanwhile, very little of substance changes for the majority. There may be some cosmetic changes, but public services often get worse, crime increases, with the poor staying poor, and the rich staying rich or becoming richer, immune or indifferent as the majority of the rich are to declining public services, to social problems, and to increasing crime.

2. The second problem with modern democracy is that politicians in general and candidates for leadership positions in government do not have to have – and in these modern times are not expected by the public to have – practical character-revealing life-experiences; and thus to have undertaken deeds which have revealed that they are courageous individuals who in dangerous or difficult situations have placed the life of others and of their country before their own. Life-experience such as serving in the armed forces of one’s country and being awarded a medal or medals for gallantry; or serving as a ‘first responder’ – such as a paramedic, or a police officer, or in the Fire & Rescue service – and thus having faced difficult, trying, and life-threatening circumstances.

Instead, all individuals have to do to qualify as a politician is to have powerful and influential friends, and/or have the support of a substantial part of the Media, and/or have the support of influential advocacy groups, and/or have adroitly played ‘the political game’ and thus have been selected by the political magnates of their own political party, and/or have personal wealth sufficient to buy their way into the Media or – through (sometimes secret) donations or other means – gain the support of influential advocacy groups.

The result is that in a modern democracy there is a leader, and a government composed of a majority of politicians, who have no courageous deeds to their name, who have no experience of ‘front line’ service to their country and to their people, but who send people to fight wars, who make and enforce policy for the ‘front line’ services of their own land, and who can and who do, and based on some supra-personal political agenda, impose sanctions on other countries and who thus cause suffering to the ordinary people of those other countries.

In other words, you have career politicians who have never proved their mettle – never been tested – in dangerous or difficult situations lauding it over those who have.

3. The third problem with modern democracy is that modern politicians – with only a few exceptions – have mastered and use the art of propaganda, evident in their inability to be open and honest about their own failings and culpability while in public office, and in their inability to be honest about the failure of the policies of their government. Instead, they are adroit at manufacturing excuses, or shifting the blame away from themselves and government policies, or are disingenuous when answering questions or when addressing concerns about their culpability or that of their government.

4. The fourth problem with modern democracy is that, as a consequence of the aforementioned three problems, there is not “government by the people for the people” but instead government by a generally self-serving or advocacy-driven clique. Which political clique is generally wealthier – for politicians are paid well and often have other sources of income – than the majority of the electorate they were elected to serve.

Consequences

Since modern democracy is today still considered by the majority to function reasonably well in terms of maintaining society, it will remain for that majority the only viable option. For its inherent cynical process of targeting, persuading, and influencing, people will work so long as a majority can be persuaded that, after the next election, “it will be better, different,” with the self-serving or advocacy-driven political clique well-understanding the Psychologie des Foules.

Thus, the always well-off political clique will continue to laud it over the poor and those whose ‘front-line’ public service keeps society functioning. The self-perpetuating political clique will continue to makes excuses for their own failures, for declining public services, for government failure to solve social problems, and for increasing poverty, homelessness, and crime.

Mass discontent, as for example in the anti-war protests before and after the invasion of Iraq, strikes, scandals about corrupt politicians, even occasional riots, have not impacted significantly on the self-perpetuating political cliques: a change of leadership, some new policies, the dismissal or the resignation of a few politicians, propaganda by the Media, perhaps the election of a new government, are usually all that is required to maintain the democratic ‘status quo’.

A study of history, ancient and modern, indicates – at least to me – that such manipulation of the many by the few for the benefit of the few cannot, given human nature en masse, continue indefinitely. That there may well arise such a breakdown of basic services, such perceived inequality, such perceived injustices, such widespread discontent, that revolution, somewhere – peaceful or otherwise – seems almost inevitable, with the attendant suffering that revolutions often cause. Thus will the cyclical nature of human history repeat itself, for we humans apparently have not changed, en masse, significantly enough so that we are personally guided by such virtues as honesty, reason, and εὐταξία to thus be immune to the propagandistic machinations of politicians, demagogues, ideologues, and special interest groups. Instead, it seems that the same fears, hopes, and emotions, still guide us, just as the negative traits of old seem to still guide so many of those few who have, by whatever means, acquired power and authority over the majority.

Can this apparently inevitable suffering-causing cyclicity – such as that of governing cliques and their overthrow, and of the decline of societies – be avoided? My own personal – and admittedly fallible – answer is to reform modern democracy so that leaders and politicians must have such personal character-revealing experience as qualifies them to lead and to govern, with that personal experience consisting of proven and years-long ‘front line’ service to their country and to their people such as in the armed forces or serving as a ‘first responder’ in such occupations as paramedic, a police officer, and in the Fire & Rescue service.

However, such a reform by having character-revealing experience as a qualification for political office is unlikely to occur, given vested interests and – dare I say it – an education system which has neglected study in their original language of authors such as Thucydides, Herodotus, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Aristotle, Pliny, Tacitus, and Cicero.

So many times, in the past somewhat turbulent decade of my life, I have reflected upon a particular verse by Sophocles:

πολλὰ τὰ δεινὰ κοὐδὲν ἀνθρώπου δεινότερον πέλει [1]

For this seems to me to capture something of our rather strange human nature – of our ability, our potential, our capacity, to be honourable, self-restrained, rational human beings, and our seemingly equal capacity (or often, greater capacity) to be unsympathetic, insensitive, selfish, dishonourable, untrustworthy, or just plain barbaric.

David Myatt
2010

[1] Antigone, 334. My translation: “There exists much that is strange, but nothing has more strangeness than we human beings.”


Advertisements

A Contrast Of Lives

odal3

Editorial Note: The following extract is from the highly controversial Understanding Neo-völkisch Satanism, which article was first published on the TWS Nexion blog.

The extract provides succinct descriptions of the ‘modern satanism’ manufactured by Howard Stanton Levey (better known under his aliases of Anton LaVey and Anton Szandor LaVey) and the ‘traditional Satanism’ of the Order of Nine Angles, and – most interesting of all – also provides an account of the contrast between the life of Levey and the life of the person often alleged to be behind the pseudonym Anton Long, the founder of the O9A and author of most of its texts.

For those interested, the allegation regarding who is behind the pseudonym Anton Long is considered in detail in the 87 page book titled A Modern Mysterium, for which see the article at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/04/21/a-modern-mysterium-2/

°°°°°°°°°

The Satanism Of Levey

The Satanism of Levey is based on the premise that Satan is a symbol of the carnal, the selfish, the egoistic, nature of human beings, with satanism understood as manifesting the raison d’êtres of ‘might is right’, of ‘lex talionis’, and of the individualistic ideas expressed in Ayn Rand’s Objectivism {5}.

This type of Satanism promotes “the total satisfaction of the ego” {6} and obeying the law of the land {7}.

The Satanism Of Anton Long

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

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

A Contrast Of Lives

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

°°°°°

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

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

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

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

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

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

{11} Sunday Mercury, July 9, 2000.

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

{13} Searchlight, July 2000.

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

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

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

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

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

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


Concerning The Error of Extremism

David Myatt

Concerning The Error of Extremism

Editorial Note: The following philosophical definition and explanation of extremism is taken from Part Three of David Myatt’s book The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, available both in printed format (ISBN 978-1484096642) and as a gratis open access pdf document from the Opera Omina page of Myatt’s weblog or directly from here. The book outlines Myatt’s Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos, also known as The Numinous Way. Myatt’s definition and explanation of extremism is derived from his forty years as an extremist and from his own pathei mathos, his own learning from those forty years.

°°°°°°°

Extremism – as defined and understood by the philosophy of pathei-mathos – is a modern example of the error of hubris. An outward expression – codified in an ideology – of a bad individual physis (of a bad or faulty or misguided or underdeveloped/unmatured individual nature); of a lack of inner balance in individuals; of a lack of empathy and of pathei-mathos.

There is thus, in extremists, an ignorance of the true nature of Being and beings, and a lack of appreciation of or a wilful rejection of the numinous, as well as a distinct lack of or an aversion to personal humility, for it is the nature of the extremist that they are convinced and believe that ‘they know’ that the ideology/party/movement/group/faith that they accept or adhere to – or the leader that they follow – have/has the right answers, the correct solutions, to certain problems which they faithfully assert exist in society and often in human beings.

This conviction, this arrogance of belief, or this reliance on the assessment of someone else (some leader), combined with a lack of empathy and a lack of the insight and the self-knowing wrought by pathei-mathos, causes or greatly enhances an existing inner/interior dissatisfaction (an unbalance, a lack of harmony) within them in regard to what-is, so that some vision, some ideal, of the future – of society – becomes more important to them, more real, more meaningful, than people, than life, as people and life are now. Thus, they with their ideology, their faith, with and because of their dissatisfaction, possess or develope an urge to harshly interfere, continually finding fault with people, with society, with life itself, and so strive – mostly violently, hatefully, unethically, and with prejudice and often with anger – to undermine, to violently change, to ‘revolutionize’, or to destroy, what-is.

In simple terms, extremists fail to understand, to appreciate, to know, to apprehend, what is important about human beings and human living; what the simple reality, the simple nature, the real physis, of the majority of human beings and of society is and are, and thus what innocence means and implies. That is, there is a failure to know, to appreciate, what is good, and natural and numinous and innocent, in respect of human beings and of society. A failure to know, a failure to appreciate, a failure to feel what it is that empathy and pathei-mathos provide: the wisdom of our personal nature and personal needs; of our physis as rational – as balanced – human beings possessed of certain qualities, certain virtues, or capable of developing balance, capable of developing certain qualities, certain virtues, and thus having or of developing the ability to live in a certain manner: with fairness, with love, and without hatred and prejudice.

What is good, and natural – what should thus be appreciated, and respected, and not profaned by the arrogance (the hubris) of the extremist, and what empathy and pathei-mathos reveal – are the desire for personal love and the need to be loyally loved; the need for a family and the bonds of love within a family that lead to the desire to protect, care for, work for, and if necessary defend one’s loved ones. The desire for a certain security and stability and peace, manifest in a home, in sufficiency of food, in playfulness, in friends, in tolerance, in a lack of danger. The need for the dignity, the self-respect, that work, that giving love and being loved, provide.

David Myatt
2013


Decoding The Life Of Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

Decoding The Life Of Myatt

One of the most common assumptions made about David Myatt – often made and repeated by anonymous persons by means of the internet – is that he has flitted from one cause to another, from one extreme (neo-nazi) to another extreme (radical Islam) and from one religion to another (Catholicism, Buddhism, Islam, Paganism) to end up founding “his own religion”, The Numinous Way.

That those making and repeating such an assumption are ill-informed and/or ignorant, with the assumption itself being prejudicial, is obvious if one studies the life of Myatt in detail.

The first relevant fact is that Myatt was a dedicated National Socialist activist and ideologue for thirty years (1968-1998). That is, for the major part of his adult life, and for a period most probably longer than many of his ‘anonymous internet detractors’ have been alive. This three decade long period of his life led to him being described as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” {1}

The second relevant fact is that Myatt was a proponent of radical Islam – of Jihad – for ten years (1998-2008) during which decade he spent at least half of it in a campaign to form an alliance between National Socialists and Jihadists {2} so that they could fight what he regarded as their common enemy: Zionists and the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine. His campaign led to him being described as “emblematic of the modern syncretism of radical ideologies” {3} and as an “example of the axis between right-wing extremists and Islamists.” {2}{4} At a NATO conference in 2015 it was stated that Myatt, as a Muslim, had called on “all enemies of the Zionists to embrace the Jihad” against Jews and the United States {5}.

The third relevant fact – derived from the previous two – is that Myatt thus spent forty years of his life (1968-2008) actively campaigning against “the same enemy”, namely Jews and Zionists; that is, against what neo-nazis and others have termed ZOG, the Zionist Occupation Government.

Spending forty years of one’s life actively engaged in fighting the same enemy is most certainly not “flitting from one cause to another, from one extreme to another.”

Which decades-long dedication to a particular cause led to one academic writing that

“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 [Order of Nine Angles] underlying sinister esoteric plots.” {6}

Which brings us to consideration of Myatt’s possible motives; of what his five decades of peregrinations – from 1968 to 2018 – were all about.

The Peregrinations Of Mr Myatt

Myatt’s admittedly strange life has led to speculation about his intent, with one academic – reviewing the book in which the “underlying sinister esoteric plots” quotation occurs – describing Myatt as an “extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual.” {7}

Over the past ten years the speculation has ranged from (i) the aforementioned “instruments for the ONA’s underlying sinister esoteric plots,” to suggestions that (ii) he is a government agent provocateur, to (iii) him being on a life-long personal Faustian quest perhaps in hope of discovering ‘truth’, to (iv) him as a youthful fanatic who slowly, gradually, over decades learns from his experiences – political, religious, and personal – and thus changing, evolving, as a person.

In the “sinister esoteric plots” interpretation he is “Anton Long”, founder of the Occult group the Order of Nine Angles, with his role being “paramount to the whole creation and existence of the ONA” {8} and with his life being regarded by many involved in the Occult sub-culture that is the ONA/O9A {9} as a documented example of the ONA’s Seven Fold Way {10}. Thus, “Myatt’s life-long devotion to various extreme ideologies has been part of a sinister game that is at the heart of the ONA.” {11}

In regard to the “government agent provocateur” interpretation, as 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. And if it appears so, then we should ask the next question: Why?

Myatt may seem to have flitted from one politico-religious philosophy to another, but there is a terrible thread of continuity and rigour through his life and writings that suggests he is much more than a disingenuous provocateur. Naziism and Islamicism have served, in turn, as modalities of disruption for what remains at core an occult working to sow general chaos and division – the necessary passage of “Helter Skelter” to break down the Old Order, before the founding of the New.

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.” {12}

As one proponent of this interpretation suggested, the O9A

“may well have been created by a state asset as a means of gathering intelligence and recruiting suitable individuals to undertake acts of subversion, extremism, and terrorism, under the pretext of occult training.” {13}

In the “Faustian quest” interpretation, Myatt – according to one academic, undertook

“a global odyssey which took him on extended stays in the Middle East and East Asia, accompanied by studies of religions ranging from Christianity to Islam in the Western tradition and Taoism and Buddhism in the Eastern path. In the course of this Siddhartha-like search for truth, Myatt sampled the life of the monastery in both its Christian and Buddhist forms.” {14}

In the “youthful fanatic who slowly over decades changes” interpretation, Myatt was an arrogant idealist who selfishly placed some cause before family and loved ones but whose varied experiences over decades gradually changed him, with there being no “Siddhartha-like search for truth” and no “underlying sinister esoteric plots”. Instead, as he wrote in his autobiography Myngath,

“As often in my life, it seemed as if the Fates revealed to me the direction in which I should go. Thus, and yet again, there was a certain period of drifting, by me, until a particular course of life seemed obvious, even to me.” {15}

Conclusion

The fact that Myatt’s life – as currently documented – is open to various interpretations is interesting, with it being for us to decide which interpretation to accept based on what level of knowledge of Myatt’s life and works we possess, on what aspect or aspects of his life and works we concentrate on, and – perhaps most important of all – on whether or not we already have a prejudicial opinion of the man.

At present, neither the “sinister esoteric plots” interpretation nor the “government agent provocateur” interpretation are evidentially supported by primary sources relating to the life and writings of Myatt {16}{17}. Instead, they are based on non-evidential assumptions – often concerning Myatt’s intent – or, in case of academics and in the matter of the O9A, on fallacious reasoning as for example in the committal by Senholt of the Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence {18} and the committal of the fallacy of Illicit Transference by Massimo Introvigne {19} and by Della E. Campion. {20}

Since there is no scholarly biography of Myatt’s life based both on primary sources and on a detailed analyses of his post-2011 writings, his poetry, and his “philosophy of pathei-mathos” {21} the “sinister esoteric plots” interpretation and the “government agent provocateur” interpretation constitute personal opinion and/or serve (i) as examples of a lack of scholarly research, (ii) as examples of the use of forgeries, such as Diablerie and Bealuwes Gast {22}, and (iii) as examples of fallacious reasoning.

My own detailed study of currently accessible primary sources – sources {17} essential to understanding Myatt’s life and to placing his extremist decades into perspective – inclines me to favour the “youthful fanatic who slowly over decades changes” interpretation.

For example, Myatt wrote in 2012 that

“what exposed my hubris – what for me broke down that certitude-of-knowing which extremism breeds and re-presents – was not something I did; not something I achieved; not something related to my character, my nature, at all. Instead, it was a gift offered to me by two others – the legacy left by their tragic early dying. That it took not one but two personal tragedies – some thirteen years apart – for me to accept and appreciate the gift of their love, their living, most surely reveals my failure, the hubris that for so long suffused me, and the strength and depth of my so lamentable extremism.” {23}

In a 2012 letter written to a BBC journalist and later included in his book Understanding and Rejecting Extremism: A Very Strange Peregrination, {24} – both of which are primary sources – Myatt wrote,

“The problem in the past had been me, my lack of understanding of myself and my egoism. It was my fault: not the place, not the time, not the people, for I so desired with that arrogance of youth to exchange this paradise, here, for those ideas, the idealism, the abstractions, I carried around in my prideful hubriatic head. Seldom content, for long, since happiness came with – was – the pursuit, or the gratification of my personal desires. So destructive, so very destructive. So hurtful, inconsiderate, selfish, profane.”

In 2014 he wrote,

“In a very personal sense, my philosophy of pathei-mathos is expiative, as are my writings concerning extremism, such as my Understanding and Rejecting Extremism: A Very Strange Peregrination published last year. Also expiative is my reclusiveness. But such things – as is only just and fitting – do little to offset the deep sadness felt, except in fleeting moments.” {25}

Such are the words, the feelings, of someone who as a result of pathei-mathos has been interiorly changed. Someone who – unusually, having spent forty years as a revolutionary activist, as “a theoretician of terror” {26} who was regarded as a “principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution” {1} – has moved from extremist to mystic. {27}

It is my conclusion that it is only those who have not studied or who are ignorant of currently accessible Myattian primary sources who can maintain that “Myatt flitted from one cause to another” or who can believe fallacious interpretations such as that involving “sinister esoteric plots”.

Morena Kapiris
May 2018 ev
v.1.02

°°°

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

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

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

{4} Mark Weitzman. Antisemitismus und Holocaust-Leugnung: Permanente Elemente des globalen Rechtsextremismus, in Thomas Greven: Globalisierter Rechtsextremismus? Die extremistische Rechte in der Ära der Globalisierung. 1 Auflage. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2006

{5} Terrorism and Communications – Countering the Terrorist Information Cycle, Slovakia, April 2005. The document is available from the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism at http://www.ict.org.il/Article.aspx?ID=929 [accessed May 2018].

{6} Per Faxneld. Post-Satanism, Left Hand Paths, and Beyond in The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press (2012), p.207.

{7} Raine, Susan. The Devil’s Party (Book review). Religion, Volume 44, Issue 3, July 2014.

{8} Senholt, Jacob C. The Sinister Tradition. Conference paper presented at Satanism in the Modern World, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, 19-20th of November, 2009. A copy is available at https://www.webcitation.org/6bpiHBIrr [accessed May 2018].

{9} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the 21st Century. Sirius Academic Press. 2013, p.89.

{10} David Myatt, The Septenary Anados, And The Quest For Lapis Philosophicus, in A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A. e-text 2018. A gratis open access copy is available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/myattian-mysterium-v4.pdf [accessed May 2018].

{11} Senholt, Jacob. Secret Identities in The Sinister Tradition, in Per Faxneld and Jesper Petersen (editors), The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Oxford University Press, 2012. p.269.

{12} Jeff Wells, Rigorous Intuition blog, August 2005.

{13} David Myatt: Agent Provocateur? e-text, 2009. Available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/agent-provocateur/ [accessed May 2018].

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

{15} Myatt, David. Myngath. Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. CreateSpace, 2013. ISBN 9781484110744

{16} Primary sources in regard to Myatt’s life would include original documentation relating to his neo-nazi decades (such as criminal proceedings, police interviews), and documentation relating to his decade as a Muslim and his time as a Christian monk.

{17} Primary currently accessible sources regarding both his life and writings include the following post-2011 published works:

° The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos.
° Understanding and Rejecting Extremism: A Very Strange Peregrination.
° Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos.
° Myngath.
° One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods.
° Sarigthersa.
° One Exquisite Silence: Some Autobiographical Poems.
° Such Respectful Wordful Offerings: Selected Essays Of David Myatt.

All the above works, and others, are available as gratis open access (pdf) documents from https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2018/03/09/david-myatt-opera-omnia/ [Accessed May 2018].

{18} Myatt, David. The Logical Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence – A Case Study, in A Matter Of Honour, 2013, e-text. Available at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/about/a-matter-of-honour-2/ [accessed May 2018].

{19} Scott, Kerri. The Authority Of Individual Judgment And The Fallacy Of Illicit Transference, in The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long, 2018, e-text. The essay is included in A Modern Mysterium, op.cit.

{20} Scott, Kerri. Another Academic Misinterpretation Of The O9A, 2018, e-text. Available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/another-academic-misinterpretation/ [accessed May 2018].

{21} An overview of his philosophy of pathei-mathos is given in J.R. Wright & R. Parker, The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt. CreateSpace, 2106. ISBN 978-1523930135.

{22} Myatt, in his A Matter Of Honour, op.cit., describes both those purported autobiographies of “Anton Long” as forgeries. See also (i) R. Parker, Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery, 2014, e-text, available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/bealuwes-gast/ [Accessed May 2018] and (ii) R. Parker, A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie, 2013, e-text, available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/a-sceptics-review-of-diablerie/ [Accessed May 2018].

The thesis regarding Myatt being Anton Long proposed by academic Goodrick-Clark in his 2002 book Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism and the Politics of Identity is based entirely on his assumption that Myatt wrote Diablerie. Goodrick-Clark provided no evidence from primary sources to support his assumption.

That Goodrick-Clark’s book has been cited by others – including some academics – as “proof” of Myatt being Anton Long is an example of those others committing the fallacy of Argumentum ad Verecundiam.

{23} Pathei-Mathos – Genesis of My Unknowing. 2012. The essay is included as an appendix in Myatt’s autobiography Myngath.

{24} Myatt, David. Understanding and Rejecting Extremism: A Very Strange Peregrination. CreateSpace, 2013. ISBN ISBN 9781484854266.

{25} Myatt, David. Some Questions For DWM, included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods. CreateSpace, 2014. ISBN 978-1502396105.

{26} Theoretician of Terror, Searchlight, July 2000.

{27} J.R. Wright & R. Parker, op.cit.


A Modern Mysterium

David Myatt

David Myatt

Editorial Note: The interesting and informative essay presented below is from the Introduction to the “gratis open access” and 87 page book titled A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A (pdf). The essay summarizes the salient points of the book, containing as the book does essays written in the past few years by various authors, and divided as the book is into three parts.

The first part deals with the O9A; the second details the claim – the allegation – that Myatt is Anton Long; and the third part presents evidence which contradicts or which casts doubt on that allegation. The work therefore allows the reader to form their own opinion of the O9A and of whether or not there is any merit to the claim that the pseudonymous Anton Long was Mr Myatt.

°°°°°°°

Introduction, from A Modern Mysterium

As the author of one the essays included in A Modern Mysterium: The Enigma of Myatt And The O9A wrote, the question of whether or not Mr David Myatt is or was “Anton Long” is sui generis insofar as the Order of Nine Angles is concerned. Why? Basically for two reasons.

If he was, then, as several O9A supporters have claimed, his somewhat strange multiform, exeatic, and antinomian, life is a real-life example of not only the practical – ‘sinister’ – ethos of the O9A but also of its core praxis termed the Seven Fold Way, which praxis is a decades-long esoteric and exoteric personal quest for Lapis Philosophicus, for Wisdom.

If he was not, then the O9A remains one modern Occult philosophy among many with little to distinguish it other than perhaps its complexity and its Labyrinthos Mythologicus.

If his life is a practical example of the ‘sinister’ ethos of the O9A – as his decades of practical involvement with political and religious extremism, his support for terrorism, his imprisonment for violence, and his criminal years, might seem to suggest – then it is easy to understand why opponents and critics of the O9A continue to denigrate him, for the documented facts about his life are enough to make Howard Levey – the much vaunted ‘Anton LaVey’, often described as “the founder of modern satanism” – seem, by comparison, just a showman, a charlatan, and a wuss. {1}

In addition, Myatt’s documented intellectualism – as in his Greek translations and commentaries, such as of tractates from the Corpus Hermeticum – make both Levey and the equally vaunted Aquino (of Temple of Set fame) seem to be, by comparison, pretentious pseudo-intellectuals. Unlike those individuals, Myatt has “fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic” {2} and thus can read primary esoteric, classical, and alchemical sources in their original language whereas they, and most if not all of their followers, have to rely on the translations of others, lacking as they do the erudition of Myatt, an erudition evident in his recent book Tu Es Diaboli Ianua. {3}

The sources used, for example, by Howard Levey – evident in his ‘satanic bible’ and his letters – are populist interpretations of the likes of Nietzsche and Ayn Rand, populist books about psychology, with the anonymous polemic titled Might Is Right much plagiarized. Such sources and populist interpretations are also much in evidence in texts written by Aquino, such as The Crystal Tablet of Set, where populist summaries of philosophies and weltanschauungen, ancient and modern, precede a quite minimalist and vague presentation of ‘satanist’ and/or of Temple of Set ideas. Thus, a chapter on ‘ethics’ consists of 12 pages of populist summaries of the likes of Plato, Hegel, Marx, et al, followed by a meagre few paragraphs concerning good and evil in an occult context, and which paragraphs merely present rather cliched personal opinions, such as that “there is thus no easy answer to the question of whether a given magical act is good or evil” and that “it is up to the magician to determine what judgments – by which judges – will be important”. As befits such pseudo-intellectualism, the references in such texts are often to populist works (such as The Social Contract by Robert Ardrey) just as quotations from such people as Plato are invariably in translations, not by Aquino, but by someone else. In contrast, when Myatt writes of ethics and about ‘good and evil’ in chapter IV – Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God – of his 2013 book Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos, he provides passages in Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic, along with his own translations. Similarly, when discussing ethics in his more recent Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos, {4} Myatt provides the relevant Greek texts (such as from the Gospel of John) and his own translations.

It is thus also easy to understand why many supporters of the O9A support the claim that Myatt is Long. For add to his documented exeatic life, to his intellectualism, the fact that he is regarded by academics as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution” and you have a person who most definitely does seem to fit the profile of what an ONA person is or should be, with his post-2012 ‘philosophy of pathei mathos’ and recent books such as Tu Es Diaboli Ianua and Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos understood as the musings of someone who, after decades of peregrinations and scholarly study, has found Lapis Philosophicus and who is “living the final apprehension”, with that philosophy, such books, and ‘the last writings of Anton Long’ {5} serving

“to illuminate the O9A for what it is and always has been, beyond the rhetoric, beyond the polemics, beyond its Labyrinthos Mythologicus, and beyond the assumptions made by others. That is, it is a living hereditary, evolving, repository of esoteric knowledge; part of which accumulated and accumulating knowledge is a scholarly perspective on ancient hermeticism; another part of which is a practical modern means (for those who might be interested) to achieve Adeptship and beyond; another part of which knowledge concerns a New Aeon and the logos necessary to bring that Aeon into being. Other parts of which are Esoteric Chant and Aeonics; and so on. In addition, this body of esoteric knowledge now also contains the insights of someone who has ventured beyond The Abyss, and which particular insights return us to that pagan knowledge, that ancient wisdom, of the Rounwytha way, which is, for those who follow it, the way of a certain type of knowing and of a certain type of living.” {6}

All of which makes it unnecessary for anyone – by they O9A or otherwise – to ‘hype’ Mr Myatt, for just presenting the documented facts about his life, and drawing attention to his intellectualism, his erudition, is sufficient. That life, that intellectualism, ‘the last writings of Anton Long’, Myatt’s ‘philosophy of pathei mathos’ (understood as a modern manifestation of the O9A way of the Rounwytha) and books such as Tu Es Diaboli Ianua and Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos tell the necessary story.

Which story is of a modern Magus; of someone who has spent all of his adult life – half a century – on an esoteric and an exoteric quest. Since such a quest exemplifies what the search for Lapis Philosophicus, for Gnosis, for Wisdom, is all about it is in the final analysis irrelevant if Myatt was or was not the pseudonymous Anton Long. For such a personal quest is the essence of all genuine Occult philosophies and praxises, beyond the labels – the denotata – we or others assign to them, be such labels Left Hand Path, Right Hand Path, Satanist, or O9A.

Which, at least to me and some others, makes Myatt someone to be admired and – perhaps – emulated by those O9A or otherwise.

June Boyle
2018

{1} Myatt, for example, has convictions and imprisonment for violence, in 1972, after leading a gang of skinheads in a ‘paki-bashing’ incident: documented in court proceedings, prison records, and newspapers. A conviction for leading a gang of thieves in 1974 and being a fence: documented in court proceedings, in police records/interviews, in mainstream newspaper reports.

He was arrested in 1998 for conspiracy to murder: documented in police records (Scotland Yard, the operation was code-named Periphery), documented in custody records at Malvern and Charing Cross police stations. He founded and led the political wing of Combat 18, the NSM, a fact documented by several academics and by mainstream newspaper reports.

He publicly supported bin Laden and the Taliban before and after 9/11: documented by several academics, by proceedings of NATO conferences, by newspaper reports. He travelled to Arab countries and – when it was unpopular and very dangerous to do so, such as after 9/11 – incited Jihad: documented by several academics. His writings justifying suicide attacks were used by ‘terrorist’ groups such as Hamas: documented by several academics, and by proceedings of NATO conferences.

{2} Connell Monette. Mysticism in the 21st Century, Sirius Academic Press, 2013. p.87.

{3} David Myatt. Tu Es Diaboli Ianua: Christianity, The Johannine Weltanschauung, And Presencing The Numinous. 2017. ISBN 978-1982010935.

{4} David Myatt. Classical Paganism And The Christian Ethos. 2017. ISBN 978-1979599023.

{5} See Appendix II of the book.

{6} The quotation is from chapter I of Part Two of the book, which chapter is titled David Myatt, The Septenary Anados, And The Quest For Lapis Philosophicus.


A Time To Reflect

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

A time to reflect as I – tired from long days of manual work – sit in the garden watching the clouds clear to bring some warm Sun on this windy day of a coldish wind. On the horizon to the South: Cumulus clouds billowing up to herald more showers, and I, for a moment as a child again, watch a few cloud-faces change to disperse; as if the clouds are for that moment, just that one moment, a memory of a person who lived, once, on this Earth: reaching out to be remembered as they the cloud move as they are moved in their so-brief and new existence.

The hedgerows are greening; the branches of trees coming into leaf, and life is renewed while I wait for the Swallows to return, here, to this Farm. This is Life: in its purest truth devoid of the empathy-destroying, suffering-causing, abstractions that we humans have manufactured to blight this planet and so grievously injure our fecund still beautiful but now suffering Mother Earth who gives us, and who gave us, life.

The brief warm Sun renews as it almost always does for me, and so – for this moment, this one moment – I am happy, again; feeling the measure of Meaning, of happiness, of joy itself; which is in a simple just-being, sans abstractions, sans thought, and beyond the dependency of, the addiction to, anger…..

Here – the child, again; free to watch the bee bumble from flower to flower; free to feel a certain playful awe. Here, the concern with only what is seen, touched, known, smelt, in the immediacy of dwelling.

There should be nothing more; nothing to wreck such simple being; nothing to bring the-suffering. But I, we, are stupid, weak, vain, addicted – and so in our failing repeat and repeat and repeat the same mistakes, and so cause and maintain the pain of our, of their, of other, suffering. Mea Culpa; Mea Culpa; Mea Maxima Culpa…

David Myatt
April 2007

°°°°°

Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2013/03/29/one-slow-and-painful-learning/


Society, Politics, Social Reform, and Pathei-Mathos

David Myatt

David Myatt

Editorial Note: We republish here an essay by David Myatt written in 2012 and included in his book The Numinous Way Of Pathei Mathos. {1} The essay provides an insight into how his ‘numinous way’ deals with important issues such as politics, society, and social change. Derived as these insights were from his own pathei mathos, from the personal learning acquired from some fifty years of practical political experience, the essay provides a remarkable contrast to the ‘revolutionary polemics’ of his extremist decades (1968-2009) and which decades led to him being described as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” {2}

RDM Crew
April 2018

{1} The book, published in 2013, is available both as a gratis open access document – https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/numinous-way-v5c-print.pdf – and in printed format: Myatt, David, The Numinous Way Of Pathei Mathos, CreateSpace, 2013. 96 pages. ISBN 978-1484096642

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

°°°°°

Society, Politics, Social Reform, and Pathei-Mathos

Modern Society and The Individual

Society, in the context of this essay, refers to ‘modern societies’ (especially those of the modern ‘democratic’ West) and means a collection of individuals who dwell, who live, in a particular area and who are subject to the same laws and the same institutions of authority. Modern society is thus a manifestation of The State, and which State is predicated on individuals actively or passively accepting some supra-personal authority [1].

In modern societies, change and reform are often therefore introduced or attempted by The State most usually: (1) on the basis of the manufacture of some law or laws which the individuals, and the established institutions, of the area governed by The State are expected to obey on pain of some type of individual punishment, financial and/or physically punitive (as in prison); or (2) by means of State-sponsored or State-introduced schemes such as, for example, the British National Health Service and which schemes are invariably enshrined in law.

The essence of such change and reform of a society – large-scale, effective, rapid change and reform in society – is therefore, for the majority of people, external, and most often derives from some posited or assumed or promised agenda of the government of the day; that is, derived from some political or social or economic theory, axiom, idea, or principle, posited by others, be these others, for example, politicians, or social/political/economic theorists/reformers (and so on).

There is thus a hierarchy of judgement involved, whatever political ‘flavour’ the government is assigned to, is assumed to represent, or claims it represents; with this hierarchy of necessity requiring the individual in society to either (i) relinquish their own judgement, being accepting of or acquiescing in (from whatever reason or motive such as desire to avoid punishment) the judgement of these others, or (ii) to oppose this ‘judgement of others’ either actively through some group, association, or movement (political, social, religious) or individually, with there being the possibility that some so opposing this ‘judgement of others’ may resort to using violent means against the established order.

Objectively, this process of change and reform by means of a hierarchy of judgement manifest in laws, and of State authority and power sufficient to enforce such laws, has resulted in fairly stable societies which are, for perhaps the majority of people, relatively peaceful, not overtly repressive, and – judged by the criteria of past societies and many non-Western societies – relatively prosperous.

Thus, while many problems – social and economic – remain and exist in such societies, with some such problems getting worse, such societies work reasonably well, contain an abundance of well-intentioned, moral, individuals, and appear to be better than the alternatives both tried in the past and theorized about. Hence it is not surprising that perhaps the majority of people within such societies favour solving such problems as do exist by existing social, political, and economic means; that is, by internal social, political, and economic, reform rather than by violent means and the advocacy of extremist ideologies.

Furthermore, many or most of the flaws, and the problems, within society are recognized and openly discussed, with a multitude of people of good will, of humanity, of fairness, committed to or interested in helping those affected by such flaws and problems, and thus not only trying to improve society but also to finding and implementing solutions in tolerant ways which do not cause conflict or involve the harshness, the violence, the hatred, the intolerance, of extremism.

For, while most large-scale, effective, rapid change and reform in society tends to be by enforceable State laws and State-sponsored schemes, change and reform also and significantly occurs and has occurred within society, albeit often more slowly, through the efforts of individuals and groups and organizations devoted to charitable, religious, or social causes and which individuals and groups and organizations by their very nature are invariably non-violent and often non-political. Furthermore, such non-violent, non-political, individuals and groups and organizations often become the inspiration for reform and change introduced by The State.

Some Problems of Modern Society

Before outlining a possible numinous approach to reform and change, based on the philosophy of pathei-mathos, it would perhaps be useful to outline some of the social problems that still beset modern societies. What therefore constitutes a social problem within a society? How is such a problem defined?

In essence, it is an undesirable circumstance or way of living that affects a number of people and which undesirable circumstance or way of living others in society are or become aware of; with what is undesirable being – according to the ethics of the philosophy of pathei-mathos [2] – that which is, or those who are, unfair; that which deprives or those whom deprive a human being of dignity and honour; and that which is and those who are uncompassionate.

Thus, among the many problems of modern societies are misogyny; ethnic and religious discrimination, hatred, and prejudice; and social/economic inequality.

For example, misogyny – from the Greek μισογύνης – is unfairness toward, and/or prejudice and discrimination against, women. Often, as in the past, this is a consequence of an existing prejudice in a man: for example, that men are somehow better than women, or that women are ‘useful’ only for or suited to certain things; or that the subservience of women, and thus their domination/control by men, is ‘a natural and necessary’ state of human existence.

Misogyny in individual practice often results in men being violent/domineering toward, or selfishly manipulative and controlling of, women; and thus in them treating women in a dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate way.

Similarly, a hatred or dislike of or discrimination against an individual or a group of individuals on the basis of their perceived or assumed ethnicity is treating that individual or group in a dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate way.

Thus such social problems are often the result, the consequence of, a lack of empathy in a person, with this lack of συμπάθεια with other human beings having often in the past been evident in the treatment of people and individuals by governments, States, and institutions, and often revealed in and through discriminatory, unfair, uncompassionate laws.

A Numinous and Non-Political Approach

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.

For, as mentioned in Some Personal Musings On Empathy,

“[the] acceptance of the empathic – of the human, the personal – scale of things and of our limitations as human beings is part of wu-wei. [3] Of not-striving, and of not-interfering, beyond the purveu of our empathy and our pathei-mathos. Of personally and for ourselves discovering the nature, the physis, of beings; of personally working with and not against that physis, and of personally accepting that certain matters or many matters, because of our lack of personal knowledge and lack of personal experience of them, are unknown to us and therefore it is unwise, unbalanced, for us to have and express views or opinions concerning them, and hubris for us to adhere to and strive to implement some ideology which harshly deals with and manifests harsh views and harsh opinions concerning such personally unknown matters.

Thus what and who are beyond the purveu of empathy and beyond pathei-mathos is or should be of no urgent concern, of no passionate relevance, to the individual seeking balance, harmony, and wisdom, and in truth can be detrimental to finding wisdom and living in accord with the knowledge and understanding so discovered.”

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.

An Experience of The Numinous

The change that the philosophy – the way – of pathei-mathos seeks to foster, to encourage, is the natural, slow, interior and personal change within individuals; that is, the change of personal character by the individual developing and using their faculty of empathy and inclining toward being compassionate and honourable by nature. In essence, this is a numinous – a spiritual – change in people, a change of perspective, quite different from the supra-personal social change based on laws desired by modern States and by those who champion or who employ political, economic, and social theories regarding society, government, and the individual.

This interior personal change, by its numinous and ethical nature, is one that does not seek to reform society through politics or by any type of agitation, or through the use of force, or by means of any type of organization, social, political, economic, religious. Instead, such numinous change is the reform of individuals on a personal, individual, and cultural basis; by personal example and by individuals cultivating, in accordance with wu-wei, conditions and circumstances whereby they themselves and others can move toward συμπάθεια with other human beings through a personal knowing and experience of the numinous. Such a knowing and experience of the numinous can be cultivated by a variety of means, for example by harmonious surroundings; through an appreciation of, and a living in balance with, Nature; by love and respect and manners and a desire for peace; by periods of interior and exterior silence; through culture and thus through music, Art, literature, an understanding of history, and through respect for and tolerance of the many religions and spiritual Ways which have arisen over millennia and which may manifest the numinous or something of the numinous.

David Myatt
2012 ce

Notes

[1] The State is defined as:

The concept of both (1) organizing and controlling – over a particular and large geographical area – land (and resources); and (2) organizing and controlling individuals over that same geographical particular and large geographical area by: (a) the use of physical force or the threat of force and/or by influencing or persuading or manipulating a sufficient number of people to accept some leader/clique/minority/representatives as the legitimate authority; (b) by means of the central administration and centralization of resources (especially fiscal and military); and (c) by the mandatory taxation of personal income.

My personal (fallible) view is that by their nature States often tend to be masculous (hence the desire for wars, invasions, conquest, competition, and the posturing often associated with ‘patriotism’), although in my view they can become balanced, within, by acceptance of certain muliebral qualities, qualities most obviously manifest in certain aspects of culture, in caring professions, in pursuing personal love and the virtue of wu-wei, and in and by the empowerment and equality of, and respect for, women and those whose personal love is for someone of the same gender.

As mentioned elsewhere, I am somewhat idiosyncratic regarding capitalization (and spelling), and capitalize certain words, such as State, and often use terms such as The State to emphasize the philosophical truth of State as entity.

[2] The ethics of the way of pathei-mathos are the ethics of empathy – of συμπάθεια. In practical personal terms, this means dignity, fairness, balance (δίκη), reason, a lack of prejudgement, and the requirement of a personal knowing and of personal experience, of πάθει μάθος.

An ethical person thus reveals, possesses, εὐταξία – the quality, the personal virtue, of self-restraint; of personal orderly (balanced, honourable, well-mannered) conduct, a virtue especially evident under adversity or duress.

Thus, and as mentioned in Enantiodromia and The Reformation of The Individual, the good is considered to be what is fair; what alleviates or does not cause suffering; what is compassionate; what empathy by its revealing inclines us to do, what inclines us to appreciate the numinous and why ὕβρις is an error of unbalance.

Hence the bad – what is wrong, immoral – is what is unfair; what is harsh and unfeeling; what intentionally causes or contributes to suffering, with what is bad often considered to be due to a lack of empathy and of πάθει μάθος in a person, and a consequence of a bad φύσις, of a bad, a rotten, or an undeveloped, unformed, not-mature, individual character/nature. In effect, such a bad person lacks εὐταξία, has little or no appreciation of the numinous, and is often in thrall to their hubriatic and/or their masculous desires.

[3] Wu-wei – a Taoist term – is used here, and elsewhere in the philosophy of The Numinous Way, to refer to a personal ‘letting-be’ deriving from a feeling, a knowing, that an essential part of wisdom is cultivation of an interior personal balance and which cultivation requires acceptance that one must work with, or employ, things according to their nature, for to do otherwise is incorrect, and inclines us toward, or is, being excessive – that is, is ὕβρις. In practice, this is the cultivation of a certain (an acausal, numinous) perspective – that life, things/beings, change, flow, exist, in certain natural ways which we human beings cannot change however hard we might try; that such a hardness of human trying, a belief in such hardness, is unwise, un-natural, upsets the natural balance and can cause misfortune/suffering for us and/or for others, now or in the future. Thus success lies in discovering the inner nature of things/beings/ourselves and gently, naturally, slowly, working with this inner nature, not striving against it.