The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

°°°°°°°

The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long

For almost four decades The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long has interested many of those interested in or curious about the modern Occult group the Order of Nine Angles, since in respect of the Order of Nine Angles whether or not Mr David Myatt is or was “Anton Long” is sui generis.

Sui generis because Anton Long not only devised the Occult philosophy and the praxises (such as the Seven Fold Way with its Insight Roles, Culling, Star Game, Esoteric Chant, Grade Ritual of Internet Adept, and physical challenges) that are – that presence – the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) but also authored nearly all of its texts from its inception in the early 1970s to his retirement, as the extant Magus of the O9A, in 2011 c.e. As one person associated with the O9A wrote:

“In modern occultism there are four main exponents of, and/or expositions of, what is often referred to as Left Hand Path, and/or Satanic, esotericism. These are Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan; Michael Aquino and the Temple of Set; Aleister Crowley and Thelema; and Anton Long and the Order of Nine Angles.

Whatever one’s opinion of the Church of Satan, the Temple of Set, Thelema, or the Order of Nine Angles, they all to great extent reflect the known and documented life, the personality, and the ideas or beliefs, of the person most associated with them and who first expounded, or who first effectively codified, the ideas/beliefs/praxis – or the esoteric philosophy – evident in them.” {1}

With several academics – from Goodrick-Clarke in 2003, to Senholt in 2012, to Introvigne in 2016 {2} – and others, from journalists to some of those associated with the O9A, writing that Anton Long was a pseudonym of David Myatt, it was natural that many people would believe that “the role of David Myatt was and is essential to the creation and existence of the ONA.” {3}

However, to date no one – including academics – has provided any evidence from primary sources {4} that Myatt is Anton Long or that Myatt wrote any of the thousands of ONA texts that form the ONA corpus.

In the case of Goodrick-Clarke, for example, he based his supposition on a work with the title Diablerie, a copy of which is in the British Library {5} and which consists of comb-bound photocopies of a typewritten text and which purports to be an account of the early life of Anton Long. While the account is superficially similar in some respects to the childhood Myatt recounted in his 1980s memoir Autobiographical Notes: Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire {6} – and subsequently in his 2013 autobiography Myngath {7} – there are discrepancies and errors, such as in details of abode and schooling, as well as many vainglorious boasts such as being a ‘cat-burglar’ and his Occult group holding a person prisoner for days before sacrificing them during a ritual. Which discrepancies and errors, and such vainglorious boasts, have led several of those associated with the O9A to declare it is a forgery {8}, a claim also made by Myatt himself who wrote, in respect of Goodrick-Clarke, that “the often fictitious account he gives of ‘my life’ during that time is almost entirely taken from the fictional Diablerie manuscript.” {9}

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc And Other Fallacies

In a section of A Matter Of Honour sub-titled The Logical Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence – A Case Study, Myatt analyses in some detail the claims made by Senholt in his 2008 Master of Arts thesis, which thesis Senholt later revised for inclusion as a chapter in the book The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, edited by Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen and published by Oxford University Press in 2013.

Myatt writes:

“A reading of the thesis reveals two interesting things. First, the use of and reliance upon secondary and tertiary sources, many of which are anonymous and many of which are derived from ‘the world wide web’, that most unreliable source of information. For example, he relies on the book Black Sun by Goodrick-Clarke even after admitting it contains errors and that the author offers no proof for the assumptions made in respect of me and the ONA. Second, that Senholt, undoubtedly inadvertently, commits the logical fallacy of incomplete evidence. That is, the multitude of facts and circumstances which do not support his contention about me and the ONA are omitted.”

Myatt details the factual errors made by Senholt, provides logical explanations for the claims made by Senholt – such as the claim that since both Myatt and the ONA use the neo-nazi ‘year of the fuhrer’ calender and terms such as ‘aeonic’, there is a causal link between the two, post hoc ergo propter hoc – with Myatt then listing various facts about his own life which contradict the assumption that he is or was a Satanist, facts (and primary sources) such as his semi-autobiographical poetry, his published correspondence, his marriage in the 1990s in a Christian church, and his ethical philosophy of pathei-mathos, which “reveal the ideas and experiences and (importantly) the failings of someone so different from a satanist that they have to be ignored.”

According to Myatt:

“it is matter of honour. Of personal knowing. As I mentioned […] the traditional gentlemanly and ladylike virtues and their cultivation are no longer the standard which individuals are expected to aspire to and to uphold. Thus I do not expect the plethora of rumours and allegations about me to suddenly cease, although I admit I do and perhaps naively nurture a vague hope that what I have written here may cause a few individuals to reconsider the veracity of such rumours and allegations.”

Yet despite Myatt’s rebuttal and despite the lack of evidence from primary sources, Senholt’s thesis and the chapter based on it in the aforementioned book – together with the claims made about Myatt by Goodrick-Clarke and by others {10} – have been cited by academics and non-academics alike as “proof” that Myatt is Anton Long and founded and was involved with the ONA.

Which use of such sources is a classic example of argumentum ad verecundiam, of the fallacy of appeal to authority. That academics such as Massimo Introvigne – in his Satanism: A Social History published in 2016 by Brill, Leiden, as volume 21 in the series Texts and Studies in Western Esotericism – commit such a fallacy in respect of Myatt seems to confirm Myatt’s conclusion in his A Matter Of Honour essay

“that the research done by some modern authors and even some academics – whose works are published by reputable publishers or quoted by others engaged in academic research – is inadequate and does not meet the taxing criteria of scholarship.” {11}

For Introvigne – professor of Sociology of Religions at the Catholic Pontifical Salesian University, Torino – fallaciously wrote (i) that Goodrick-Clarke in his 2003 book Black Sun confirmed that Myatt was Anton Long, and (ii) that Senholt “offered a number of elements confirming that Long was indeed Myatt.” Fallacious because neither Goodrick-Clarke nor Senholt provided any evidence from primary sources, with their ‘circumstantial evidence’ based on non-evidentiary assumptions (as in Goodrick-Clarke assuming Myatt wrote Diablerie) or derived from fallacious reasoning (as in Senholt unintentionally committing the fallacies of incomplete evidence and post hoc ergo propter hoc).

The Authority Of Individual Judgment And The Fallacy Of Illicit Transference

Those interested in ‘The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long’ sometimes commit another fallacy, that of illicit transference, by arguing from the particular to the general, as Massimo Introvigne does in his book by referencing one item and then stating, on the basis of that one item, that the ONA has “more or less acknowledged that Anton Long was a nom de plume of Myatt.” {12}

The item cited by Introvigne was the e-text A Modern Mage: Anton Long and The Order of Nine Angles, which was later published as a printed book under the title The Radical Philosophy of Anton Long. {13} The work contains an introduction – and several articles – by Mr R. Parker, who wrote in the introduction that

“in order for a person to fully understand and appreciate the Order of Nine Angles – and to thus know what being O9A means in the real world they should know about and understand the sinister-numinous life of Anton Long because the person behind that nom-de-guerre was David Myatt.”

It is fallacious to cite this work, and such a statement – or any such works or any such statements – as an acknowledgement by the ONA that Myatt is Anton Long because the Order of Nine Angles is a leaderless collective – or more correctly, “a movement, a subculture or perhaps metaculture that its adherents choose to embody or identify with” {14} – and thus has no central authority and no one person, or any persons, who can claim to represent or who can claim to speak or write on behalf of the ONA. Even the pseudonymous Anton Long never claimed such an authority, writing in the early 1990s that

“There is no acceptance of someone else’s authority […] I claim no authority, and my creations, profuse as they are, will in the end be accepted or rejected on the basis of whether they work. Satan forbid they should ever become ‘dogma’ or a matter of ‘faith’. I also expect to see them become transformed, by their own metamorphosis and that due to other individuals: changed, extended and probably ultimately transcended, may be even forgotten. They – like the individual I am at the moment – are only a stage, toward something else.” {15}

“You ask who has authority in the Order and what this authority represents. Basically, the only ‘authority’ is that which arises or developes because of experience […] I have no ‘authority’ in the real sense – I simply offer advice and guidance based on my own experience. I am still learning. What I teach is not ‘sacred’ – hopefully, it will be surpassed, refined, changed, when others discover and experience and attain.” {16}

Anton Long is referring to one of the founding principles or traditions of the Order of Nine Angles, ‘the way of practical deeds’, of individuals learning – via such means as the Seven Fold Way – from pathei-mathos, from their own experience, a principle which has become known as The Authority Of Individual Judgment.

In practice this principle means that anyone or any nexion or nexions self-identifying as ONA can only present their own personal views or opinions concerning the ONA, based as those may be on their own experience or learning. Hence when someone such as Mr R. Parker writes that the person behind the nom-de-guerre Anton Long “was David Myatt” they are only presenting – can only ever present – their own personal view or opinion. They are not presenting – can never present – the view or the policy of the Order of Nine Angles.

That some individuals interested in ‘The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long’ do not understand this, and/or commit the fallacy illicit transference, is understandable. That an academic such as Introvigne does not understand this fundamental ONA principle reveals a lack of understanding of the Order of Nine Angles, a lack deriving from an inadequate knowledge of, a lack of scholarly research into, the Order of Nine Angles.

The Legend Of Anton Long

That no one, academics included, has provided any evidence from primary sources that Myatt is Anton Long is not unexpected since in regard to the milieu of modern Occultism attention and interest hitherto has been focused on the likes of Howard Levey, Michael Aquino, and Mr Crowley, and not on the Order of Nine Angles and Anton Long.

That – with perhaps one exception {17} – what little has been written and published by academics about The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long, and about the Order of Nine Angles, contains basic errors {18} {19} and assumptions, with the authors committing various logical fallacies, is also unexpected, given the lack of scholarship – of extensive research using primary sources – in what are relatively new fields of study, that of Western esotericism in general and of modern Satanism in particular.

Consequently, given the importance, the uniqueness, of Anton Long in creating and developing O9A Occult philosophy and praxises he remains – factually – something of a mystery to those associating themselves with the O9A movement and to those academics interested in the O9A, with assumptions and conjectures about his identity, and fallacious reasoning, having served to create and to perpetuate stories about him. Which mystery, which assumptions and conjectures, and which stories, are advantageous to an esoteric movement.

Kerri Scott
2017

{1} R. Parker (2013). Anton Long and The Exeatic Quest for Gnosis. e-text.

Anton Long was the author of foundational O9A documents – primary sources – such as Naos, Hostia, The Deofel Quartet, The Culling Texts, and Enantiodromia: The Sinister Abyssal Nexion.

{2} (a) Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas (2003). Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press. p.216; (b) Senholt, Jacob C. (2013). Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles. “The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity”. Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 250–274; (c) Introvigne, Massimo (2016). Satanism: A Social History. Brill. p.357.

{3} Senholt, Jacob C. (2009). The Sinister Tradition. Conference paper presented at Satanism in the Modern World, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, 19-20th of November, 2009. p.16

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

In respect of Myatt and his peregrinations, primary sources would include his own writings, including his autobiography Myngath; court transcripts of his criminal trials; interviews with police officers who have arrested and interviewed him under caution; documents concerning his early years in Africa and the Far East; documents relating to his time as a Catholic monk; documents relating to his conversion to Islam (such as his Testimony of Faith in Islam signed as it is by Hafiz Muhammad Tufail – Imam of the Jamia Masjid Ghousia – and by Qadi Abdur Sa’auf and dated 24 Jumada Al-Ula), documents and letters relating to his involvement with Column 88; and so on.

Some material by the anti-fascist group ‘Searchlight’ relating to Myatt can be found in the Searchlight Archive in the University of Northampton archive room (ID: SCH/01/Res). Most of the Myatt items are in Series 12, SCH/01/Res/BRI/12/004, which deals with Combat 18. Some other material, relating to Myatt’s National-Socialist Movement, is in Series 21 SCH/01/Res/BRI/21/002

{5} Long, Anton (c.1991). Diablerie: Revelations of a Satanist. The British Library. General Reference Collection Cup.711/742. BNB GB9219567; System number 012478777.

{6} Quotations from Myatt’s memoir were included in the pamphlet Cosmic Reich: The Life and Thoughts of David Myatt, published by Renaissance Press, New Zealand, in 1995. Some details of Myatt’s early life are described on p.216 of Jeffrey Kaplan’s Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right, published by Rowman & Littlefield, in 2000.

Similar details are given in issue #3, May 1998 edition of Column 88, the magazine published by Myatt’s National-Socialist Movement, with other details included in the 2001 internet article The Life and Times of David Myatt, a copy of which is archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20011121112831/http://www.geocities.com:80/davidmyatt/biog.html [Accessed November 2017]

Around 2002, Myatt himself issued a revised and updated version of his memoir – which included his years with Combat 18 in the 1990s – a copy of which is archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20030502034417/http://www.geocities.com:80/davidmyatt/notes1.html [Accessed November 2017]

{7} Myatt, David. (2013). Myngath. Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. CreateSpace Publishing. ISBN 9781484110744.

{8} An example is the 2013 article A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie by R. Parker, a copy of which is available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2013/01/19/a-sceptics-review-of-diablerie/ [Accessed November 2017]

Parker writes that the ‘evil deeds’ done by Mr Long which are described in Diablerie “are lame or laughable or sound like the adventures of a frat boy.”

{9} Myatt, David. A Matter Of Honour. e-text, 2012. In the essay Myatt lists seven biographical errors made by Goodrick-Clarke. A pdf version of the essay is available on Myatt’s weblog at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/concerning-the-occult/ [Accessed November 2017]

Myatt also makes mention of another forgery, Bealuwes Gast, writing that it

“seems to have been recently written by someone, possibly for financial gain resulting from selling it at some silly price to collectors of rare Occult memorabilia. The bulk of this new fictional ‘autobiography’ consists of an early (now out of date) edition of Myngath to which various fictional autobiographical stories and ‘sinister’ incidents and diatribes have been added in line with what might be expected from a mythical ‘Anton Long’. Given that the majority of these autobiographical stories in this so-called Bealuwes Gast are quite risible and fanciful (and not fundamentally satanic at all), and given that the ‘sinister diatribes’ seem to have been cut-and-pasted from various internet articles attributed to those who over the years have used the nom-de-plume Anton Long, it seems unlikely that this forgery will ever be taken seriously by anyone. I mean – and to name just one risible example – who can take seriously a ‘clockwork orange cult’ and the wearing of white lab coats to boot.”

In regard to this other ‘autobiography of Anton Long’, qv. the 2014 article by R. Parker, Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery, available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/bealuwes-gast/ [Accessed November 2017]

{10} One of the fallacious claims often repeated, deriving as it does from Senholt, is that Myatt’s extremist adventures (neo-nazi followed by radical Muslim) were ONA Insight Roles and thus link Myatt to the ONA. It is fallacious since such Insight Roles, by definition, (i) only last between a year and eighteen months while Myatt’s neo-nazi adventures lasted thirty years (1968-1998) with his time as a radical Muslim lasting over ten years (1998-2009), and (ii) they are a task that a fairly new Occult initiate – an External Adept – is expected to undertake before moving on to the next stage of the ONA’s Seven Fold Way.

The task is outlined in such Anton Long authored texts as An Introduction to Insight Rôles, which is included in the 1460 page ONA compilation The Definitive Guide To The Order of Nine Angles: Theory and Praxises, seventh edition, 2015.

{11} In his essay Myatt mentions that the criteria of scholarship “is essentially two-fold: (i) of detailed, meticulous, unbiased research on and concerning a specific topic or topics or subject undertaken over a period of some considerable time, usually a year or more in duration, and of necessity involving primary source material; and (ii) a rational assessment of the knowledge acquired by such research, with such conclusions about the topic, topics, or subject therefore being not only the logical result of the cumulative scholarly learning so acquired but also possessing a certain gravitas.”

{12} Introvigne, op.cit. p. 358.

{13} While the printed book is no longer available, copies of the e-text are, at the time of writing, still available on certain websites.

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

{15} Letter to Michael Aquino, dated 20th October 1990 ev. The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown. Volume 1. Thormynd Press, 1992.

{16} Letter to Miss Stockton, dated 19th June 1991 eh. The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown. Volume 1.

{17} The one exception is arguably the chapter on the ONA in Monette’s Mysticism in the 21st Century, op.cit.

{18} Some of the basic errors made by Introvigne include the following: (i) “that Myatt joined Jordan’s British Movement in 1969,” when the correct date is 1968; (ii) that Myatt’s middle name is William, when it is Wulstan; (iii) that the ONA Black Mass “derived from Huysmans and the rituals of the Church of Satan” when there is no such derivation and no documentary evidence to support such a claim; and (iv) that the Temple of Set “perceived the competition [the ONA] as dangerous, particularly when in the late 1980s some members of the Temple of Set started considering themselves members of the ONA at the same time. In 1992, Aquino […] launched an internal purge, expelling from the Temple of Set those members who also wanted to remain in the ONA,” when – to our knowledge – there was no such purge and no documentary evidence to support such a claim.

{19} The article The Occult And Academia surveys some of the errors about the ONA and Myatt made in the 2016 book Children of Lucifer: The Origins of Modern Religious Satanism, written by Ruben Van Luijk. The article is available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/more-unscholarly-research/ [Accessed November 2017]


Advertisements

Demonizing Mr Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt

Background

For the past seven or eight years – including in recent months – there have been attempts made to ‘demonize’ David Myatt all based on the unproven allegation that he is Anton Long of Order of Nine Angles fame.

These attempts have been made both by some individuals associating themselves with the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) and by those who for whatever reason or from whatever motive are opposed to the O9A or to Myatt himself. Such O9A opponents include self-described
modern Satanists as well those who profess to be followers of Jesus and those who take exception to what they believe is the pro-Nazi stance of the O9A. Those who are opposed to Myatt himself include anti-fascists who profess such slogans as “never forgive, never forget” and who thus cannot forgive or forget Myatt’s neo-nazi past, {1} and individuals who for unconscious emotive reasons of their own are in some way either jealous of the real Myatt or hate the ‘sinister Myatt’ conjured up by their imagination, with the ‘real’ Myatt having been described as “having fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic and possibly Persian, [and] possessed of a gifted intellect and apparently a polymath,” {2} and as “an extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual,” {3} and with the ‘sinister’ Myatt being accused by demonizers of all manner of crimes even though no evidence is ever provided to substantiate their accusations. {4}

        In the matter of individuals associating themselves with the O9A, their intent seems clear. It is to portray Myatt – aka Anton Long – in the most sinister light possible given that such individuals assert that the O9A is Satanist and indeed the only modern genuinely antinomian and satanist group because it espouses and practices what is evil such as criminality, violence, hatred, human sacrifice, political extremism, drug-trafficking and terrorism. Hence their composition and circulation of texts such as Bealuwes Gast {5} and Diablerie {6} and hence their assertion that Myatt is central to the O9A with his weird life an example of what it means to follow the O9A Seven Fold Way.

In the matter of individuals who are followers of Jesus – or at least sympathetic to the Christian religion – their intent also seems clear. It is to portray Myatt as an example, par excellence, of either a nihilistic modernism or of what a servant of Satan is and does in the real world, with one for instance recently writing that

“it is clear from my reading of O9A material that it is essentially not about the promethean elevation of the human person or individuality at all, which its talk of individuation and so on might seem to imply at first sight, but that the entire ‘philosophical’ system is geared towards the cunning seduction of human individuals in order to have them possessed and effectively taken over by these demonic entities (‘dark gods’), whose agenda is the source of this magical covenant itself, rather than David Myatt as an individualistic ‘philosopher’ with a personal agenda. Much of the teaching as presented exoterically to non-initiates is thus no more than upaya or ‘skilful means’ (if I’m permitted to appropriate the Buddhist term) to get people hooked so that the demons will have their incarnate vehicles to exploit. Some of the O9A fiction outlines very explicitly how it is a matter of a demonic infection being spread through the empowered transmission from a possessed initiate to another human vessel. The terrible truth is that the ‘new, more evolved individual’ is nothing more than a puppet of these satanic beings.”


A Common Theme

All such attempts to demonize Myatt have one thing in common. They all ignore important aspects of Myatt’s life and a swathe of his writings.

The ignored aspects of his life include his public (post 2010) rejection of all extremism (including neo-nazi and fascist ideology) while his ignored writings include his poetry, his published letters, his post 2011 writings about extremism, his writings about his philosophy of pathei-mathos with its principles of empathy, humility, and compassion, his 2013 autobiography Myngath; his post 2012 autobiographical essays included in books such as Sarigthersa and One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods {7} and his essays praising Christianity and in particular Catholicism. {8}

The demonizers of Myatt have ignored such things because those things reveal a very different Myatt. One at odds with the ‘sinister’ image of him they have all in their own way strived to manufacture and have propagated in pursuit of their aims. For the image of Myatt that emerges from his poetry and his post 2011 writings is of a reclusive man who regrets his extremist past, who values virtues such as empathy and compassion, and who believes that

“the most important truth concerning human life […] is that a shared, a loyal, love between two people is the most beautiful, the most numinous, the most valuable thing of all.”

Naturally, one or two demonizers have tried to ‘square the circle’ here by claiming that Myatt’s rejection of extremism is a ruse and that the aforementioned writings of his were either written by someone else or were a clever ‘sinister’ jape by Myatt in order to mislead people.

Such claims are of course both laughable and revealing of the need such demonizers have of their ‘sinister Myatt’. That some of these demonizers have resorted to forgeries which they claim were written by Myatt while others have attached Myatt’s name to old or photocopied O9A typewritten articles, {9} shows the lengths they will go to propagandise their ‘sinister Myatt’ and to support their claim that Myatt is after all Anton Long.

As noted in an essay by Ms J. Wright, Myatt’s later writings

“express is a mysticism, a reverence for and an appreciation of the numinous, so at odds with the ethos and the practice of Satanism – of whatever variety – that it is inconceivable that they were written by a Satanist or even by a practising Occultist.” {10}

Rachael Stirling
March 2017


{1} According to an academic source Myatt is “arguably England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (USAF), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

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

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

{4} Some of the silly accusations made against Myatt are included in the 2010 pdf compilation titled Lies of a Moac, currently [March 2017] available at
https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/lies-of-a-moac1.pdf

These silly accusations include (see pp.7ff of the aforementioned document) gangstalking, hacking into various internet forums, stealing people’s ID’s by hacking their computers, attacking disabled people, and that he was a police informer.

{5} Regarding the forgery titled Bealuwes Gast see the article Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery.

{6} Regarding the forgery titled Diablerie see the article A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie.

{7} All these writings, and the poetry, are available from Myatt’s blog Learning From Adversity; A Rejection of Extremism.

{8} For instance see A Catholic Still In Spirit?

{9} Several people have claimed that they have or they have seen old typewritten O9A articles or letters or manuscripts signed with Myatt’s name. Yet as noted in O9A Questions And Answers 2017 (pdf) in response to one such claim:

“a signature on some old ONA typewritten MSS proves nothing. Anyone could have affixed Myatt’s name on them at any time and until the original documents are made available and examined in a forensic way by a professional qualified to do so then it’s just speculation; just another rumor about Myatt. A forensic examination would involve, among other things, finding the age of the paper, the type of ink used in the signature, comparing the signature with a documented signature by Myatt.”

{10} The Strange Life Of David Myatt (pdf).


A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie

Order of Nine Angles

ω9α

A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie

Overview

Since the publication in 2002 by New York University Press of the book Black Sun by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, the text entitled Diablerie: Revelations of a Satanist – a purported autobiography by Anton Long – has often been mentioned by those curious about or critical of both the Order of Nine Angles and David Myatt, for Goodrick-Clarke not only brought the existence of Diablerie to a wider audience but also extensively quoted from it {1}.

Some academics, like Goodrick-Clarke himself, and Senholt {2}, accept without question that Diablerie was written by Myatt, and the work has often been referred to in printed books about Satanism – for example, it is mentioned in the 2009 book Modern Satanism: Anatomy of a Radical Subculture by Chris Mathews. Others, from journalists writing about Myatt to fans of the ONA, have used Diablerie or mentioned it as ‘proof’ that Myatt is (or was) Anton Long; as proof that Myatt is both the founder of the ONA and a Satanist (and a nasty piece of work, a man of extreme and calculated hatred, etcetera), and as evidence that the ONA is amoral and “represent a dangerous and extreme form of Satanism”.

As for the book itself, the only public copy is in the British Library, and is a slim, spiral bound, volume with card covers whose pages are xeroxed copies of a typewritten text and which text contains many typos, and many misspellings (deliberate or otherwise) {3}. The text is marked ‘printed and published’ by Thormynd Press, Shrewsbury, and dated 1991.

As for Myatt himself, he has written several times that Diablerie is fake, most recently in his 2012 essay A Matter of Honour where he writes:

“Goodrick-Clarke never bothered to contact me regarding these claims of his, and the first thing I knew about them was when the book was published. Had he contacted me, then, I would have been in a position to supply him with the unpublished autobiographical MS that the plagiarist had purloined and used as the source for that fanciful work of fiction entitled Diablerie.”

The ‘unpublished autobiographical MS’ he refers to being the one Myatt wrote in 1984 and which was

” [a] brief autobiographical memoir which was sent to several friends and many political contacts, including to George Dietz in Virginia who had just published, under the imprint of his Liberty Bell Publications, my pamphlet Vindex, Destiny of the West and who was at the time interested in publishing the book, The Logic of History, which I was then engaged in writing, with such a memoir planned to be a part of that book.” {4}

The question therefore is whether or not Diablerie is authentic. If it is not authentic, then who its is author and for what reason was it published and circulated?

Content and Style

In terms of content, Diablerie is unremarkable. The narrative is one of an arrogant, self-opinionated, pompous young man who professes to “posses the pride of Satan”; who takes an interest in Satanism; who hilariously sets out to do “evil deeds”; who smirks that he “would have to be ruthless”; who gloats that he “knew more about the Occult and magick than these people who performed ceremonial rituals after the Golden Dawn”; and whose “evil deeds” are lame or laughable or sound like the adventures of a frat boy.

In terms of style, a lot of Diablerie differs quite markedly from the writings of Myatt dating from the 1980’s and the 1990’s, and which writings from that period include his well-known text Vindex, Destiny of the West (published in 1984) and his many articles about National Socialism, such as National-Socialism: Principles and Ideals (published in 1991 and part of his fourteen volume Thormynd Press NS Series).

Reading texts such as Vindex and National-Socialism: Principles and Ideals gives an appreciation of Myatt’s early style; and this style is often detailed (some might say convoluted) and sometimes expressively direct, especially when he is writing about National Socialism. Consider the following, from his Vindex:

“If an understanding of history implies an understanding of the present and a feeling for the future, then the work of the historian Arnold Toynbee is of great importance, for from his study of civilizations – and with the help of some of Oswald Spengler’s insights – it is possible to construct a model of history that is fully in accord with scientific methodology and which predicts the future of the West.”

and this, from National-Socialism: Principles and Ideals:

“One of the most fundamental principles of National-Socialism – expressing thus the wisdom of civilization – is that each individual is a part of, and has duties and obligations to, their folk or race. That is, that the individual is not an isolated being, concerned only with their own self-centred desires and feelings (including their own ‘happiness’ and material well-being), but rather belongs – and that this belonging, involving as it does duties and obligations toward their folk and thus the civilization that folk has created, is necessary for a healthy existence: of the individual, the folk and their civilization….

One of the most important truths that expresses the reality of civilization is that of race. Race is a representation of the natural order – of how evolution works, and how Nature, or the gods/God, are expressed, manifested or presenced on Earth.”

Contrast these with the following, from Diablerie:

“Which boy could resist? So I went with him – to a brothel. Actually, it just looked like an ordinary house down an ordinary Singapore alley. The ladies were rather nice – and wore elegant silk sarongs…. I had both a light and a dark side. The dark side wanted to find its limits. I thought what it would be like to kill, to do dark deeds…. But always a Promethean fire, a Satanic spirit drove me on – toward something. What, I often did not know. But I had a belief in myself, an arrogance which I knew no one or anything could break. I possessed the pride of Satan…. The world was mine – if I chose to take it….. London called. There, it seemed, I might find the forbidden.”

The difference is obvious. The former are the words of an intellectual; the latter are the clipped sentences of the type often found in first-person ‘action’ novels or comic strips of the Dick Tracey type. It is as if Diablerie is pulp fiction, a first-person narrative of fictional anti-hero and evil Satanist, Anton Long, with – and importantly – some quotes from the writings of the real person who the author wants people to believe is the inspiration for his fictional Anton Long. Quotes inserted as ‘background’ for credibility, as the author of a crime novel inserts material gleaned from real crimes and real police investigations for credibility. In the case of Diablerie, some of the inserted material is most probably taken from Myatt’s 1984 autobiographical memoir or from remembered conversations with Myatt himself, or from both. The rest of the inserted material being plagiarized from Myatt’s political writings which already, by 1991, were quite extensive and widely distributed.

All of which brings us to the question of authorship and the question of motive.

Errors and Omissions

Myatt’s early years – for example his childhood in Africa and Asia – were first recounted by him in his 1984 autobiographical memoir, a memoir which he used as the basis for part one of his Autobiographical Notes: Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire, written in 1990, first openly published in 1993 and mentioned and used as a source in Cosmic Reich: The Life and Thoughts of David Myatt, published by Renaissance Press, New Zealand, in 1995. If one compares these Notes with Anton Long’s early years, as related in Diablerie, then it would appear as if the narrator of Diablerie is Myatt, or at least someone with a knowledge of Myatt’s early life, a knowledge obtained from that memoir, those Notes, or remembered from a reading of that memoir or those Notes or from conversations with Myatt himself or remembered from all three.

However, if the narrator was Myatt, then it is curious as to how many errors and omissions occur in the section of Diablerie devoted to Anton Long’s early years. For instance, in the Notes Myatt writes that from around the age of thirteen, while abroad, he “studied ancient Greek, Latin, Chinese and Sanskrit”, while Diablerie has Anton Long learning Greek and Latin in England at the age of fifteen (or maybe sixteen).

Comparing Diablerie with Myngath – Myatt’s official autobiography – the error and omissions regarding those early years are even more apparent, which leads to three possible conclusions. Firstly, that if Myatt was the narrator of Diablerie then in that work he lied about or falsified many facts and also invented stories about himself. Secondly, that the narrator of Diablerie was not Myatt but someone who knew him and co-operated with him in producing the pulp fiction narrative that is Diablerie. Thirdly, that the narrator of Diablerie was not Myatt but either someone who knew him (politically, or otherwise) or who had access to or had read the memoir or the Notes or both, and who produced the pulp fiction narrative that is Diablerie in order to create Anton Long, the myth, but who made mistakes when recalling material once read, and incorrectly remembered, or who was attempting from memory to describe parts of conversations of months or even years gone by.

Motive and Author

In terms of motive, I cannot conceive of Myatt, intellectual and poet {5}, a married man aged 41 at the time, depicting himself in the way Anton Long is depicted in that 1991 text Diablerie – as an arrogant, self-opinionated, pompous man who talks like some character in a Dick Tracey comic strip: “the world was mine – if I chose to take it”. “London called.” Not to mention using words straight out of a Star Wars movie – “the dark side”. Neither can I conceive of Myatt creating such a two-dimensional wooden B-movie villain as the Anton Long of Diablerie is (or comes across as), as part of some elaborate ploy to create ‘the Anton Long myth’ and thus bolster the credentials of the Order of Nine Angles. The “perfection of evil” as Anton Long pompously claims to be in Diablerie? Certainly not.

Surely the author of Breaking The Silence Down (written 1985) – with its depiction of Sapphic love and its believable main character Diane – could have come up with a better characterization of ‘Anton Long’.

Given all this, and what I have mentioned above about style, content, errors and omissions, my conjecture is that Diablerie was written by Beesty Boy, aka ‘Christos Beest’, who at the time – 1991 – was a young man in his early 20’s, a fan of Star Wars, had been involved with the ONA for several years, was working on his Sinister Tarot, was editor of Fenrir, and whose ONA booklet Antares: The Dark Rites of Venus, Coxland Press would publish two years later. In addition, he was at the time a personal friend of Myatt who encouraged his talent as a musician and painter. {6}

The Many Faces of Anton Long

In the past three years there was been much speculation, on occult, Satanist, and O9A, forums and blogs, about the many faces of Anton Long. As one person put it recently on a Satanist forum:

“It seems that someone has been writing under the name AL…. The real question is if Myatt is pretending to be AL. Or if Myatt is feeding AL (or the AL committee) material to write. Or if Myatt told some folks to take the AL pen name and do what you want with it.”

There is also the view that the ‘original Anton Long’ of the original ONA – of ONA 1.0 as Jason King labelled it – ceased to write ONA material in the 1990’s, and of, as someone else, said

“[t]he story of ‘Anton Long’ [being] the story of several different individuals using that pseudonym in the last 40 years. Beginning with Myatt himself in 1972, then a year later with a married businessman living near Manchester, then around 1998 with ‘Beesty Boy’ (aka Christos Beest aka Moult), and finally around 2003 with one or two anonymous young writers who tried to keep the myth going by posting their stuff on the internet and who created websites, blogs and e-groups to create the illusion of a real, expanding, influential, hardcore Satanist group led by ‘Anton Long’, the myth.”

There is also the rumour of Myatt as agent provocateur for the state {7} and the fact that Myatt has openly said that in the early 1970’s he created an occult group as a ‘neo-nazi honeytrap’ in order to propagate holocaust denial and neo-nazism and recruit “respectable people who could be useful to the Cause”. {8} Or, as someone else suggested, “as a means of gathering intelligence and recruiting suitable individuals to undertake acts of subversion, extremism, and terrorism, under the pretext of occult training”.{7}

Sinister Jape or Genuine Work?

If CB, as I conjecture, wrote Diablerie, then why, and was it with Myatt’s knowledge or even approval given that at the time – 1991 – Myatt was according to his own admission still occasionally cooperating with his occult contacts as part of his strategy to recruit people for his clandestine neo-nazi terrorist groups such as the Aryan Liberation Army? {8}

Was Diablerie some kind of sinister jape that the ONA are known to have enjoyed playing at people’s expense? Or part of their Labyrinthos Mythologicus which the Order of Nine Angles describe as “a modern and an amoral version of a technique often historically employed, world-wide among diverse cultures and traditions both esoteric and otherwise, to test and select candidates, and a mischievous, japing, and sly, part of our sinister dialectic.” {9}

My conjecture is that Beesty Boy wrote it as part of the ONA’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus, without Myatt’s initial approval but then later nonchalance about such matters {10}, and at the time Beesty Boy himself began penning ONA material using the name Anton Long.

R. Parker
2012 ev
(Revised Jan 2013 ev)

Footnotes

{1}The first mention of Diablerie in a mainstream book seems to be Lure of the Sinister: The Unnatural History of Satanism by Gareth J. Medway published by New York University Press, first edition April 2001.

{2} Senholt, Jacob. Secret Identities in The Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles, in Per Faxneld & Jesper Petersen (eds) The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, Oxford University Press, 2012.

{3} Some early – and even later – ONA material contain deliberate spelling mistakes, designed to provoke an instinctive and judgemental reaction in the reader. For example, in the 2009 text Defending the ONA? it is stated that

“in the days of typewritten letters, sometimes letters might be sent out with a word spelt in an unusual way, or containing deliberate spelling mistakes. Sometimes, the grammar was also unusual. Those who could not see beyond the outer form (the words; the syntax, and so on) to the essence (always contained quite clearly in such letters) so obviously failed, restricted as their apprehension was by the norms of their own times, by their own preconceptions, by society, or whatever.”

This particular sly ONA tactic is also mentioned in several older ONA texts, including The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown, published around the same time as Diablerie.

{4} Myatt, David. Polemos Our Genesis. e-text, 2012. Included in the pdf compilation Remembering Wyrd.

According to Myatt, this 1980’s memoir formed the basis for his Autobiographical Notes: Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire, the first part of which was published in the 1990’s and mentioned in Cosmic Reich: The Life and Thoughts of David Myatt, published by Renaissance Press, New Zealand, in 1995. The second and third parts were published following his conversion to Islam in 1998, and which parts were subsequently and substantially revised during the naughties.

{5} Myatt’s early poetry – from the 1970’s and 1980’s – included compilations such as Gentleman of the Road, and To Forgotten Gods. His early poetry included notable poems such as Wine (1972) and No Sun To Warm (1974) and Only Time Has Stopped (1978).

{6} CB played a minor role in the 1990’s in Myatt’s National-Socialist Movement and, for a while, took over the leadership of Myatt’s Reichsfolk organization when Myatt converted to Islam in 1998. Their friendship floundered (never to be renewed) when Myatt – as Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt – aligned himself with Al-Qaeda.

The fact that both CB and Myatt used Thormynd Press to publish their own works, and that Thormynd also published works by the ONA, is not as interesting or evidential as it might at first appear, for publishers often publish diverse works by various authors for purely commercial reasons. Thus the fact that Thormynd published Diablerie as well as items by Myatt is not proof of a link between that work and Myatt.

{7} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/david-myatt-agent-provocateur/

{8} Myatt, David. Ethos of Extremism. e-text (in seven parts), 2012.

{9} http://lapisphilosophicus.wordpress.com/about-2/labyrinthos-mythologicus/

{10} Myatt writes, in his A Matter of Honour: “As an early advocate of copyleft, I have never been bothered by plagiarism or by others using and adapting my ideas and my ‘inventions’, such as The Star Game.”