David Myatt

David Myatt


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

{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

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 that

“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).

Order of Nine Angles


A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie


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)


{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.”