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.


Advertisements

An Itinerant Jihadi

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Several pages of a new book – Itinerant Jihadis: Arab and Muslim War Volunteers by Raphael Israeli, published by Strategic Book Publishing & Rights Agency – are devoted to David Myatt and his Muslim years, with the author quoting from several articles written by Myatt.

While there is nothing new about Myatt – with the information somewhat dated, and the author covering previously well-described aspects of Myatt’s life from his leadership of the NSM to his publicly-given (rather propagandistic) reason for converting to Islam – the author does, however, write that Myatt et al provide “incriminating evidence of the brewing Islamic subversion in Britain, and elsewhere, and of its close relationship with world Jihadi organizations.”


In Reply To Some Questions (2012)

800px-Cumulus_clouds_panorama

From Myatt’s preface:

“These answers, though dated, may be of some interest; for example, in regard to the development of my ‘numinous way’ into the ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’ and in regard to my temerarious statement that “I do not intend to write anything more about” that philosophy, for I have of course since 2012 continued to write about, and develope, that philosophy and which more recent writings have obsoleted most of the essays referenced in the following answers.”

Questions For DWM, 2012
(pdf)


Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/questions-for-dwm-2012/


Regarding The Term Numinous

David Myatt

David Myatt

A Note Regarding The Term Numinous

As a chapter of a book by Christopher Pankhurst – Numinous Machines, published in December 2017 by the ‘right-wing’ San Francisco based Counter-Currents organization – is titled Nexus of Life: David Myatt & the Acausal, it is fitting that we examine the origin of the term ‘numinous’ and what Myatt himself means by the term, especially as the blurb for the book on the publishers website repeats the common but mistaken belief that “Rudolf Otto coined the term numinous to refer to the primal experience of the holy.”

A mistaken belief since as a certain “Anton Long” pointed out in his text Alchemical Seasons and The Fluxions of Time published in 123 yfayen (2011 ce) that

“despite the now common belief that the use of the word ‘numinous’ is fairly recent, deriving from the writings of Rudolf Otto, its first occurrence in English – so far discovered – is in a religious tract published in London in 1647 ce, entitled The simple cobler of Aggawam in America. Willing to help mend his native country. The author, Nathaniel Ward – a scholar at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, an English clergyman, and a Puritan supporter – emigrated to Massachusetts in 1634 ce.”

The meaning of the term numinous in that book, and in later books such as The Quest of the Sangraal by Robert Stephen Hawker published in 1864 (where it is spelt numynous), is “of or relating to a god or a divinity, revealing or indicating the presence of a divinity; divine, spiritual,” derived as it is from the classical Latin ‘numen’, which Latin word implied a deity, a divinity, a reverence for what is divine.

In his 2013 book The Numinous Way Of Pathei-Mathos Myatt described how he then philosophically used and understood the term:

“The numinous is what manifests or can manifest or remind us of (what can reveal) the natural balance of ψυχή; a balance which ὕβρις upsets. This natural balance – our being as human beings – is or can be manifest to us in or by what is harmonious, or what reminds us of what is harmonious and beautiful. In a practical way, it is what we regard or come to appreciate as ‘sacred’ and dignified; what expresses our developed humanity and thus places us, as individuals, in our correct relation to ψυχή, and which relation is that we are but one mortal emanation of ψυχή.”

Prior to that ‘Pathei Mathos iteration’ (c.2011 – present) Myatt had frequently used the term ‘numinous’ during his ‘National Socialist iteration’ (1968-1998) writing in his 1990s text The Meaning of National-Socialism, {1} published by George Dietz in his Libery Bell magazine and also circulated by Myatt’s National-Socialist Movement, not only that

“Something is numinous if it has beauty and awe. Something which is divinely-inspired or divinely-representative is numinous. What is numinous is generally what is revered, or regarded as sacred – as spiritual or divine. Nature herself is numinous – a wonderful, awe-inspiring mystery. The numinous is an expression of the acausal – of the Unity behind causal, temporal, appearance,”

but also that

“a folk is not an abstract, easily defined, static, “thing” like the concept of race. It is a living, changing, evolving, being – a unique type of life. What defines a folk is thus far more than a certain set of physical or physiological or genetic characteristics. A folk is a symbiotic being – in symbiosis with the being which is the homeland of that folk, with that community or that collection of folkish communities. All this makes the culture, the Way of Life, the ethos (or soul) of that folk living as well. And it is this living which is numinous, which presences the numinous.”

Since Myatt uses and used the term numinous in specific ways, and always seemed to avoid using the English word ‘holy’ both in reference to that term and in his Greek translations, it is interesting and relevant to mention his commentary on the Greek word ἅγιος in section 5 of the Pymander chapter of the ancient Corpus Hermeticum. {2}

The Holy

In regard to ἅγιος – conventionally translated as ‘holy’ – Myatt, quoting Rilke and providing his own translation of the German, writes that the numinous has two aspects:

{Begin quote}

Numinous is better – more accurate – than ‘holy’ or ‘sacred’, since these latter English words have been much overused in connexion with Christianity and are redolent with meanings supplied from over a thousand years of exegesis; meanings which may or may not be relevant here.

Correctly understood, [the] numinous is the unity beyond our perception of its two apparent aspects; aspects expressed by the Greek usage of ἅγιος which could be understood in a good (light) way as ‘sacred’, revered, of astonishing beauty; and in a bad (dark) way as redolent of the gods/wyrd/the fates/morai in these sense of the retributive or (more often) their balancing power/powers and thus giving rise to mortal ‘awe’ since such a restoration of the natural balance often involved or required the death (and sometimes the ‘sacrifice’) of mortals. It is the numinous – in its apparent duality, and as a manifestation of a restoration of the natural, divine, balance – which is evident in much of Greek tragedy, from the Agamemnon of Aeschylus (and the Orestia in general) to the Antigone and the Oedipus Tyrannus of Sophocles.

The two apparent aspects of the numinous are wonderfully expressed by Rilke:

Wer, wenn ich schrie, hörte mich denn aus der Engel
Ordnungen? und gesetzt selbst, es nähme
einer mich plötzlich ans Herz: ich verginge von seinem
stärkeren Dasein. Denn das Schöne ist nichts
als des Schrecklichen Anfang, den wir noch grade ertragen,
und wir bewundern es so, weil es gelassen verschmäht,
uns zu zerstören. Ein jeder Engel ist schrecklich.

Who, were I to sigh aloud, of those angelic beings might hear me?
And even if one of them deigned to take me to his heart I would dissolve
Into his very existence.
For beauty is nothing if not the genesis of that numen
Which we can only just survive
And which we so admire because it can so calmly disdain to betake us.
Every angel is numinous

wenn ich schrie. ‘Were I to sigh aloud’ is far more poetically expressive, and more in tune with the metaphysical tone of the poem and the stress on schrie, than the simple, bland, ‘if I cried out’. A sighing aloud – not a shout or a scream – of the sometimes involuntary kind sometimes experienced by those engaged in contemplative prayer or in deep, personal, metaphysical musings.

der Engel Ordnungen. The poetic emphasis is on Engel, and the usual translation here of ‘orders’ – or something equally abstract and harsh (such as hierarchies) – does not in my view express the poetic beauty (and the almost supernatural sense of strangeness) of the original; hence my suggestion ‘angelic beings’ – of such a species of beings, so different from we mortals, who by virtue of their numinosity have the ability to both awe us and overpower us.

{End quote}

Myatt thus provides a new – yet ancient, and most certainly pagan – interpretation of the term, so very different from the understanding of that of Christianity, which Christian understanding is “pertaining to God; belonging to God, commissioned by God, or persons devoted to God; conforming to the will of God, entirely devoted to God.”

Three Wyrd Sisters
2017

{1} A copy of Myatt’s text is available here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/myatt-ns-meaning-v3.pdf
{2} David Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates. 2017. ISBN-13: 978-1976452369


The Ignorant Vulgarians And Islam

odal3

The Ignorant Vulgarians And Islam

There are two things that I find of particular interest about David Myatt. The first thing is the range and the depth of his practical experience, which included thirty years experience of street-level often violent political activism, several years as a Christian monk, and ten years as a practising Muslim. The second thing is his erudition, evident as that erudition is in his familiarity with the culture – and especially the literature – of the West from the time of Homer to Cicero to TS Eliot and beyond. Having “fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic and possibly Persian” {1} he is thus erudite, a scholar, as those terms were understood by English speakers from before the time of Shakespeare to the time of Ralph Waldo Emerson.

When, therefore, he in his mature – post-2011 – years writes about ancient Greek culture, about Christianity, about the culture of the West, and about Islam, he is writing not only from personal experience but also as a scholar able to read primary sources – such as Homer, the New Testament, and the Koran – in their original language.

What Myatt in recent years has written about Islam and Muslims directly contradicts the anti-Muslim rhetoric of “the vulgarians”, such as The Master Vulgarian who currently occupies a position of power and influence in America and the hordes of minor, anti-Muslim, vulgarians who style themselves as defenders of ‘civilization’. {2}

Regarding such people Myatt asks:

“Have [they] read the Quran in Arabic? Have they studied the Sunnah – at the very least the collections of Bukhari and Muslim? Have they studied Al-Adab Al-Mufrad? Have they studied Islamic jurisprudence and discussed Shariah with a Qadi? How many conversations about Islam have they had with learned Imaams? Have they lived in a land where the majority of people are Muslim? How many times have they been guests of Muslim families and so shared meals and personal conversations and thus empathised with Muslims? How many Muslim women have they interviewed or asked about Hijab – about why they wear it and how it makes them feel?

If they have not done all those things then they are, in my view, fundamentally ignorant concerning Islam and the Muslim way of life, and thus they speak and write and demonstrate in public about what they personally are uneducated about and about those whom they have not personally interacted with in a courteous way. Thus their opinions, their views, are those of bigots, and their behaviour is uncivilized – that is, the behaviour of people who are unlearned, ill-informed, uncultured, uncourteous, hubriatic. They are also hypocritical, for these leaders and organizers – and those who bankroll them – are virulent in their praise of ‘Western civilization and Western values’ without, it seems to me, realizing that they themselves with their ignorance, their hubris, their intolerance, their prejudice – their bigotry – are excellent examples of the new barbarians assailing Western culture.” {3}

In another article he writes:

“My personal view of Islam, of the Muslim way of life, and which view I have expressed in recent correspondence with others, is a very positive and tolerant one; of respect born from experience, a scholarly study, and a comparative assessment with other religions and spiritual ways also personally experienced.

Perhaps the bad opinion many people in the West have of Islam would be changed if they spent time with Muslim families in places as diverse as Egypt, Somalia, Turkey, Morocco, Pakistan, Senegal, Malaysia, and Birmingham. Until they have, who are they to pass judgement on the Muslim way of life, and on the Quran, the Sunnah, and the Shariah, that inspires and informs that way of life?” {4}

National Socialism And Honour

Even during his time with Reichsfolk in the late 1990s Myatt was writing about the need to treat other races with honour and thus respect their way of life. In a letter to an imprisoned Comrade {5} dated JD2452013.275 (that is, 13 April 2001) and which letter he expanded into an article published under the title The Question of National-Socialism, Racism and Tolerance, {6} Myatt rhetorically asked important questions such as:

“Should we strive to attain our freedom through certain tactics, one of which is a fanatical intolerance? Is our situation that desperate that we should see those who uphold other ways of life – and those of other races – as our enemies? This is the means that has been mostly followed in the past fifty years or so, albeit that it has been followed and employed on a mostly instinctive level. This is the means of “racism”, whether called by that Zionist-invented term or not.

Or, should we strive to be idealistic, and follow the ethic of honour to its logical conclusion? This means that we always strive to do what is honourable, which means that we should strive to be both strong, yet tolerant in a warrior way: proud of our people, our culture, but accepting of other ways, other people, if those other people respect us.”

After considering the options, he concluded:

“I assert that what is good is what is beneficial to our folk, but also honourable, and that if something – some deed or action – benefits or may benefit our folk but is also dishonourable, then that deed or action is something which a National-Socialist should not do […]

We must use our own values of honour, of loyalty, of duty to the folk as the criteria, the standard, to judge what is right, what is wrong, and what is necessary. Furthermore, we must use these values to determine our own behaviour toward others. This is the National-Socialist way: the way of honour, of loyalty, of duty to our folk.

I firmly believe that we can return our people to their own way of life by setting them a personal example, and to do this we must be prepared to live by, and if necessary die for, our ideals of honour, loyalty and duty.”

His words seem even more relevant now as the vulgarians among us gain more and more influence.

R. Stirling
29 November, 2017
(Revised 30 November 2017)

°°°°°

{1} Connell Monette. Mysticism in the 21st Century, Sirius Academic Press, 2013. pp. 86.

{2} While The Master Vulgarian barks about “Islamic terrorism” he in his ignorance forgets – or ignores – two things. First, that America in the last twenty years has directly and indirectly (through its policies) killed far more civilians than all Muslim terrorists combined; directly, in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and indirectly in places like Yemen and Syria. Second, that it is not a question of “Islamic terrorism” – as if the religion of Islam is responsible – but rather of some individuals doing what is dishonourable and using something such as a religion as an excuse for their dishonourable deeds: see for example Extremism, Terrorism, Culture and Physis.

{3} Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/just-my-fallible-views-again/

{4} Source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/let-us-then-try-what-love-can-do/the-need-for-tolerance/

{5} Although the Comrade is not publicly named, aural tradition names him as Richard Scutari, of Brüder Schweigen, with whom Myatt corresponded for some years beginning in the 1990s.

{6} A copy of the article is available here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/ns-and-tolerance.pdf

The article was included in the Reichsfolk publication National-Socialism and Islam: The Case for Co-operation, first distributed in 2003 as part of Myatt’s plan to bring National Socialists and Muslims together to fight “their common enemy.” A copy of the publication is available here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/ns-islam.pdf


Related:

The Vulgarian


A Review of The Uncertitude Of Mr Myatt by JR Wright & R Parker

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

JR Wright & R Parker, The Uncertitude Of Mr Myatt,
From National Socialism To The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos. 2017.

Available as a Gratis Open Access pdf file (1) this slim volume of 58 pages is by the authors of The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt (2) which was published last year and which provided a reasonably comprehensive – and currently the only available – analysis of Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos, which analysis is no easy feat since Myatt himself admits that he is “aware that the ‘philosophy’ of pathei-mathos, as described in works such as The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos and scattered in numerous other essays is not expounded as clearly and precisely as it could and perhaps should be.” (3)

The first part of The Uncertitude Of Mr Myatt deals with Myatt’s criticism of National Socialism and Hitler, spread as that criticism was over a period between 2010 and 2012. The authors use the same methodology as in their The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt, which is to provide extensive and relevant quotations from Myatt’s works and then comment on them.

This approach illustrates not only how Myatt’s thinking evolved as he developed and refined his Numinous Way during those years, but also the criteria he employed; in the process also revealing Myatt’s detailed understanding of National Socialism and the interesting fact that his criticism was framed by the pagan spirituality of ancient Greece, that is, in terms of hubris, the classical Fates (Moirai) and the Ἐρινύες. In an illuminating footnote the authors write that Myatt “expresses in his intellectual way the irony, the tragedy” by placing in context the Greek quotation the philosopher Martin Heidegger used in his 1933 speech at the University of Freiburg.

The second part deals with Myatt’s latest book – Classical Paganism And The Christian Etho – and while it is a useful summary of that book there is no detailed analysis of Myatt’s assumptions and conclusions. For example, whether or not Myatt is correct in his statement that the ethics of Greek and Roman paganism can be summarized in the phrase καλὸς κἀγαθός, or whether or not Homer’s Odyssey is “redolent of the classical paganus ethos”, and whether or not Christian ethics are indeed based on “the example of the life of Jesus of Nazareth as depicted in the Gospels.”

The second part also does not in our view unequivocally answer the question that the authors asked at the end of part one, which was whether that book by Myatt marks “a return to his earlier folk culture”, with that folk culture being – in their words – “”mostly but not always just his ‘ethical National Socialism’ of Reichsfolk with the term ‘folk culture’ replacing the term ‘national socialism’ and with references to Hitler and the Third Reich removed.” All they say in answer is that “there are no such links” to and nothing redolent of “Myatt’s old ‘folk culture’ world-view.”

Well over half the book is taken up with four old essays by Myatt, the most interesting of which is Three O’clock One English Morning – written in 2010 – in which he gives details both of his motivation as a National Socialist and the tactics and strategies he employed in his three decades as a violent political activist. These four essays by Myatt, and the one by Ms Wright with the intriguing title David Myatt, Reichsfolk, Esoteric Hitlerism, and Savitri Devi, are however – as the authors claim in their Preface – useful resources for those interested in or researching “the life of David Myatt and of how and why he developed his philosophy of pathei mathos.”

The book, despite its deficiencies, is a useful addition to the literature about Myatt given that Myatt’s life and writings continue to interest certain individuals, with some of those interested influenced by or identifying with various modern Western sub-cultures – such as the Order of Nine Angles, the Occult Left Hand Path, Esoteric Hitlerism, Reichsfolk, NRx – while others (currently, an admittedly miniscule and heretical minority) see in Myatt something Faustian and ineluctably redolent of that strange dichotomy between Light and Dark, Numinous and Sinister, between Apollonian and Dionysian, between The Scholar and The Activist, between The Monk and The Warrior, between Honour and Dishonour, between The Wisdom of Pathei-Mathos and The Reckless Promethean Quest, that lie at the heart of – which are – the ethos and the mythoi of the culture of the West.

T.W.S.
November 2017 ev

(1) https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/uncertitude-of-myatt-v7.pdf
(2) https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/myatt-mystic-philosophy-second-edition.pdf
(3) https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/dwm-questions-2017-v1b.pdf


The Uncertitude Of Mr Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt

Editorial Note: The following 54-page work incorporates and thus supersedes the previously issued work by Wright & Parker titled From National-Socialism To The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos which was published in October of this year.

°°°°°

The Uncertitude Of Mr Myatt
(pdf)

°°°°°°°

Contents

° Preface
° Part One: David Myatt And The Uncertitude Of Knowing
° Part Two: A Modern Pagan Spirituality
° Appendix One: Three O’clock One English Morning
° Appendix Two: David Myatt, Reichsfolk, Esoteric Hitlerism, and Savitri Devi
° Appendix Three: Concerning The Development Of The Numinous Way
° Appendix Four: Hitler, National-Socialism, and Politics – A Personal Reappraisal
° Appendix Five: Some Philosophical and Moral Problems of National-Socialism

°°°°°

From the Preface:

{quote}
This study concerns (i) the evolution of Myatt’s thought between 2010 and 2012, and especially his move away from National Socialism to his non-political, mystical, philosophy of pathei-mathos with its virtues of compassion, tolerance, and honour, and (ii) whether or not his recent work such as his Pagan Mysticism And The Ethos of Christianity signifies a further evolution in favour of a modern world-view, based on Greco-Roman paganism, as “a means to reconnect those in the lands of the West, and those in Western émigré lands and former colonies of the West, with their ancestral ethos, for them to thus become, or return to being, a living, dwelling, part – a connexion between the past and the future – of what is still a living, and evolving, culture.”

Such evolution of his thought is natural given that in his Uncertitude of Knowing – one of the works discussed here – he writes:

“I am aware that I may not have all or even many of the answers required, and that such answers as I do have, or some of them, might be erroneous and that [they] therefore may need to be amended […] I have made enough mistakes in my own life to know my fallibility, as my views have evolved, matured, as a result of my experiences, my pathei-mathos. So all I have is my own perspective, my own uncertitude of knowing.”

So we should understand that he sees all his post-2010 writings – from his ‘numinous way’ to his later ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’ to his recent Pagan Mysticism And The Ethos of Christianity – as inconclusive, fallible, subject to change […]

[Such] changes express the reality of the world-view he developed post-2006, aptly described by Myatt as based on pathei mathos, on the learning that can arise from adversity and personal experience.
{/quote}


Related

The Mystic Philosophy of David Myatt
(pdf)