Christianity and the Aryan Way

odal3

°°°°°°°

Conventional Religion, Christianity, and the Aryan Way
(pdf)

°°°°°

We reproduce here chapter 13 from Myatt’s 1990s, and neglected, tract The Complete Guide to the Aryan Way of Life . The chapter deals with the difference between “the Aryan way” and Christianity and contains some interesting insights.

Myatt’s idealistic and at times polemical tract begins with the statement that

“To be Aryan is to be of Aryan descent and to uphold and follow the Aryan way of life. The decadent and ignoble way of life which exists today in all nations is the total opposite of this Aryan way of life.

An Aryan is someone who behaves and thinks like an Aryan; someone who upholds and who lives, day after day, by Aryan customs and who is aware and proud of their Aryan culture and heritage. Above all, an Aryan is someone who judges everything by Aryan standards, and who strives to do what is Aryan.”

Myatt goes on to state that the Aryan way is the way of Honour, Loyalty and Duty, and that

we use the term Aryan instead of “White”. White refers just to the colour of the skin; Aryan refers to our culture, our heritage, our character, our Aryan way of life.

A true Aryan is much more than just a “White” person: a true Aryan is a White person who has an Aryan character; who has an Aryan “soul”. A true Aryan is a White person who behaves, who thinks, who lives, like an Aryan: that is, in accord with our own Aryan traditions, our own Aryan heritage, our own Aryan way of life.

RDM Crew
2019

°°°°°°°


Reichsfolk National Socialism

°°°°°°°°°

odal3

Reichsfolk:
A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

What is not widely known in the modern Western world is that there are two very different interpretations of National Socialism. “Ours” – that of groups such as Reichsfolk and of those who know and who appreciate the writings and deeds of people such as Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {1} – and that of the majority of latter-day self-described “neo-nazis”.

Latter-Day Neo-Nazism And The National-Socialism Of Reichsfolk

The first and most well-known latter-day interpretation of National Socialism is that of the majority of self-described “neo-nazis”, and which interpretation is accepted by most anti-fascists who actively oppose such modern “neo-nazis”.

This is the National Socialism with a belief in a strong, powerful, nation-State, and with an overt racist ideology. A National Socialism with a dislike – often hatred – of non-White immigrants and non-White neighbours; with a belief in the instinct of “might is right” and the necessity of kampf; with a dislike – even a hatred – of those whose love is for someone of the same gender; a National Socialism with a misogyny based on the masculous instinct that it is the natural duty of most women to be wives and home-makers; and a National Socialism with a dislike – even a hatred – of Islam and Muslims.

The second, and not very well-known, interpretation of National Socialism is that of the “revisionist”, non-racist, National-Socialism developed by David Myatt in the 1990s and manifest in the Reichsfolk group {2} inspired as this version was by Myatt’s meetings with Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle and by his correspondence with Jost Turner whose vision was of a new Aryan folk-community in America and of other “NS kindred” communities around the world.

In this Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism {3} it is regarded as both (i) “an ethnic philosophy which affirms that the different races, the different peoples, which exist are expressions of our human condition, and that these differences, this human diversity, should be treasured in the same way we treasure the diversity of Nature. National-Socialists believe our world would be poorer were these human differences to be destroyed through abstract ideas,” and as (ii) “a pure expression of our own unique Aryan ethics, based as these ethics are upon the idealism of duty to the folk, duty to Nature, and upon the nobility of personal honour.” {4}

It is also the National-Socialism which rejects the notion of a strong, powerful, modern nation-State in favour of new ethnic folk-communities and which National-Socialism is not politically active “on the streets” but instead is “a social, educational, cultural, and spiritual, movement based upon and dedicated to disseminating the noble principles of ethical, non-racist, National-Socialism which are honour, reason, fairness, loyalty, duty to one’s own folk and to Nature, and respect for and understanding of other cultures and other ways of life.” {2}

              In simple terms, the Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism is based on both honour and race, whereas the neo-nazism of most modern nazis and of modern neo-nazi political groups is based on the glorification of race and the glorification of “racial struggle” at the expense of personal honour; a difference Myatt emphasised is his essay A Brief Criticism of William Pierce, written in 114yf,

“The main weakness of the theorizing of Pierce is that he has failed to see that it is a combination of race and honour which defines National-Socialism, and which should define the racialist movement in general. Without the evolutionary, moral, concept of honour, there is only the inhuman ethics of the past, and in practice this leads to the creation of people who are ignoble and societies which are anti-evolutionary. Thus, Pierce is firmly stuck in the past: an ignoble past of unreason and dishonour.

This lack of an ethical dimension to his thinking leads to him supporting the old concept of racial struggle and the inhuman consequence of considering that some races are superior to others.” {5}

Myatt expanded upon this in his seminal text Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism,

“An affirmation of race without an affirmation honour is not National-Socialism, just as an affirmation of honour without an affirmation of race is not National-Socialism.

It is this living, organic, dialectic of honour and race which defines National-Socialism itself, and a National-Socialist is an individual who strives to do their honourable duty to both their own race and Nature herself, of which other human races are a part.

That is, a National-Socialist must always be honourable, whatever the consequences, or the perceived consequences. Quite often, this means a National-Socialist is faced with what seems to be difficult choices and difficult decisions, although in reality if National-Socialism itself is properly understood, there is no conflict, no moral dilemma and no difficulty in doing the right, the honourable, thing.

Thus if something, some act or deed, seems to affirm race – or be beneficial to one’s race – but is dishonourable, then that something is not something a National-Socialist should do. What honour does is define our duty to our race and other races – it prevents us from committing hubris.” {5}

In addition, in Myatt’s revisionist version of National-Socialism there is no misogyny, for the NS Code of Honour applies equally to both men and women,

“A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.” {6}

Our National-Socialism

The National-Socialism of Reichsfolk is Myatt’s revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism.

This is the National-Socialism where

“a true National-Socialist knows or feels that some things are honourable, and other things are dishonourable. It is dishonourable, for instance – cowardly and unfair and uncivilized – for several people to attack and try to injure or kill a single individual.

Thus, if several Caucasians attack one Negro, they are acting dishonourably – they are being uncivilized and cowardly. A true National-Socialist would never do such a thing. They would always want to see, or take part in, a “fair fight”.

Furthermore, I myself – a life-long National-Socialist – would go to the aid of a Negro if I saw him being attacked by several Caucasians, for that would be the just, the fair, the honourable, the civilized and the National-Socialist thing to do. That so many people today who adhere to ‘political National Socialist’ organizations do not agree with this just shows how far these so-called ‘National Socialists’ are from genuine National-Socialism. Which, incidently, is why I always write ‘National-Socialism’ rather than National Socialism.”

This is also the National-Socialism where there is respect for the Muslim way of life and Muslim culture, with honourable co-operation between National-Socialists and Muslims regarded as desirable {8}.

That this revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism is not appreciated – and certainly not understood – in the societies of the modern West is regarded by our kind as just one more indication of just how successful the Magian, the hubriati, and the neo-nazi hordes of Homo Hubris, have been in propagating the Magian latter-day (mis)interpretation of National Socialism as something “racist”, homophobic, misogynist, anti-Muslim, and uncivilized.

R.S.
Reichsfolk
December 129yf
v.1.07

°°°

{1} Waffen SS General Leon Degrelle was awarded numerous medals for war-time bravery including the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, a German military award similar to the British Military Cross. His writings include:
° The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS volunteer, 1941-1945. Institute for Historical Review. 2014. ISBN 9780939484768.
° Hitler, né à Versailles. 1–3. Paris: Art et histoire d’Europe. 1986. ISBN 2906026085.
° Ich war Gefangener. Nürnberg: Hesperos Verlag. 1944.
° Hitler pour 1000 ans. Paris: La Table Ronde. 1969.
{2} qv. https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/intro-reichsfolk.pdf
{3} qv. Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings (pdf).
{4} Myatt, Why National-Socialism is Not Racist, 111yf. The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{5} The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{6} The Code is given in the third edition of Myatt’s The Meaning Of National-Socialism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{7} Myatt, The Spirituality of National-Socialism: A Reply to Criticism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{8} See, for instance, the essay Islam and National-Socialism in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/ns-islam.pdf

°°°°°°°

Related:

David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°


Article source:
https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/a-new-interpretation-of-national-socialism/


Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire

hitler1

°°°°°°°°°

David Myatt: Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire
(pdf)

°°°

Republished here is Part One of David Myatt’s three-part autobiographical notes titled Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire, in which part he provides an informative overview of his three decade long career as a neo-nazi activist.

Originally written and published in the 1990s, on the now defunct ‘geocities’ DM Homepage fan-site, it was revised by Myatt in 2003 during his now notorious campaign to bring neo-nazis and radical Muslims together in order for them to fight their “common enemy”. {1} We have slightly changed the original formatting to make the item more pdf friendly, and provided a link to an archive version of the original article.

RDM Crew
December 2018 ev

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

°°°°°°°

Related:

Selected National Socialist Writings

A Primer of Neo-Nazi Ideology

°°°°°°°


David Myatt and Tommy Robinson: A Contrast

odal3

°°°°°°°°°

Editorial Note:

We republish here an article from 2013 which raised suspicions about the person using the alias Tommy Robinson. The article was first privately published in Das Reich, the internal bulletin of Reichsfolk, and then publicly posted on the well-known Right-Wing Stormfront internet forum. {1}

The 2013 article contrasts the showmanry, publicly-seeking behaviour of “Tommy Robinson” with the restrained behaviour of David Myatt, with Mr Robinson announcing his apparent “change of heart” in 2013 in public at a Press Conference broadcast live on Sky TV News. In contrast Myatt did not publicly mention his private conversion to Islam in 1998 until two years later when interviewed by the BBC for the Panorama TV programme about David Copeland and which brief remarks by Myatt about his conversion were cut from the programme and never broadcast.

The article also drew attention to the fact that the person behind the alias Tommy Robinson – Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – was associated with and friends with influential Zionists such as Richard Spencer and Pamela Geller. Which influential people perhaps explains why the 2013 Press Conference and Mr Robinson himself attracted so much Media attention at the time.

            In the five years since the article was published it has become public knowledge that “Tommy Robinson” is now and has been for over a year not only mentored and financially aided by wealthy Zionists such as Ezra Levant, Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz, but also is supported by British Establishment figures like Eton-educated millionaire Lord Pearson and influential American figures such as the Republican Congressman Paul Gosar. {2} Gosar, incidently, is a staunch supporter of the pro-Zionist Middle East Forum run by millionaire Daniel Pipes which group paid for the July 2018 trip to England by Gosar where he met with “Tommy Robinson” and spoke at a pro-Robinson public rally organized and paid for by Daniel Pipes and Ezra Levant.

In summary, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – a convicted criminal who has been jailed for violence and fraud – is a man who is not only, as the 2013 article states, a publicity-seeker “hooked on attention” but is also, as more recent articles have revealed, a useful muppet whose strings are being pulled by his Zionist paymasters while Establishment figures like Lord Pearson massage his ego by wining and dining him in exclusive venues such as the British Houses of Parliament with the muppet now well-dressed and well-coiffured courtesy of his wealthy mentors but still spouting the same old Islamophobic rhetoric he spouted five and more years ago.

In contrast David Myatt – despite also being a convicted criminal who has also been jailed for violence – is a man who not only now lives like a reclusive mystic but who also as a result of pathei-mathos has, in extensive writings, renounced both his extremist past and all forms of extremism. {3}

RDM Crew
November 2018

{1} http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t999405/

The Das Reich bulletin published by Myatt’s Reichsfolk group was mentioned in the Nazi Satanism And The New Aeon chapter of the book Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity, authored by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke (page 223 of the edition published by NYU Press in 2003). It was also mentioned – in the section headed David Wulstan Myatt – in the earlier book Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right, edited by Jeffrey Kaplan and published by Rowman & Littlefield in 2000.

{2} See for example https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/11/05/an-example-of-zionist-power/

{3} For an overview of Myatt’s recent writings see the book The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt (pdf)

°°°°°°°

David Myatt and Tommy Robinson – A Comparison

In early October 2013 the founder and leader of the anti-Muslim EDL, one Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Lennon aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon aka Andrew McMaster aka Paul Harris, or whatever his real name is) with much fanfare publicly announced he had left the English Defence League (EDL) because he had “concerns over the dangers of far-right extremism”.

He subsequently gave many interviews to journalists and even held a press conference which was not only broadcast live by Sky TV but also was widely covered by many mainstream newspapers and media including The Guardian and The Sunday Times.

In several of these interviews he announced his intention of continuing to combat what he termed Islamic extremism and even spoke of forming or being part of some new group dedicated, among other things, to preventing the establishment of any new mosques in Britain and propagating the belief that “the Koran promotes violence”. He also declined, when pressed by several journalists, to renounce his association with and support for prominent anti-Islam activists and propagandists such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer with whom he had a long-standing association.

Unsurprisingly, many anti-fascist groups and commentators were suspicious of Robinson’s sudden ‘conversion’ with one association – the Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks – even going so far as to say that unless Robinson met with the victims of anti-Muslim prejudice where the perpetrators were EDL sympathisers they would not believe his ‘conversion’ was genuine.

Contrast the public shenanigans of Robinson with David Myatt, the founder and first leader of the NSM (of which David Copeland was a member) who was, for thirty years, a violent neo-nazi activist and regarded not only as the “ideological heavyweight behind Combat 18” but also as “the mentor who drove David Copeland to kill”.

In the Fall of 1998 Myatt privately, and without any public fuss, converted to Islam at a Mosque in Worcester. Following this conversion he gained a reputation, according to the author Martin Amis, as a “fierce Jihadi”, and – according to Professor Robert Wistrich – travelled and spoke in several Arab countries and wrote one of the most detailed defences in the English language of Islamic suicide attacks, with the Simon Wiesenthal Center commentating in 2003 that,

“David Myatt, the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s […] has converted to Islam, praises bin Laden and al Qaeda, calls the 9/11 attacks ‘acts of heroism’, and urges the killing of Jews. Myatt, under the name Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt supports suicide missions and urges young Muslims to take up Jihad. Observers warn that Myatt is a dangerous man.”

Over ten years later (in 2010) Myatt, again privately, and without any public fuss, renounced all forms of extremism, admitted his past mistakes, expressed regret regarding his extremist past, and wrote, in an oblique reference to his former political opponents (such as those involved with the Searchlight organization), that –

“I harbour no resentment against individuals, or organizations, or groups, who over the past forty or so years have publicly and/or privately made negative or derogatory comments about me or published items making claims about me. Indeed, I now find myself in the rather curious situation of not only agreeing with some of my former political opponents on many matters, but also (perhaps) of understanding (and empathizing with) their motivation; a situation which led and which leads me to appreciate even more just how lamentable my extremism was and just how arrogant, selfish, wrong, and reprehensible, I as a person was, and how in many ways many of those former opponents were and are (ex concesso) better people than I ever was or am.” Source – http://www.davidmyatt.info/genesis-of-my-unknowing.html

Myatt then withdraw from public life, to reclusively concentrate on developing his rather mystical ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’ which extols the virtues of compassion, humility, empathy, and love.

This comparison of Myatt with the shenanigans of ‘Tommy Robinson’ leads to the inevitable conclusion that, as one journalist wrote, Robinson’s “defection is not a transformation” and that Robinson “is a man who is hooked on attention” who is simply “changing his method” (his tactics) and not his fundamental beliefs.

°°°°°

Related:
Latest: Criminal Case Against Zionist Muppet Postponed
The Zionist Muppet Archives – Part One

°°°°°°°°°


Selected National Socialist Works

°°°°°°°°°

odal3

Selected National Socialist Writings Of David Myatt
(pdf)

°°°°°°°

We republish here a selection of the National Socialist writings of David Myatt. As noted in the Preface:

From the voluminous writings of David Myatt about National Socialism we have selected those that – alongside his Vindex, Destiny of The West, first published in Virginia (USA) in 1984 by George Dietz in his Liberty Bell magazine – have not only been most influential among contemporary neo-Nazis from the 1990s on but are also not stridently polemical […]

In these writings Myatt presents his revisionist version – his evolution – of the National Socialism of Adolf Hitler. His vision of National Socialism is certainly idealistic, inspiring, ideological, at times mystical, and marks him – in the words of one academic – as arguably one of the “principal proponent[s] of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology”.

As Myatt writes in one of the included works:

“This work, along with several other NS works I have written, has been slightly amended to reflect only the essence of National-Socialism. Thus, all polemical and political remarks – incompatible with Esoteric Hitlerism – have been removed.”

In our view in the first two essays in the compilation, The Meaning of National-Socialism – written in 108 yf (1997) with a third revised edition published some years later, in 2003 – and the Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism – written in the year 2000 {1} – Myatt provides a clear and contemporary understanding of National Socialism and which understanding is very different from, in fact diametrically opposed to, how National Socialism is perceived today both by those opposed to it and by the majority who are described as “neo-nazis” or who describe themselves as “neo-nazi”.

In his Esoteric Hitlerian essay Myatt also provides an interesting autobiographical aside:

“Like many National-Socialists who live in the post First Zionist War world, I have in the past, out of desire to at least do something, used both the rhetoric and the tactics employed by the NSDAP in the hope of gaining some kind of political power. Thus, my older writings – and the propaganda I employed as leader of the now disbanded National-Socialist Movement – contain much strident rhetoric and appeals for political action of one kind or another. I have given all of my adult life to striving to aid the Cause in one way or another, as have many other National-Socialists.

In the past thirty or more years, I have used every tactic I could, some covert, some overt, some dubious and perhaps dishonourable, to further our noble Cause, as I have, on occasion, used deceit to try and deceive our now powerful enemies. In the end I and those others who have used similar tactics have achieved nothing because the tactics, and sometimes the intention, were wrong, as I have slowly and painfully learned from experience. This post First Zionist War world is very different from the world which Adolf Hitler and the members of his NSDAP knew and many people – myself included – have in past mistaken some of the rhetoric of the past for the essence.

We have concentrated on fighting perceived enemies, and on somehow taking over the status quo, to the detriment of what is fundamentally important. We have perceived our duty as fighting these perceived enemies, and taking part in some war, whereas our real duty is to be and to strive to be a becoming, a continuation of our folk and of evolution itself – to belong to our folk; to be honourable; to express our humanity through our Nature-given talents and abilities; to create genuine folk communities in harmony with Nature.”

As Myatt makes clear in two of the essays included in the compilation – his Theory Of The Holocaust and the The Life of Adolf Hitler section of his The Religion of National-Socialism – in his revisionist version of National Socialism “the holocaust” is regarded as mendacious anti-Nazi propaganda.

RDM Crew
November 2018

{1} It worth noting that the third edition of his The Meaning of National-Socialism (the version included in the compilation) and his essay Esoteric Hitlerism were both written during his early years as a Muslim during his notorious campaign for an alliance between radical Muslims and National Socialists so that they might unite in their fight against their common “Zionist” enemy.

°°°°°°°°°
Related:
Concerning The Vindex Mythos (pdf)
Myatt: Vindex, Destiny of the West (pdf)
°°°°°°°°°


Myatt’s Philosophy: Honour, Empathy, A Rejection Of Extremism

David Myatt

°°°°°°°°°

Editorial Note:

The following essay is an extract from the book The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt by JR Wright and R. Parker, second edition 2018 {1}.

The book provides a detailed analysis of Myatt’s philosophy of pathei mathos; a philosophy, or weltanschauung, which Myatt developed between 2011 and 2015 following his rejection of extremism which, as the author of the following writes,

“was a consequence of pathei mathos – primarily, the suicide of his partner in 2006 – and which learning from grief resulted in him developing what he termed a philosophy of pathei-mathos centred around personal virtues such as humility, compassion, empathy and personal honour.”

It is those virtues which form the core of Myatt’s philosophy, and in our view this extract gets to the heart of that philosophy providing as it does relevant quotations from Myatt’s post-2011 writings.

We have corrected a few typos in the essay.

RDM Crew,
2018

°°°

{1} The book is available as a gratis open access (pdf) document here: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/myatt-mystic-philosophy-second-edition.pdf

The contents of the book are:

I. A Modern Mystic: David Myatt And The Way of Pathei-Mathos.
II. A Modern Pagan Philosophy.
III. Honour In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos.
IV. An Overview of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos.
           Part One: Anti-Racism, Extremism, Honour, and Culture.
           Part Two: Humility, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos.
V. Classical Paganism And A New Metaphysics.
Appendix I. A Note On Greek Terms In The Philosophy Of Pathei-Mathos.
Appendix II. Towards Understanding Ancestral Culture.
Appendix III. From Mythoi To Empathy: Toward A New Appreciation Of The
Numinous.

°°°°°°°°°

An Overview of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos, Part One

It is now generally acknowledged that David Myatt – once renowned as an ideologue {1} and as a ‘theoretician of terror’ {2} – has rejected the extremism that dominated his life for some forty years, thirty of which years were spent as a neo-nazi activist and ten as a “fierce Jihadist” {3} and apologist for Al-Qaeda {4}.

According to his own account {5} this rejection was a consequence of pathei mathos – primarily, the suicide of his partner in 2006 – and which learning from grief resulted in him developing what he termed a philosophy of pathei-mathos centred around personal virtues such as humility, compassion, empathy and personal honour {6}{7}. In addition he has written several interesting, if rather neglected, essays in which he discourses about culture and – politically relevant today – about topics such as extremism. In these discourses, which apply his philosophy to the topics discussed, he is at pains to point out that he presents only his “personal, fallible, opinion about such matters” and that these opinions derive from his decades of “experience of extremists and my decade of study and personal experience of, and involvement with, Islam.” {8}

Culture, Civilization, and Politics

Given Myatt’s predilection during his extremist decades, and especially as a neo-nazi ideologue, for pontificating about both ‘culture’ and ‘civilization’, his mature view of such things, resulting from his recent seven or so years of interior reflection following his learning from grief {9}, are of especial interest.

For he writes that:

“The very usage of the term civilization, for instance, implies a bias; a qualitative often pejorative, prejudiced, assessment and thence a division between something judged ‘better than’ – or ‘superior to’ or ‘more advanced than’ – something else, so that ‘to civilize’ denotes “the action or process of being made civilized” by something or someone believed or considered to be more distinguished, or better than, or superior to, or more advanced.

In common with some other writers, my view is that a clear distinction should be made between the terms culture, society, and civilization, for the terms culture and society – when, for example, applied to describe and distinguish between the customs and way of life of a group or people, and the codes of behaviour and the administrative organization and governance of those residing in a particular geographical area – are quantitative and descriptive rather than qualitative and judgemental. It is therefore in my view inappropriate to write and talk about a European or a Western ‘civilization’ […]

[T]he essence, the nature, of all cultures is the same: to refine, and develope, the individual; to provide a moral guidance; to cultivate such skills as that of reasoning and learning and civility; to be a repository of the recorded/aural pathei-mathos, experiences, and empathic understanding of others (such as our ancestors) over decades, centuries, millennia, as manifest for example in literature, music, memoirs, poetry, history, Art, and often in the past in myths and legends and religious allegories. A recorded/aural pathei-mathos and empathic understanding – a human learning – which teach the same lessons, whatever the culture, whatever the people, whatever the time and whatever the place. The lesson of the importance of a loyal love between two people; the lesson of the importance of virtues such as εὐταξία and honour; the lesson of the need to avoid committing the error of hubris. The lesson of hope, redemption, and change. And the lesson concerning our own nature […]

Ultimately, the assumed or the perceived, the outer, differences do not matter, since what matters for us as human beings capable of reason and civility is our shared humanity and the wisdom that all cultures guide us toward: which wisdom is that it is what is moral – it is what keeps us as mortals balanced, aware of and respective of the numinous – that should guide us, determine our choices and be the basis of our deeds, for our interaction with other human beings, with society, and with the life with which we share this planet.

As outlined in my philosophy of pathei-mathos, my personal view is that the criteria of assessment and judgement are the individual ones of empathy, reason, and the presumption of innocence; which means that abstractions, ideations, theories, and categories, of whatever kind – and whether deemed to be political, religious, or social – are considered as unimportant. That what matters, what is moral, is a very personal knowing in the immediacy-of-the-moment so that what is beyond the purveu of our empathy, of our personal knowing, knowledge, and experience, is something we rationally accept we do not know and so cannot judge or form a reasonable, a fair, a balanced, opinion about. Hence, and for example, individuals and people we do not know, of whatever faith, of whatever perceived ethnicity, sexual orientation, or perceived or assumed or proclaimed culture – whom we have no personal experience of and have had no interaction with over a period of causal time – are unjudged by us and thus given the benefit of the doubt; that is, regarded as innocent, assumed to be good, unless or until direct personal experience, and individual and empathic knowing of them, as individuals, proves otherwise […]

What matters are our own moral character, our interior life, our appreciation of the numinous, and the individual human beings we interact with on the personal level; so that our horizon is to refine ourselves into cultured beings who are civil, reasoned, empathic, non-judgemental, unbiased, and who will, in the words of one guide to what is moral, Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ.” {8}

Myatt’s emphasis is thus on the individual; on their interior life, and their personal interaction with others in what he terms, in his philosophy of pathei-mathos, the immediacy of the personal moment:

“Since the range of our faculty of empathy is limited to the immediacy-of-the-moment and to personal interactions, and since the learning wrought by pathei-mathos and pathei-mathos itself is and are direct and personal, then the knowledge, the understanding, that empathy and pathei-mathos reveal and provide is of the empathic scale of things and of our limitations of personal knowing and personal understanding. That is, what is so revealed is not some grand or grandiose theory or praxis or philosophy which is considered applicable to others, or which it is believed can or should be developed to be applicable to others or developed to offer guidance beyond the individual in political and/or social and/or religious and/or ideological terms; but rather a very personal, individual, spiritual and thus interior, way. A way of tolerance and humility, where there is an acceptance of the unwisdom, the hubris, the unbalance, of arrogantly, pejoratively, making assumptions about who and what are beyond the range of our empathy and outside of our personal experience.” {10}

There is, therefore, a rejection of involvement with politics:

“Given that the concern of the philosophy of pathei-mathos is the individual and their interior, their spiritual, life, and given that (due to the nature of empathy and pathei-mathos) there is respect for individual judgement, the philosophy of pathei-mathos is apolitical, and thus not concerned with such matters as the theory and practice of governance, nor with changing or reforming society by political means.” {11}

In line with the virtues of his philosophy, Myatt is scathing regarding extremism in general:

“One of the worst consequences of the extremism of extremists – of modern hubris in general – is, or seems to me to be, the loss of what is personal, and thus what is human; the loss of the empathic, the human, scale of things; with what is personal, human, empathic, being or becoming displaced, scorned, forgotten, obscured, or a target for destruction and (often violent) replacement by something supra-personal such as some abstract political/religious notion or concept, or some ideal, or by some prejudice and some often violent intolerance regarding human beings we do not personally know because beyond the range of our empathy.

That is, the human, the personal, the empathic, the natural, the immediate, scale of things – a tolerant and a fair acceptance of what-is – is lost and replaced by an artificial scale posited by some ideology or manufactured by some τύραννος; a scale in which the suffering of individuals, and strife, are regarded as inevitable, even necessary, in order for ‘victory to be achieved’ or for some ideal or plan or agenda or manifesto to be implemented. Thus the good, the stability, that exists within society is ignored, with the problems of society – real, imagined, or manufactured by propaganda – trumpeted. There is then incitement to disaffection, with harshness and violent change of and within society regarded as desirable or necessary in order to achieve preset, predetermined, and always ‘urgent’ goals and aims, since slow personal reform and change in society – that which appreciates and accepts the good in an existing society and in people over and above the problems and the bad – is anathema to extremists, anathema to their harsh intolerant empathy-lacking nature and to their hubriatic striving.” {12}

All this amounts to viewing matters – events in the external world, and our relation to other humans – in terms of two principles rather than in terms of politics, ideology, dogma, or revolutionary social change. The first principle is personal honour; the second what Myatt terms ‘the cosmic perspective’, of which perspective Myatt writes:

“The Cosmic Perspective reveals a particular truth not only about the Anthropocene (and thus about our φύσις as human beings) but also about how sustainable millennial change has occurred and can occur. Which change is via the progression, the evolution – the development of the faculties and the consciousness – of individuals individually. This is the interior, the a-causal, change of individuals wrought by a scholarly learning of and from our thousands of years old human culture of pathei-mathos, by our own pathei-mathos, and by that personal appreciation of the numinous that both the Cosmic Perspective and the muliebral virtues incline us toward. This aeonic change voids what we now describe by the terms politics and religion and direct social activism of the violent type. There is thus a shift from identifying with the communal, the collective – from identifying with a particular contemporary or a past society or some particular national culture or some particular causal form such as a State or nation or empire or some -ism or some -ology – toward that-which has endured over centuries and millennia: our human culture of pathei-mathos. For the human culture of pathei-mathos records and transmits, in various ways, the pathei-mathos of individuals over thousands of years, manifest as this sustainable millennial culture is in literature, poetry, memoirs, aural stories, in non-verbal mediums such as music and Art, and in the experiences – written, recorded, and aural – of those who over the centuries have appreciated the numinous, and those who endured suffering, conflict, disaster, tragedy, and war, and who were fundamentally, interiorly, changed by their experiences.” {13}

Given this perspective, and given that personal honour “cannot be extracted out from the living moment and our participation in the moment” {7} and is a necessary virtue, then Myatt’s philosophy, while somewhat redolent of Buddhism, Taoism, and the Catholic contemplative tradition, is rather unique in that the personal use of force (including lethal force) in the immediacy of the moment is justified in personal defence of one’s self or of others, since

“the personal virtue of honour, and the cultivation of wu-wei, are – together – a practical, a living, manifestation of our understanding and appreciation of the numinous; of how to live, to behave, as empathy intimates we can or should in order to avoid committing the folly, the error, of ὕβρις, in order not to cause suffering, and in order to re-present, to acquire, ἁρμονίη. For personal honour is essentially a presencing, a grounding, of ψυχή – of Life, of our φύσις – occurring when the insight (the knowing) of a developed empathy inclines us toward a compassion that is, of necessity, balanced by σωφρονεῖν and in accord with δίκη.” {14}

Given the mention of wu-wei in many of Myatt’s recent writings, it is no surprise that Myatt admits (or, rather, overstates) his debt to Taoism:

“According to my limited understanding and knowledge, I am not expressing anything new here. Indeed, I feel (and I use the word ‘feel’ intentionally) that I am only re-expressing what I intuitively (and possibly incorrectly) understood nearly half a century ago about Taoism when I lived in the Far East and was taught that ancient philosophy by someone who was also trying to instruct me in a particular Martial Art.” {13}

It is therefore possible to speculate that the archetypal follower of Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos – if there were or could be such followers of such a personal philosophy of life – might be akin to one of the following: (i) a reclusive or wandering, or communal living, mystic, concerned only with their interior life and/or with scholarly study, yet prepared – in the immediacy of the moment and when confronted by someone or some group being dishonourable – to do what is honourable in defence of themselves or others even if that meant their own death; (ii) someone outwardly ordinary who was in, or who was seeking, a loving relationship, and who – compassionate and sensitive and cultured – was unconcerned with politics or conventional religion, and yet prepared – in the immediacy of the moment and when confronted by someone or some group being dishonourable – to do what is honourable in defence of themselves or others even if that meant their own death; (iii) someone with an interior sense of what is honourable whose occupation or career or way of life enables them, in a personal manner and within their milieu, to individually do what is honourable, fair, and just; and (iv) someone who – compassionate and empathic by nature – whose occupation or career or way of life enables them, in a personal manner and within their milieu, to individually do what is compassionate and who would – in the immediacy of the moment and when confronted by someone or some group being dishonourable – do what is honourable in defence of themselves or others even if that meant their own death.

In Myatt’s view, such individuals would be acting in a wise way – in accord with the aforementioned cosmic perspective – since:

“The only effective, long-lasting, change and reform that does not cause suffering – that is not redolent of ὕβρις – is the one that changes human beings in an individual way by personal example and/or because of πάθει μάθος, and thus interiorly changes what, in them, predisposes them, or inclines them toward, doing or what urges them to do, what is dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate. That is what, individually, changes or rebalances bad φύσις and thus brings-into-being, or restores, good φύσις.” {15}

For:

“It is inner, personal, change – in individuals, of their nature, their character – that is is the ethical, the numinous, way to solve such personal and social problems as exist and arise. That such inner change of necessity comes before any striving for outer change by whatever means, whether such means be termed or classified as political, social, economic, religious. That the only effective, long-lasting, change and reform is understood as the one that evolves human beings and thus changes what, in them, predisposes them, or inclines them toward, doing or what urges them to do, what is dishonourable, undignified, unfair, and uncompassionate.” {11}

Extremism, Racism, And Prejudice

In Myatt’s philosophy, the personal knowing of others provided by empathy and the self-knowing that pathei-mathos reveals replace the categorizations by which we have assumed we can know and understand others and ourselves:

“Hitherto, the φύσις of beings and Being has most usually been apprehended, and understood, in one of three ways or by varied combinations of those three ways. The first such perceiveration is that deriving from our known physical senses – by Phainómenon – and by what has been posited on the basis of Phainómenon, which has often meant the manufacture, by we human beings, of categories and abstract forms which beings (including living beings) are assigned to on the basis of some feature that has been outwardly observed or which has been assumed to be possessed by some beings or collocation of beings.
The second such perceiveration derives from positing a ‘primal cause’ – often denoted by God, or a god or the gods, but sometimes denoted by some mechanism, or some apparently inscrutable means, such as ‘karma’ or ‘fate’ – and then understanding beings (especially living beings) in terms of that cause: for example as subject to, and/or as determined or influenced by or dependant on, that primal cause.

The third such perceiveration derives from positing a human faculty of reason and certain rules of reasoning whereby it is possible to dispassionately examine collocations of words and symbols which relate, or which are said to relate, to what is correct (valid, true) or incorrect (invalid, false) and which collocations are considered to be – or which are regarded by their proponents as representative of – either knowledge or as a type of, a guide to, knowing.

All three of these perceiverations, in essence, involve denotatum, with our being, for example, understood in relation to some-thing we or others have posited and then named and, importantly, consider or believe applies or can apply (i) to those who, by virtue of the assumption of ipseity, are not-us, and (ii) beyond the finite, the living, personal moment of the perceiveration.

Thus, in the case of Phainómenon we have, in assessing and trying to understand our own φύσις as a human being, assumed ipseity – a separation from others – as well as having assigned ourselves (or been assigned by others) to some supra-personal category on the basis of such things as place of birth, skin colour, occupation (or lack of one), familial origin or status (or wealth or religion), some-thing termed ‘intelligence’, physical ability (or the lack thereof), our natural attraction to those of a different, or the same, gender; and so on.” {16}

In Myatt’s view, extremism – whether political or religious – makes some category an ideal to be strived for or returned to, since:

“All extremists accept – and all extremisms are founded on – the instinctive belief or the axiom that their cherished ideation(s) or abstraction(s) is or are more important, more valuable, than the individual and the feelings, desires, hopes, and happiness, of the individual. The extremist thus views and understands the world in terms of abstractions; in terms of a manufactured generalization, a hypothesis, a posited thing, an assumption or assumptions about, an extrapolation of or from some-thing, or some assumed or extrapolated ideal ‘form’ of some-thing. Sometimes, abstractions are generalization based on some sample(s), or on some median (average) value or sets of values, observed, sampled, or assumed. Abstractions can be of some-thing past, in the present, or described as a goal or an ideal which it is assumed could be attained or achieved in the future.

The abstractions of extremism are manifest in the ideology, which posits or which attempts to explain (however irrationally and intolerantly) some ideated form, some assumed or believed in perfect (ideal) form or category of some-thing, and which ideated form is or can be or should be (according to the ideology) contrasted with what is considered or assumed to be its opposite.” {17}

Thus in racism individuals are assigned to, associated with, some ‘race’ with the various ‘races’ assigned a qualitative value – describing their ‘worth’ – based on what some ideology or some ideologue state or believe is their contribution to ‘civilization’ and on how useful or harmful they might be to those deeming themselves ‘superior’.

This is immoral, according to Myatt, not only because it is dishonourable but because of the primacy of empathic, of personal, knowing:

“Everything others associate with an individual, or ascribe to an individual, or use to describe or to denote an individual, or even how an individual denotes or describes themselves, are not relevant, and have no bearing on our understanding, our knowledge, of that individual and thus – morally – should be ignored, for it is our personal knowing of them which is necessary, important, valid, fair. For assessment of another – by the nature of assessment and the nature of empathy – can only be personal, direct, individual. Anything else is biased prejudgement or prejudice or unproven assumption.

This means that we approach them – we view them – without any prejudice, without any expectations, and without having made any assumptions concerning them, and as a unique, still unknown, still undiscovered, individual person: as ‘innocent’ until proven, until revealed by their actions and behaviour to be, otherwise. Furthermore, empathy – the acausal perception/knowing and revealing of physis – knows nothing of temporal things and human manufactured abstractions/categories such as assumed or assigned ethnicity; nothing of gender; nothing of what is now often termed ‘sexual preference/orientation’. Nothing of politics, or religion. Nothing of some disability someone may suffer from; nothing of social status or wealth; nothing regarding occupation (or lack of one). Nothing regarding the views, the opinions, of others concerning someone. For empathy is just empathy, a perception different from our other senses such as sight and hearing, and a perception which provides us, or which can provide us, with a unique perspective, a unique type of knowing, a unique (acausal) connexion to the external world and especially to other human beings.

Empathy – and the knowing that derives from it – thus transcends ‘race’, politics, religion, gender, sexual orientation, occupation, wealth (or lack of it), ‘status’, and all the other things and concepts often used to describe, to denote, to prejudge, to classify, a person; so that to judge someone – for example – by and because of their political views (real or assumed) or by their religion or by their sexual orientation is an act of hubris.

In practice, therefore, in the revealing of the physis of a person, the political views, the religion, the gender, the perceived ethnicity, of someone are irrelevant. It is a personal knowing of them, the perception of their physis by empathy, and an acceptance of them as – and getting to know them as – a unique individual which are important and considered moral; for they are one emanation of the Life of which we ourselves are but one other finite and fallible part.” {12}

However, Myatt’s analysis of extremism goes much further. Based on his forty years of personal experience he considers that the extremist is a particular type of person “by nature or becomes so through association with or because of the influence of others, or because of ideological indoctrination” and that

“it is in the nature of extremists that they disdain, and often despise, the muliebral virtues of empathy, sensitivity, humility, gentleness, forgiveness, compassion, and the desire to love and be loved over and above the desire for conflict, territorial identity, and for war. Thus we find in extremism a glorification of the masculous at the expense of the muliebral; a definite personal certitude of knowing; a glorification of toughness and aggression
and war; an aggressive territorial pride; a tendency to believe, or the forthright assertion, that ‘might is right’ and kampf is necessary; the desire to organize/control; a prominent desire for adventure and/or for conflict/war and/or violence and competition.” {17}

Thus, in Myatt’s philosophy, the extremist is hubriatic: unbalanced because lacking in – or having rejected or suppressed – the muliebral virtues which are or which should be an essential part of our human nature and the genesis of all culture; with the need for such muliebral virtues, for such a balance, and the necessity of culture, among the important things that ‘our culture of pathei-mathos’ informs us about {18}. Little wonder, then, that

“it is [our] shared human culture of pathei-mathos that extremists of whatever kind, and those who advocate -isms and -ologies, scorn and so often try to suppress when, for however short a time, they have political or social or religious power and control over the lives of others. It is this human culture of pathei-mathos which – at least according to my experience, my musings, and my retrospection – reveals to us the genesis of wisdom: which is that it is the muliebral virtues which evolve us as conscious beings, which presence sustainable millennial change. Virtues such as empathy, compassion, humility, and that loyal shared personal love which humanizes those masculous talking-mammals of the Anthropocene, and which masculous talking-mammals have – thousand year following thousand year – caused so much suffering to, and killed, so many other living beings, human and otherwise.” {13}

Furthermore, according to Myatt:

“Given the masculous nature and the masculous ethos of extremism, it is no surprise that the majority of extremists are men; and given that, in my own opinion, the predominant ethos of the last three millennia – especially within the societies of the West – has been a masculous, patriarchal, one it is no surprise that women were expected to be, and often had no option but to be, subservient, and no surprise therefore that a modern movement has arisen to try and correct the imbalance between the masculous and the muliebral […]

[Yet] it is only by using and developing our faculty of empathy, on an individual basis, that we can apprehend and thence understand the muliebral; [for] the muliebral can only be manifested, presenced, individually in our own lives according to that personal, individual, apprehension. Presenced, for example, in our compassion, in our honour, by a personal loyal love, and in that appreciation of innocence and of the numinous that inclines us, as individuals, to reject all prejudice and to distance ourselves from that pride, that certainty-of-knowing about ourselves and those presumptions we make about others, which are so redolent of, and which so presence and have so presenced, the patriarchal ethos.” {13}

Extremism and racism, therefore, are understood in Myatt’s philosophy in relation to hubris and enantiodromia:

“Enantiodromia is the term used, in the philosophy of pathei-mathos, to describe the revealing, the process, of perceiving, feeling, knowing, beyond causal appearance and the separation-of-otherness and thus when what has become separated – or has been incorrectly perceived as separated – returns to the wholeness, the unity, from whence it came forth. When, that is, beings are understood in their correct relation to Being, beyond the causal abstraction of different/conflicting ideated opposites, and when as a result, a reformation of the individual, occurs. A relation, an appreciation of the numinous, that empathy and pathei-mathos provide, and which relation and which appreciation the accumulated pathei-mathos of individuals over millennia have made us aware of or tried to inform us or teach us about.” {14}

“For what the culture of pathei-mathos reveals is that we human beings, are – personally – both the cause and the cure of suffering; and that our choice is whether or not we live, or try to live, in a manner which does not intentionally contribute to or which is not the genesis of new suffering. The choice, in effect, to choose the way of harmony – the natural balance – in preference to hubris.” {19}

Conclusion

In his seminal and scholarly essay Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God {19}, Myatt places the ethics of his philosophy in the context of the theories of ethics postulated by Christianity, by Islam, and by the proponents of the modern State. He concludes, in respect of his philosophy and its ethics, that:

“The alternative ontology, derived from the culture of pathei-mathos, suggests that the answer to the question regarding the meaning of our existence is simply to be that which we are. To be in balance, in harmony, with Life; the balance that is love, compassion, humility, empathy, honour, tolerance, kindness, and wu-wei. This, by its nature, is a personal answer and a personal choice; an alternative way that compliments and is respectful of other answers, other choices, and of other ways of dealing with issues such as the suffering that afflicts others, the harm that humans do so often inflict and have for so long inflicted upon others. The personal non-judgemental way, of presumption of innocence and of wu-wei, balanced by, if required, a personal valourous, an honourable, intervention in a personal situation in the immediacy of the moment.”

However, this answer is contingent on understanding, via empathy and pathei-mathos, not only ‘the illusion of ipseity’ {16} – the ‘separation-of-otherness’ – but also the cosmic perspective and thus the temporary nature of all our human manufactured forms, categories, and abstractions, for according to Myatt:

“There has been, as there still is, at least in my view, a failure to appreciate two things. Firstly, the causal (the mortal) nature of all forms: from institutions, governments, laws, States, nations, movements, societies, organizations, empires, to leaders and those embodying in some manner the authority, the volksgeist, the ideations, the principles, the aspirations, of their time. Secondly, and possibly most important of all, that what is muliebral cannot be embodied in some organization or movement, or in some -ism, or in any causal form – and certainly cannot be expressed via the medium of words, whether spoken or written – without changing it, distorting it, from what it is into some-thing else. For the muliebral by its very φύσις is personal, individual, in nature and only presenced in the immediacy-of-the-moment, and thus cannot be the object of a supra-personal aspiration and thus should not be ‘idealized’ or even be the subject of an endeavour to express it in some principles or principles (political or otherwise), or by some axiom or axioms, or by some dogma. For all such things – forms and words included – are manifestations, a presencing, of what is, in φύσις, masculous and temporal. Or, expressed more simply, the muliebral presences and manifests what is a-causal – what, in the past, has often inclined us to appreciate the numinous – while the masculous presences and manifests what is causal, temporal, and what in the past has often inclined us toward hubris and being egoistic.” {13}

Myatt’s comprehensive philosophy – propounded in various writings between 2012 and 2014 and which he recently described as being just his personal weltanschauung rather than a philosophy {20} – thus provides an interesting, intriguing, and insightful if iconoclastic, analysis of extremism and contemporary society as well as offering an understandable ethics centred on personal honour, a rather mystical ontology, and a somewhat mystical answer to the question of existence; and although his philosophy certainly deserves to be more widely studied and more widely appreciated, it will doubtless – given Myatt’s outré and controversial life – continue to be neglected for many, many, decades to come.

R. Parker
2014

Notes

{1} (a) Barnett, Antony. Right here, right now, The Observer, February 9, 2003. (b) Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas, 2006, p. 142ff.
{2} Searchlight, July 2000.
{3} Amis, Martin. The Second Plane. Jonathan Cape, 2008, p.157
{4} (a) Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2. (b) Wistrich, Robert S. A Lethal Obsession: Anti-Semitism from Antiquity to the Global Jihad, Random House, 2010.
{5} (a) Myatt, David. Myngath – Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. 2013. ISBN 978-1484110744. (b) Myatt, David. Understanding And Rejecting Extremism. 2013. ISBN 978-1484854266
{6} Myatt’s philosophy of pathei-mathos is described in the following three published collections of his essays: (a) The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos. 2013. ISBN 978-1484096642. (b) One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings. 2014. ISBN 978-1502396105. (c) Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos. 2013. ISBN 978-1484097984
The three collections of essays are also available, as of October 2014 and as pdf files, from his weblog at http://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/
{7} Of the virtue of personal honour, Myatt writes that it

“presences the virtues of fairness, tolerance, compassion, humility, and εὐταξία – as (i) a natural intuitive (wordless) expression of the numinous (‘the good’, δίκη, συμπάθεια) and (ii) of both what the culture of pathei-mathos and the acausal-knowing of empathy reveal we should do (or incline us toward doing) in the immediacy of the personal moment when personally confronted by what is unfair, unjust, and extreme […]

[For] such honour – by its and our φύσις – is and can only ever be personal, and thus cannot be extracted out from the ‘living moment’ and our participation in the moment; for it only through such things as a personal study of the culture of pathei-mathos and the development of the faculty of empathy that a person who does not naturally possess the instinct for δίκη can develope what is essentially ‘the human faculty of honour’, and which faculty is often appreciated and/or discovered via our own personal pathei-mathos.” The Way Of Pathei-Mathos – A Précis, in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings.

{8} Myatt, David. Let Us Then Try What Love Can Do. 2012. e-text.
{9} The Development of the Numinous Way. The essay is included, as an appendix, in the printed version of his autobiography Myngath, ISBN 978-1484110744
{10} Conspectus of The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos. 2012. The essay is included in Myatt’s book The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{11} Society, Politics, Social Reform, and Pathei-Mathos. 2012. The essay is included in The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{12} Some Personal Musings On Empathy In Relation to the Philosophy of πάθει μάθος. 2012. The essay is included in The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{13} Some Questions For DWM. 2014. The essay is included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings, 2014, ISBN 978-1502396105
{14} The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos. 2013. ISBN 978-1484096642
{15} The Way of Pathei-Mathos – A Philosophical Compendium. 2012. The essay is included in The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484096642
{16} See: (a) Toward Understand The Acausal, and (b) The Way Of Pathei-Mathos – A Précis. Both essays are included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings, 2014, ISBN 978-1502396105
{17} Myatt, David. Understanding And Rejecting Extremism. 2013. ISBN 978-1484854266
{18} Regarding ‘the culture of pathei-mathos’ – a key part of his philosophy – see Myatt’s 2014 essay Education And The Culture Of Pathei-Mathos, which is included in One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings, ISBN 978-1502396105
{19} Questions of Good, Evil, Honour, and God. 2013. The essay is included in Religion, Empathy, and Pathei-Mathos, ISBN 978-1484097984


Maintaining The Cosmic Balance

°°°°°°°°°

odal3

Editorial Note: Following a debate pro et contra the following article, we decided to repost it, for even though we disagree with some of the assertions made by the author it nevertheless raises some interesting points as well as, in relation to what the author describes as a modern zeitgeist, referencing Myatt’s Vindex: Destiny Of The West.

The translation of the Greek quotation at the end, although uncredited, is from Myatt’s translation of The Agamemnon by Aeschylus. The also uncredited quotation in the article and which quotation begins “Perceived Aeonically, the Zionist entity…” is from the controversial essay Zionism And The Zeitgeist Of The West.

RDM Crew
August 2018

°°°°°°°°°

Maintaining A Cosmic Balance

We find it both indicative and amusing when people like us – post-WWII National Socialists and fascists who assert that the ‘holocaust’ is a myth, a legend – are accused of being “anti-Semitic” and of being full of “racial hatred” and of “inciting racial hatred”.

Indicative

Such accusations are indicative because concepts such as “racial hatred” and “inciting racial hatred” are modern inventions, innovations which when enshrined in criminal law – as they now are in many Western lands – represent a particular political agenda and a modern zeitgeist that is the foundation of that political agenda.

The zeitgeist is of the necessity and the encouragement of multi-racial societies based on the claim that all races are equal in terms of intelligence, ability, and in their propensity toward being good and just; and that it is only such things as “racism” by Whites along with White colonialism, and “institution racism” in majority-White societies and nations that had kept and which keep non-White races – and especially “people of colour” – from realizing their potential and from showing that they are equal to White people in terms of intelligence, ability, and in their propensity toward being good and just.

The particular political agenda based on this zeitgeist is that of introducing criminal and civil laws in majority-White societies and nations, which laws (i) seek to promote a multi-racial society, (ii) seek to propagate the claim of “institution racism” in majority-White societies and nations, and (iii) seek to criminalize those who oppose such multi-racial societies by stereotyping such opponents as intolerant bigots, as racists, who are full of “racial hatred” and who “incite racial hatred”.

In addition, this political agenda now includes the assertion that majority-White societies and nations, especially in Europe, have a “duty of care” in respect of non-White races and which duty (i) demands that majority-White societies and nations accept and welcome and support non-White immigrants and refugees in their thousands and hundreds of thousands, and (ii) demands that majority-White societies and nations give aid to non-White Third World countries in Africa and elsewhere, and (iii) demands that majority-White societies and nations do not draw undue attention to the corruption, the lawlessness, the violence, that now exist in former European colonies or in lands once governed by a White minority such as Rhodesia and South Africa.

That this particular political agenda – part as it now is of government policy in most European lands – amounts to favouring non-Whites over Whites and to actively (almost tyrannically) suppressing White dissent against such a political agenda and the zeitgeist it is based upon, is not more widely known among White folk is (i) due to the propaganda campaigns waged by governments in favour of that political agenda and (ii) due to the propaganda campaigns of such governments to stereotype their opponents as intolerant bigots, as racists, who are full of “racial hatred” and who “incite racial hatred”.

Amusing

Such accusations are amusing because “holocaust denial” and “anti-Semitism” are also modern inventions, innovations which when enshrined in criminal law – as there now are in many Western lands – represent the same particular political agenda and the same modern zeitgeist that is the foundation of that political agenda.

Amusing to us because we know, we understand, how such tyrannical attempts to criminalize “holocaust denial” and “anti-Semitism” are, Aeonically, in the time-scale of centuries, of millennia, doomed to failure, knowing and understanding as we do that our folk, our White peoples, have sooner or later always rebelled against tyrants, against tyranny, against oppression, against unjust laws. For we in our majority have within us such an instinct, such a propensity, toward what is good and just, that we abjectly refuse to be dominated by those who are not good, who are not just.

Our so-called “anti-Semitism” is, for example, just our recognition of how a certain minority demands that we now accept both the modern zeitgeist – of racial equality – that they have invented and propagated {1} and the myth of the holocaust that they have also invented to stereotype and to criminalize us.

Amusing, because we know, we understand, that although they will “have their day” – evident for example in their Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine and in their “holocaust denial” laws – they cannot, in their hubris, affect The Cosmic Balance and thus cannot avoid the consequences of their hubris.

For we – we post-WWII National Socialists and fascists who assert that the ‘holocaust’ is a myth, a legend – currently represent and will in the future represent an aspect of that Cosmic Balance. Of the dialectic, the dissent, the rebellion, that informs – that makes – our human history, our human evolution.

Thus, as someone recently wrote in respect of the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine:

“Perceived Aeonically, the Zionist entity may well be successful, for a while: be it for some decades, be it for a hundred years or perhaps more. However, their success is dependant on the continuing support of America, on a continuing belief among the peoples of the West in both the legend of the holocaust, and in the myth supported by evangelical/traditionalist Nazarenes (especially in America) that their support for the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine is authorized by Nazarene Scripture which they believe revealed that their Nazarene God intended Palestine for those who consider themselves “the chosen people” as thus who regard themselves as the descendants of the Hebrews tribes mentioned in the Old Testament.

However, regarding American support, both the demographic and the belief of the people of America are changing. Demographically, the move is away from a White majority toward those hitherto ethnic minorities – the Hispanic and the Negro – who have an instinctive aversion to the policies and politics espoused by people such as The Vulgarian. {2} In terms of belief, it is estimated that, in America, every year around 3,000 Nazarene churches close due to falling congregations, with a 2017 study by the American based Public Religion Research Institute revealing that in 1996 around 65% of Americans identified themselves as White Christians while a decade or so later only 43% did so.

Thus it is reasonable to conclude that in a hundred or so years time the people of America, and their beliefs, will be different from that of today, with there being no guarantee of American support for the Zionist entity that currently occupies Palestine.

Regarding belief among the peoples of the West in the legend of the holocaust, although it is likely that over the next three or four decades more Western lands will introduce Zionist-supported tyrannical laws making questioning “the holocaust” a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment, the history of Western peoples over the last three millennia reveals that rebellion against tyrannical laws is inevitable, sooner or later, be that later a century or more. For every tyranny, every Empire, has its day with none, in the entire history of humanity, lasting more than three or four centuries. There is always a revolution or rebellions; there is always the death – from natural causes or otherwise – of a tyrant or potentate; there is always a change of government; always the removal, the overthrow – violent or otherwise – of a ruling cabal. And there are always new ideals, new ideas, new ways of living, which replace – gradually or otherwise – the old.”

Thus, Aeonically, Cosmically, understood, the hubriatic pursuit by Zionists among White nations of their “racial equality” zeitgeist – and their hubriatic promotion of the myth of the holocaust – will eventually be their undoing.

Perhaps they will then understand – or more likely, given their physis and thus their history of hubris, they will not understand – that as Aeschylus wrote millennia ago:

Δίκα δὲ τοῖς μὲν παθοῦσιν μαθεῖν ἐπιρρέπει

“The goddess, Judgement, favours someone learning from adversity”. (Agamemnon, 250-251)

Richard Stirling
Reichsfolk
129 yf

{1} The roots of this zeitgeist are described in David Myatt’s seminal and heretical text Vindex: Destiny Of The West, available at https://reichsfolktimes.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/vindex-destiny-of-the-west.pdf

Editorial Note: That pdf edition was produced some years ago by an Australian who added a few footnotes to the text and an essay at the end. While the transcriber introduced a few typos and transcription errors into the text, these – and his few footnotes and end essay – do not detract from the value of that pdf version of Myatt’s text: from the fact that, to date, it is still the only publicly available edition of Myatt’s text, with rare secondhand copies of the 1984 printed edition fetching, as befits such an heretical text, high prices when they come up for sale, and thus kudos is due to the person who transcribed the printed text and produced that pdf version.

{2} qv. https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/the-vulgarian/


Article source:
https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/08/15/maintaining-a-cosmic-balance/