Richard Moult: The Green Damask Room

 

 

It really is understandable why anonymous people – usually using a pseudonym – use the internet to spread their ill-informed opinions and rants while at the same time denigrating public figures. For sure, the relative anonymity the internet affords makes them feel safe, while such denigration and the spreading of their opinions and rants makes them feel important and good about themselves and may even provide some with a purpose, giving some meaning to their very ordinary lives especially when other (often also anonymous) on-line denizens take their opinions and denigration of others seriously. For others, ‘the green-eyed monster’ within causes them to anonymously mock that which it feeds on and needs.

The Anonymous Denigration Of The Order of Nine Angles

The denigration of the Order of Nine Angles (ONA) via the internet by anonymous individuals has been on-going for over ten years, with most of these denigrating individuals being self-described satanists who either follow the masculous “Ayn Rand with trappings” Satanism of Howard Stanton Levey {1} or who admire the man and his plagiaristic writings {2}.

Such self-described satanists take every opportunity to denigrate and spread lies about the ONA, indulging as they so often seem to do in psychological projection {3}, that is in (mostly unconsciously) dislocating themselves from the reality of the ONA and instead either (i) creating for themselves an illusory, imaginary, ONA which they always describe in negative and pejorative terms or (ii) accepting without question the illusory, imaginary, ONA which other self-described satanists have created and propagated, year upon year, via the medium of the internet.

This dislocation of theirs from the reality of the ONA is evident when such self-described satanists are asked to explain their understanding of ONA esotericism – as in ONA ontology, epistemology, and its links to Greco-Roman paganism and hermeticism – for they invariably fail to rationally respond and fail to answer the questions asked of them, instead resorting to abusive ad hominem and/or argumentum ad nauseam and/or ignoratio elenchi.

For not one of these (mostly anonymous) denigrators – such is their egoism and their belief in their illusory ONA – can be or has been honest enough to admit that their knowledge of the ONA esotericism and praxises is severely limited or non-existent.

Such egoism, for where will these self-described satanists be in ten, in twenty, years? Where will the so-called satanist group to which they have pledged allegiance or which they themselves have founded be in twenty, thirty, forty years?

These self-described satanists will doubtless be – as the majority have been in previous decades – assimilated by their Western non-satanic milieu, with their chosen much vaunted “antinomian” satanist groups either defunct, or wrought with schism, or will have descended down to be what the ‘Church of Satan’ is today, a charlatan group selling its ‘secrets’ for a fee and admitting anyone who can stump up the necessary admission charge. In practical terms, will these purveyors of Levey-type ‘satanism’ still be active, still publicly propagating satanism, in thirty, in forty, years time? Of course not.

Meanwhile, Anton Long and his esoteric legacy endures, just as the ONA will remain untainted by such commercial, such propagandistic, and such plebeian concerns as have bewitched most modern self-described satanists. For the history of the ONA reveals that is has remained untouched, over some forty years, by the denigration of self-described satanists and by the propaganda they have sent forth into cyberspace in some silly attempt to discredit it {4}.

Which naturally brings us to the denigration of Mr Myatt on the internet by anonymous individuals who with their masculous arrogance and with their delusions about themselves really do believe that they are satanists even though they have no exeatic, no real-life antinomian – subversive, heretical – deeds to their name.

Thus do such self-described satanists, because of their real-life failure and because of their jealousy and delusional imaginings, lambaste and try to denigrate Mr Myatt whose documented life really is replete with heresy, subversion, and exeatic (Satanic) living.

The Anonymous Denigration Of Myatt

As in the matter of the ONA, the denigration of David Myatt via the internet by anonymous individuals has been on-going for over ten years. For the delectation of readers, and to provide typical examples, here are extracts from – and comments on – one such anonymous and quite typical denigration circulated in 2016.

{quote 1} The only sinister thing [Myatt] ever did was take part in some minor street fights during his involvement with C18.{/quote}

Comment: That the anonymous denigrator deliberately omits or does not know certain facts already in the public domain is typical of the selective memory, and/or the ignorancy of the facts, and/or of propagandistic style of denigrators in general.

In the matter of Myatt, what was somehow ‘forgotten’ by the denigrator are, among other things, the following: (i) his founding and violent involvement in the 1970s with the Leeds-based National Democratic Freedom movement during which he was involved in many street brawls and arrested and convicted several times (those researching his life can find the relevant Court files in these and other cases); (ii) his arrest in the 1970s by the then Yorkshire Regional Crime Squad for leading a gang of thieves, and his subsequent trial and conviction; (iii) his arrest and subsequent trial and sentence of imprisonment, also in the 1970s, for leading a gang of skinheads in a violent racially-motivated attack; (iv) the ‘dawn raid’ on his village home and his arrest by six detectives from S012 (a ‘special operations’ unit based at Scotland Yard, now designated S015) for incitement/conspiracy to murder and incitement to racial hatred.

{quote 2} He’s never been in the war-zone so he has no clue what jihad is. All he did was travel to some Muslim countries, talk to some Muslim friends, read Quran, attend mosques and participate in the Muslim forum. {/quote}

Comment: That the anonymous denigrator omits or does not know certain facts already in the public domain is typical of the selective memory, the ignorancy of the facts, and propagandistic style of denigrators in general, some of whom need to denigrate a particular person or persons either because they have an agenda or because they have surrendered to the green-eyed monster within.

In the matter of Myatt, what was somehow ‘forgotten’ by this particular denigrator are, among other things, the fact that according to a highly-reputable academic source Myatt spoke about Jihad in several Arab countries. This was at a time when Jihadists were fighting in places like Afghanistan and Iraq and where anyone openly speaking about – preaching – Jihad was liable to arrest by the authorities in nearly all Arab lands. So Myatt put himself at risk, of being imprisoned and possibly even at risk of ‘rendition’ by America.

What the anonymous denigrator also somehow ‘forgot’ was that Myatt, using his real name – and thus not anonymously – openly and publicly defended the 9/11 attacks, bin Laden, and the Taliban, participated in a public dialogue about Jihad and Islam, corresponded about Jihad with Muslim scholars such as Sheikh Salman bin Fahd al-Oadah, with one of Myatt’s writings about Jihad being for several years on the official Hamas website who wouldn’t have used it if the author “had no clue as to what Jihad is”.

Here again Myatt put himself at risk of being arrested and imprisoned.

{quote 3} He’s always been more of a thinker than a doer. And as I wrote, he’s always been idealistic and rather naive in his writings. Even his NS writings don’t look as if they were written by an actual extremist. {/quote}

Comment: Personal opinion stated as fact without any actual evidence or detailed analysis to back it up. Plus, the anonymous denigrator has never met Myatt in person so does not know what Myatt is – and was – like in real life. According to one academic source, Myatt undertook “a global odyssey which took him on extended stays in the Middle East and East Asia, accompanied by studies of religions ranging from Christianity to Islam in the Western tradition and Taoism and Buddhism in the Eastern path. In the course of this Siddhartha-like search for truth, Myatt sampled the life of the monastery in both its Christian and Buddhist forms.”

Which describes a “doer”, as do the facts of his violent political activism and criminal activism outlined previously.

It would be interesting to know just what actual deeds the anonymous denigrator – and other anonymous denigrators of Myatt – have done in the real world so that their lives could be compared with the life of Myatt.

{quote 4} The rest is mythos deliberately perpetuated by his friends and followers but also by some tabloid bloggers and shitty journalists. {/quote}

Comment: This is the standard mantra of the anonymous denigrators of Myatt (ADOMs) after they have omitted whatever facts and sources contradict their assumptions regarding Myatt.

Some ADOMs in their paranoia and delusion and/or in their jealousy go even further, declaiming that anyone and everyone who points out the facts or who defends Myatt or who writes anything positive about him must be Myatt himself using a variety of pseudonyms and/or some “shitty journalist” or some gullible academic that Myatt himself has conned.

{quote 5} He’s just an ordinary chap with a knack for writing. {/quote}

Comment: This is another standard mantra of the ADOM crowd, the veracity of which is contradicted by the facts. As for the offending Myatt essay which sparked this particular ADOM to pen another bit of anti-Myatt propaganda, he/she/it apparently ‘forgot’ to mention what are perhaps its two most salient points. Which are the mention of Myatt talking to a Special Branch (SO12) British police officer shortly after the 9/11 attacks in New York, and Myatt mentioning what another member of SO12 said to him following his arrest in 1998.

For these frame his comments in that essay with context, which is part of the learning from practical experience that led Myatt to develop his philosophy of pathei mathos and turn from extremist to mystic. Thus far from being “a rant” – as that particular ADOM propagandistically claimed – Myatt’s essay Breaking My Silence is in fact a measured contribution to his life story.

Why ADOMs?

One has to ask why are there so many ADOMs and why have they, for over a decade, continued their on-line and always anonymous campaign? What is their agenda, or is their campaign just personal, the result of having surrendered to the green-eyed monster within? In my view, ADOMs neatly fall into three camps.

First, we have a minority who have indeed surrendered to the green-eyed monster within and who thus have a personal beef with Myatt, whatever that is and whether or not it is imaginary or the result of some grievance they believe they have suffered. For instance, one ADOM was known to have been cuckolded by Myatt who had an affair with his wife. Another (a violent misogynist) was known to hate Myatt’s friend Mr Moult following Moult’s honorable intervention in a domestic dispute and who believed (in his psychotic way) that the best way ‘to get Moult’ was to anonymously denigrate his friend. Another and still active ADOM is simply jealous and angry, having been ‘outed’ as an O9A pretender.

Second, are the even smaller minority who hate Myatt because of his neo-nazi past and many of whom seem to believe that he is still, at heart, a National Socialist or that even if he is not that he should he hounded because of his past. Thus, with their “never again” and “never forget, never forgive” mentality, they wage a campaign against Myatt.

Third, and the majority, are those who have agenda connected with the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA). For most of this type seem to believe that if they denigrate Myatt (whom they assume, without presenting any evidence, is the pseudonymous Anton Long) then they will denigrate the O9A and prevent it from becoming a challenger to the likes of the Church of Satan and/or the Temple of Set and/or to Mr Crowley and/or to whatever new self-described satanist group is the flavour of the year.

As to what category the anonymous author of the recent denigration, commented on above, belongs to my view is that he/she/it is not only having fun at the expense of gullible self-declared modern Satanists but also quite deliberately spreading disinformation about the O9A having as he/she/it does a particular and an apparently very ill-informed (that is mundane) view of what the O9A is, perhaps believing as he/she/it/ does that the O9A is actually very dangerous and potentially quite subversive so that a propaganda campaign against it – and against Mr Myatt – is warranted.

One can therefore expect, given this exposé, that both he/she/it/ and other active ADOMs will rant yet again about “ONA clowns and trolls” and/or about Myatt sock-puppets. Which responses will of course simply enhance, for the sagacious, both the Myatt mythos and the mythos of the O9A, and will, for many other readers, aid or arouse their curiosity about both Myatt and the O9A.

In sum, ADOMs are a natural and necessary consequence of both the O9A and the Myattian mythoi. A sign of just how healthy both of those mythoi now are.

KS
2017
v.1.03

{1} See (i) The Church of Satan And The O9A: The Dehortations of Howard Stanton Levey and (ii) Anton LaVey And Anton Long: A Study In Modern Satanism, in the 2016 pdf compilation  The Polemical Satanism Of The Order Of Nine Angles: Lambasting Levey And Aquino.

{2} See (i) The Satanic Bible  and (ii) The Church of Satan And The O9A: The Dehortations of Howard Stanton Levey, in the 2016 compilation The Polemical Satanism Of The Order Of Nine Angles: Lambasting Levey And Aquino.

{3} See for example (i) Jung’s General Aspects of Dream Psychology, (collected works, volume 8), pars. 507 & 519, and (ii) Jung’s The Shadow, (collected works, volume 9, Part 2, Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self) par. 17.

Note: those interested in the German editions of the above works should consult General Bibliography of C. G. Jung’s Writings, Revised Edition (Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 19), 1990, ISBN 978-0691098937

{4} A most amusing thing about one particular self-described satanist who has for years denigrated and who continues to denigrate the ONA (via some internet blog and in the comments section of other blogs) is that their much touted self-described “philosophy” is – like the so-called “philosophy” of Howard Levey – not a philosophy at all (having no original epistemology, ontology, or ethics) but rather is just a collection of masculous cliches padded out with paraphrases of, and/or with quotes from, what other writers such as Heraclitus, Epicurus, and Nietzsche, have written.

In addition, and like nearly every other self-described satanist, this pretentious denigrator when paraphrasing or giving quotations from non-English speaking authors depends on the translations of others for they themselves lack the scholarly knowledge to provide their own translations and thus – despite their boasts that their modern satanism (based as it is on, or inspired as it is by, the works of Howard Levey) means, among others things, self-empowerment, an abnegation of self-deceit, and a self-reliance – they are most certainly not self-reliant and most certainly not free of self-deceit.


Image credit: Painting by Richard Moult – The Green Damask Room


Advertisements