Editorial Note: We republish two replies made by us in the comments section of two different blogs. Republished here because they may be of some interest to others dealing as they do with certain perennial O9A matters. For publication here we have slightly amended the texts and corrected a few typos.
“Apparently you et al are still making the same two mistakes. The first mistake is the fallacy of illicit transference. A few individuals who associate themselves with the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) write polemics or (on purpose or otherwise) otherwise annoy some self-described ‘satanists’ or some ONA critic, or some Nazarene on a crusade, or someone claiming association with the ONA, and those persons then proceed to lambaste the ONA in general on the basis of those few individuals.
The second mistake is forgetting about or – for whatever reason, disputatious or otherwise – ignoring the ONA principle of the authority of individual judgment: that no one ONA or claiming to be ONA can speak or write “on behalf of the Order of Nine Angles” so that their opinion about or their interpretation of matters ONA or about satanism or about whatever is just their personal opinion or interpretation and has no authority whatsoever. But instead of applying that ONA principle, there are “walls of text” from those aforementioned types of persons plus argumentum ad hominem and argumentum ad nauseam.
Thus does a particular scenario regarding the ONA repeat itself, via the internet, again as it has done for nigh on nine years.
The point of this my own “wall of text” is that your view, your opinion, your interpretation about and of matters ONA is just as valid as mine or those of the others who contribute to blogs such as the ‘wyrdsister’ one. None of us are “special” or have received some “revelation” or have more “insight” into ONA matters than others. Neither do we have some sort of “mission”. We all have our own reasons, rational or irrational, or our own agenda, for finding the ONA interesting and for writing about it. We all have our own, our individual, experiences – occult and/or otherwise – which make us who we are and which color our interpretation and perception of matters ONA and of the ONA itself.
All of which applies to everyone past and present, from “Anton Long” (be he one person or many) to Mr McD to a certain well-known perennial interloper who frequents occult forums and ONA supporting, and ONA critical, blogs.”
“In a reply on another blog I wrote metaphorically of how I felt I belonged to another life on another world, based as that metaphor was on the experience of one of our kind. I wrote, in respect various comments made about the ONA, that
I was rather reminded of a recent conversation with a friend of mine who works as an ER [A&E] doctor. She confided that when she gets home all she wants to do is be silent, alone, and thus able to recall in peace the events of her day. To place into perspective the trauma, the injuries, the patient or patients who died while in her care even though she had done all she could do, and sometimes more. But all her then partner wanted to do on her return to their condo was talk and complain about her own office day, admitting as that doctor did that such complaints – though so very human, so natural – seemed, at least to her, so very trivial.
Thus do we – exchanging messages here – seem to belong to different worlds. Is there therefore anything meaningful for us to say here? Perhaps not.
Suffice to say that such a metaphor was not understood. On one world, an ER/A&E doctor whose 12 hour shift was often many hours longer and whose immediate decisions – tiredness and overwork not withstanding – sometimes made a difference between life and death for some of the patients in her care. While, on another world, someone or some many pontificated – via the medium of the internet, and like children – about this or that.
Such a difference in pathei mathos. Did practical experience, in the real world, and over months, years, win out against wordy pontifications, on some internet blog or forum, by some newbie or by some egoistic pretender or by some masculous zealot on a self-appointed crusade?
No, such practical experience did not – could not – win out, there in cyberspace. The internet pontifications continued, as did the delusions of some newbie, of some egoistic pretender and of some masculous zealot on some self-appointed crusade.
So it is that those who know – who have over a period of years experienced the sinister and the numinous in the real world and who thus have acquired both esoteric and exoteric pathei mathos – so often seek silence and a being-alone or at least such a sharing as developes between two lovers joined via an esoteric quest.
Thus there really is nothing I – or any of my sinisterly-numinous kind – can or need to say in impersonal places such as this. What needed to be said, or written, by our kind has been said or written over the past four decades.
So what now and in the future remains? Only a personal, a very individual, a real-life, a quite sporadic, limited, guidance; one person to another, and if and only if those needing such a guidance have revealed by their deeds that they in person merit such a real-life interaction with one of those who are of our sinisterly-numinous kind.”