Baphomet, Dark Goddess


The O9A And Modernity

In the midst of an on-going and outright political – an anti-fascist – campaign to discredit the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) it is interesting and perhaps fun to revisit a more philosophical criticism of the O9A, dating from 2017, by one Branko Malić, issued under the titles (i) Prolegomena to Any Future Satanism: Order of the Nine Angles and Supremacy of the Fringe, in three parts, and (ii) Virtual Reality and Terrorism.

We briefly mentioned some of his criticisms in essays such as The Post Modern Nihilist O9A? {1} and The Nihilist O9A {2} writing in the The Nihilist O9A that “some caveats aside, there is – at least in our view – a fairly insightful analysis of the Order of Nine Angles.”


These caveats deserve a mention here since they serve to place the writings of Malić about the O9A into perspective. Which perspective is that while somewhat insightful – and thus rather better than, more intellectual than, the majority of items about or criticisms of the O9A – the writings nevertheless lack scholarly rigour.

The first caveat is that Malić – like most if not all O9A critics, political, academic, or otherwise – assumes that Myatt=Long but does not, just like such critics, provide anything probative, any evidence, in support of that assumption. {3}

Second, he seems to accept without question – like many other Myatt critics – that Myatt uses, is behind, various O9A pseudonyms and yet again does not, just like many other Myatt critics, provide anything probative, any evidence, in support of that assumption, that personal opinion.

Third, he seems to accept without question – like many other previous critics of the O9A – certain rumours about some O9A folk harassing or attacking certain types of people, referring as he does only to some post(s) by some anonymous person on some internet blog.

Fourth, his criticism is rooted in, framed by, his understanding of the concept – the causal abstraction – of modernity, the worst of which modernity he describes as “an attempt to understand the world on the basis of pathological or otherwise depraved human individual, something shared by founding fathers of modern intellectual culture like Marx, Freud, Heidegger, Rosenberg and their followers, academic or otherwise.” While never providing his own definition of “modernity” he does refer to an essay by Marijan Cipra. {4} Thus Malić writes that the “ONA is the most radical formulation of the LHP metaphysics and it is astonishingly congruent with some of the most prominent and influential ideas of Modernity”.

Which use of such an abstraction to frame his criticism students of the O9A will understand as a fundamental flaw since the O9A reality is of the personal enantiodromia which reveals The Unity, the monas, beyond all opposites, beyond all abstractions. {5}

Fifth, he is not adverse to using – like many other O9A critics – pejorative terms to describe both the O9A and Myatt. Terms such as “pompous”, quasi religious crap, pseudo-human.

Sixth, while he does provide references to O9A texts and items written about the O9A by others, there are mistakes in some of the references. For example, one source given in regard to a quotation about Myatt – “what all these diverse influences reveal is an outpouring of creativity, by a single individual. That is, they do seem to reveal an ‘evil genius’ at work; someone assuming diverse roles, and diverse personae, in order to cause, or bring about, disruption, and change” – is misattributed. {6}


In part two of Prolegomena to Any Future Satanism, Malić, having mentioned that his analysis refers “to one ONA text from 1980, entitled Symbols and Being which is devoted to an explicitly Heideggerian interpretation of the LHP notion of the relationship of acausal and causal as an interplay between non-Being and Being”, he writes that,

                   “by going beyond good and evil the individual must step into absolute evil; the Evil which has no opposite because it itself is all there is or, more precisely and at the same time, everything that isn’t; “a transcendental horizon” – to maliciously use the Heidegger’s term – of any future question on the meaning of Being and a prolegomena to any future Satanic political project.
                   Let us not get confused by fancy philosophical terminology, because this is what Myatt, and with him some other individuals we mentioned in the first part of this analysis, want to practically introduce into the world (‘causal’ or ‘phenomenal’ realm). As we shall see, it is the utmost extremity of the metaphysics of evil and, astonishingly, at the same time, the utmost extremity of Modernity, or at least the modern mentality.”

In the section titled Satanic core of Modernity – Heidegger’s philosophy as a prolegomena to metaphysics of evil, the author writes:

                  “By mentality I denote the relationship of man towards metaphysical origin(s). The modern mentality is thus qualified as a certain anti-metaphysical rationality, i.e. rationality that strives to put man in the center as creative originator or at least, as is the case in Heidegger and the ONA, a necessary mediator of those attributes of the world that were traditionally ascribed to God. Everything successive to him – i.e. angels, soul, Spirit, magic, providence, demons, etc. – is swept away too in the course of the process Max Weber aptly denoted as Entzauberung or disenchantment of the world.
                   Heidegger was seemingly the most radical philosophical critic of this process in the Twentieth Century, yet the truth is that he was in fact more likely its consequent propagator – the one who really made a life-long intellectual effort to drive it to its pseudo-apocalyptic conclusion.
                   David Myatt, writing under the pseudonym Thorold West, proves to be his apt pupil although with a pronounced affinity to natural sciences which Heidegger detested. Although LHP luminaries are more prone to use C.G. Jung from whom they borrow and to an extent distort a good deal of terminology (numinous, acausal, archetypes, etc.), Myatt’s treatment of Heidegger is ominous because there really is no need for distortion of the original terminology – it fits the ONA mentality hand in glove.”

Which, while interesting, seems to represent a fundamental misunderstanding of the O9A, which O9A is the individual using both ‘the sinister’ and ‘the numinous’ as a means toward a personal weltanschauung, via rites such as Internal Adept and the Enantiadromia of The Abyss, and thus of the balancing of the masculous with the muliebral leading to the discovery of lapis philosophicus.

For Malić also writes that the

                   “LHP is conditioned by Modernity and is using modern and postmodern kinds of mental methods (methodologies?) to get in touch with its origins; one could argue that ONA’s insistence on radical individualism (“individuation”) and personal experience (“dark empathy”) as conditio sine qua non of the “true Satanic character”, “aural tradition” and “numinous” knowledge, are examples of hyper-modernity transcending even some of its greatest excesses embodied in the radically totalitarian political projects of the Twentieth Century. […] I consider the supposedly marginal political fringe of the Alt Right, ONA, chans, etc. as a prime example of Modernity pushing its worst extremity towards its consequent conclusion: the metaphysical illusion starts to really act upon the world in a quite autonomous way. The fact that it is an illusion does not diminish its influence, because it is capable of acting upon humans and deepening their own delusion that they can absolutely reform the world in their own image. This is sub-materialism, sub-humanism based not upon metaphysics but on sub-physics, a counter image of truth.
                  The ONA system worked upon this possibility long ago, on the fringe of the fringe, and devised a philosophy of history and political ideal, that now, as crazy as it may sound, can slowly move into the centre. The idea of “Galactic Imperium” and the development of “new man” now doesn’t seem farfetched – not on the grounds of some inexistent technological achievement that could make it possible, but precisely because people are growing accustomed to accepting something like that as a relevant political goal. After all, some of its equivalents can be seen in the “white ethno-state” sought after by Alt Right leadership, as well as in the Neo-Eurasianist existential empire of Dasein promoted by Alexander Dugin.”

Which again does not fit with the fundamental O9A aim of the individual discovering lapis philosophicus for themselves by the decades-long anados (ἄνοδος) of the O9A Seven Fold Way. Which is why, for the O9A Adept, politics, the disruption of society, even the idea of a Galactic Imperium are ultimately irrelevant compared to such an anados, such a personal discovery; a discovery prefigured in the traditional way of life of the Rounwytha.

If, as a by-product of some such individual (O9A and non-O9A) exeatic and esoteric quests over decades or centuries, there develops a “white ethno-state” or some Vindexian political change, or the beginnings of non-terran colonization, or the debunking of the now sacred dogma of the holocaust, or some other Faustian things, then such are or may be causal consequences of the acausal presencing that is the O9A, not its essence. An essence now independent of the writings of both Anton Long and David Myatt, and then, in Causal Time, even beyond what the O9A has now evolved to become: a sinisterly-numinous mystic tradition, an anarcho-nihilist sub-culture.

TWS Nexion
March 2021 ev



{3} In the matter of Senholt’s “evidence” refer to (i) The Logical Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence – A Case Study in Myatt’s A Matter Of Honour, available at, and (ii) the section Misunderstanding: The leader of the O9A is Anton Long which is a pseudonym of David Myatt in


{5} “Regarding the nature of Reality, the perception and the understanding which initiates of the O9A mystic tradition personally discover via their anados are: (i) the nexible (the causal-acausal) being of our human physis; (ii) the potential we as individuals possess to consciously evolve our own individual physis; (iii) the unity – the mundus, the Being – beyond the apparent opposites of ‘sinister’ and ‘numinous’, of causal/acausal, of masculous/muliebral, a unity indescribable by ordinary language but apprehensible by esoteric languages and a particular manner of living.” Quotation Source:

{6} Misattributed to an article in an old now abandoned blog: when the correct reference is


Image Credit: Bainis by Richard Moult
The image is considered by many Occultists to be a modern representation
of the shapeshifting Dark Goddess, Baphomet