Another Instructive Example

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles

To add to our portfolio containing previous personal examples of just how the Order of Nine Angles – with its Labyrinthos Mythologicus, its elitism, its personal standards, and its arduous, individual, Seven Fold Way – differs from other contemporary Occult groups and from self-described modern ‘satanists’, we – who among other things are propagandists in the most literal and dramatic sense of the word – present here another contemporaneous example, culled from the Internet.

One of the differences between “us” and “them” is, as another person associating themselves with the ONA wrote, that those who are ONA value “objective and impersonal evaluation and respectful communication.”

            The crux of this particular contemporaneous example is as follows.

A certain person – who once declared themselves to be ONA, and then declared they were ‘leaving’ the ONA – published a plethora of claims about Mr Myatt and about the ONA and which claims were responded to and rebutted by citing primary sources {1}. This person was asked to provide evidence from primary sources in support of their claims, which they failed to do. When this failure of theirs to provide such evidence was pointed out, the person proceeded – we presume in order to try and “save face” – to reduce the matter to one topic only, to wit that of Mr Myatt being Anton Long and of the name Myatt being on some old, typewritten MSS.

Let us call this person – for convenience and based on the fact that his blog is replete not only with Goetic, Magian-inspired, ‘demons’, but also (as we shall see) with logical fallacies and profanities – the Magian Mundane, or Miaman (phonetically: me-a-man) for short.

Here follow pertinent extracts from a post by the Miaman reducing the matter to one topic only, illustrative as these extracts are of what we, with some justification, describe as the Miaman type.

The Miaman wrote:

   {quote} “I postulated that Anton Long was the name adopted by David Myatt.” {/quote}

Notice how, instead of simply stating that in his opinion Anton Long was the name adopted by David Myatt, the Miaman tries to make himself appear in a good light by stating ‘I postulated’, probably unaware of the fact that the term ‘postulate’ as well as meaning “a premise that forms part of or the basis of a discipline or theory,” also conveys the meaning “an unfounded or disputable unproved assumption; a hypothesis, a stipulation, an unproven theory.”

The Miaman wrote:

   {quote} “The identification of Anton Long with one David Myatt is the consensus held by most individuals knowledgeable concerning the two.”{/quote}

In one short sentence the Miaman commits several logical fallacies – argumentum ad populum, “the consensus is” – and argumentum ad verecundiam, “knowledgeable individuals”, and the latter despite providing no evidence for who these individuals are, what their knowledge is, and what primary sources such knowledge derives from.

The Miaman wrote:

   {quote} “David Myatt has come to renounce both the Order of the Nine Angles […] A person who knows Myatt in real life has informed me that he still leads a parochial temple.” {/quote}

These types of statements are typical of the Miaman type. Firstly, a personal opinion is stated as fact. Secondly, no evidence is provided in support of that opinion, in this instance a web-link to an article on Myatt’s blog or official website where he wrote that has “renounced the ONA.” Thirdly, the committal of the logical fallacy of argumentum ad verecundiam, which here is the statement that “someone who knows Myatt told me that…” with there yet again being no evidence provided (let alone evidence from primary sources) to support such a statement of personal knowing, such hearsay.

The Miaman wrote:

   {quote} DarkLogos posited the autistic argument that these signatures should be considered meaningless and mysterious until they are forensically [profanity redacted] analyzed. {/quote}

Note here (i) the use of weasel words, “autistic argument”, and (ii) an unsupported claim by the Miaman that it was someone called DarkLogos who first mentioned forensics, based as that Miaman claim itself is on a another unsupported claim by the Miaman that Lianna is this DarkLogos person.

Note also that the Miaman fails yet again to address the central issue regarding ‘signatures’, which is that “a signature on some old ONA [typewritten] MSS proves nothing. Anyone could have affixed Myatt’s name on them at any time and until the original documents are made available and examined in a forensic way by a professional qualified to do so then it’s just speculation; just another rumor about Myatt.”

Thus, instead of answering relevant questions and instead of providing actual evidence for his many claims about Myatt and the ONA he, as Miamans are wont to do, resorted to argumentum ad hominem and profanities.

Which is why in the matter of his claim that Myatt is Long, the Miaman wrote:

   {quote} “In response to this [request for evidence], I created a fake account and started shit-talking her […] I proceeded to post lewd and sexually degrading comments regarding Lianna’s interest in me [since] sexually degrading profanities are an apt mechanism.” {/quote}

The Miaman then proceeded to ban the individual in question from making further comments, thus ensuring that – at least on his blog – he “had the last word”.

In addition, it is illustrative how the Miaman tried to justify and excuse his Miaman actions, which actions are in this case the failure to provide evidence from primary sources for the many claims made, resorting to misogynist comments, resorting to argumentum ad hominem, using profanities, and committing the logical fallacies of argumentum ad verecundiam and ignoratio elenchi. Part of the excuse by the Miaman was:

   {quote} “When debating an interlocutor of a pompous nature who considers herself to be lofty of intellect, sexually degrading profanities are an apt mechanism.” {/quote}

The excuse consists (i) of pejorative presumptions about the person – “pompous nature”, “considers herself to be” – and of (ii) unsupported assumptions, “when debating”, “an interlocutor”, and of (iii) “sexually degrading profanities” being, according to the Miaman, acceptable.

In truth, as the replies and posts by the Miaman reveal, there was no actual, rational debate and especially no intellectual debate about primary sources. In addition, someone asking for evidence for his many and various claims is an “interlocutor”, while those supportive of the Miaman are not; and with the use of anonymity to post “sexually degrading profanities” and make lewd remarks being, according to the Miaman type, acceptable.


As the published ONA portfolio of examples reveals {2} the ONA has an elitist approach which highlights the plebeian nature of Levey-type ‘satanism’ and of many self-professed modern LHP occultists. As someone ONA wrote:

   {quote} “Some of the distinguishing features of plebs are (i) that their behaviour is unmannerly (characterized by a lack of civility) and (ii) their speech contains profanities, especially when they emote, and (iii) they are prone to displays of anger and aggression (characterized by a lack of self-control and/or by displays of egoism, the later usually deriving from the erroneously high opinion they have of themselves and of their abilities). Such plebeious people have plebeianized occultism and especially satanism, something evident whenever modern (and so-called post-modern) self-described satanists opine, via the medium of the internet or otherwise, about themselves, about satanism, about occultism, and about whatever else they have a plebeian opinion about.” {3} {/quote}

Thus, in the particular example considered here, those associating themselves with the ONA responded in a civil way to the many claims made and provided evidence from primary sources – such as from medieval alchemical texts {1} – while the Miaman simply repeated the many accusations about the ONA and about Myatt (the fallacy of argumentum ad nauseam), then made other accusations (ignoratio elenchi), then attempted to reduce the topic to one particular matter, then indulged in profanities and lewdness, then committed the fallacies of argumentum ad hominem, argumentum ad populum, and argumentum ad verecundiam.

Three Wyrd Sisters,
June 2017


{1} The claims and their rebuttal are here:

{2} The portfolio includes the example given in {1} as well as the following, selected from the many other examples available:

(b) Documenting Pretentiousness In Internet Occultism and Documenting Plebeian Physis In Modern Occultism in

{3} The quotation is from the article Satanism Plebeianized, published in the 2015 compilation The Joy Of The Sinister, available at

The Nihilist O9A: Prolegomena To A Future Satanism

O9A Insight Role
O9A Insight Role

Some caveats aside, there is – at least in our view – a fairly insightful analysis of the Order of Nine Angles recently published under the title Prolegomena to Any Future Satanism: Order of the Nine Angles and Supremacy of the Fringe pt.3

Which item hints at what the ONA is really all about and just how it differs from the boring ‘satanism’ of Levey et al. Here are just a few of the interesting points made in that analysis.

§          The popular notion of Satanism rarely lays stress on the political aspect of it. Seemingly, its radical individualism submits the ideological ambitions to the needs of individual self-expression – or self-indulgence – rendering it to a large degree a-political, at least at first glance. When we come to deal with the sinister dialectic of O9A, we are soon forced to realize that deep down the real stress is precisely on politics; the politics taken in the most radical sense of inciting the end of the present world (Aeon) and the creation of the new man and the new world.

§         The idea of influencing the broader society by subversion ranging from inducing moral depravity to terrorist acts is the nucleus of O9A metaphysics.

§         What really makes O9A stand out is how high it sets the bar: every other conceivable form of radical politics can potentially be assimilated, provided it is genuinely directed against the system, towards the creation of the new world and the new man. Through it all it is astonishingly truthful to the principles of modernity – radical subjectivity and dissolution of it in the further radicalization of freedom, evolutionary principle driven to the extreme and technical approach to human inner life.

§         The purpose of [the] trickster [insight] role playing game is to create strife, chaos, confusion and – Satan willing – bloodshed in order, not only to open oneself to the chaos of acausal, but also to create the same disposition in the social groups and society at large.

Finally, perhaps the most interesting bit of all:

§         In a strictly philosophical sense this truly is a form of Satanism. What makes it ominous is that, when you ponder about it a bit, it really isn’t detached from presuppositions of the mainstream, seemingly anti-metaphysical, notions about man and history. O9A has an ontology and metaphysics of Satanism, but it is fairly in accordance with both extreme empiricists and supposedly opposed Heideggerian understanding of getting over the metaphysics (überwindung der Metaphysik): rejecting the error of transcendence towards above. The only step needed to develop what would properly be called ‘subphysics’ is to draw the final consequences of this decision.

For what the ONA really amounts to – in our view – is Chaos (χάος). Bringing the chaos of the acausal into our temporal (causal) world. By any means possible, and without any checks or balances, such as ‘God’ or even ‘Satan’ as described by both Nazarenes and by material egoists such as Howard Levey.

In this sense, the Order of Nine Angles really is nihilist, anarchic, and redefines what ‘modernism’ – metaphysically and in reality (esoterically and exoterically) – means, or perhaps should now mean.

Some Thoughts Of Some Solitary Seeker

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles

Digging and weeding the Powys soil – Nature against itself to thus create a new flowing – I find myself often and increasingly removed from this “21st Century” Western world. Not least from the curious world of the Internet, where connexions, adulation, and knowledge are saught amongst invented cyber-personae. And thus I am prompted to write following a recent visit to an online forum pertaining to LHP esoteric matters, and having read through a plethora of posts concerning that entity now often known as “O9A”.

When I became initiated into the Dark Tradition, many too many decades ago, I learned of a small collective of adults who worked quietly, hidden, and quite separate from the celebrity-ridden world of the Occult. For, refreshingly, the “Order” never really felt the need to engage with that world – more often viewing its antics with a detached amusement, or simply a non-judgemental disinterest. The few writings which existed (by today’s comparison) were non-polemical recordings with no references to anything outside of its Tradition. I may be mistaken, but back then, my understanding was of “it” existing not as an antidote or alternative/reaction to anything – but rather, a complete Way of itself.

Of course, with the onset of all things Internet, the world changed quite dramatically. The “Order” accordingly evolved – but, for good or ill? Time is still to tell, but ultimately the question is an irrelevance, being a matter only of personal taste and opinion. Today, it is interesting – sometimes – how individuals have taken the essential teachings and created new expressions of that Tradition, with this appropriating of established teachings to serve personal ends being entirely in keeping with the functionality of the Occult, both ancient and modern.

According to my online reading, a good number of these cyber-personae seem to argue over “fixing” the Order, or about “which of its teachings are now invalid” or about which teachings were fabrications to begin with. But, the ONA/O9A was only ever a recent causal invention, with a specific, temporal function: initially to esoterically bind a few individuals, and thence in its latter stages to go outwards and interact with the Occult world in general (including with its later employment of those strange abstractions “Niner”,”Drecc”, “Balobian” and so on).

       I cannot believe that the following will be a revelation to many, but I must say that the “Order of Nine Angles” is only a limited abstraction (in its conforming to the “Occult”) of something far greater – a far greater thing which contains within it elements pertaining to the Occult, but not just those elements alone. What this “greater thing” is can only really ever be apprehended in self-forgetting – but that is for another time, perhaps.

There is one aspect in particular which strikes me as interesting when reading comments by those cyber-personae. It is that the reality of this Tradition in practice, as I understand it, is in fact based on personal, direct knowledge of those who follow the Way – or at the very least, between a guide and those she or he is guiding. It is this personal (generational) transmission, as inconvenient as this may be in today’s age of convenience, which imbues the methods of the Way with Numen – with magick (and I should add, though perhaps unnecessarily, that email correspondence does not constitute personal transmission). There is no genuine “kindred” outside of this personal transmission.

My, possibly controversial, take on the matter is that whilst publication of the teachings has been of great interest to academics and occultists alike and has served to reveal the existence of an hitherto secret and self-contained Way, without this personal transmission, there cannot in fact be any basis for judging the efficacy of the methods of the Tradition.

As an aside, I would be curious to learn out of those who claim on cyber-space to be effectively following the Seven-Fold Way, how many, if any, have ventured into the land and at least undertaken the rite of External Adept? How many in this modern age would discard their mobile phone, unplug themselves from social media and undertake an ordeal such as the rite of Internal Adept? Given the age we live in, it seems that the latter rite in particular is the quintessential esoteric stand against the modern world, and is more relevant now than ever. There will be many excuses not to undertake such rites, and all those excuses will be very convincing. But I shall move on before I descend into polemic…

       If I were asked to describe the ONA/O9A, and even though my knowledge of it comes from an entirely different era, I would say that it is still an apolitical, anarchistic organisation designed to liberate the individual, and of course in the process provoke, infuriate, and contradict the conformists and power structures of society. And in addition – and perhaps most importantly – via its Labyrinthos Mythologicus, cause one or two, or more, individuals per decade (per century?) to discover that which lies beyond the mere shadow which is the form of the “O9A” itself.

Now having written all this, I recall my guide, many Summers ago, asking a rhetorical question: “Will anyone ever really know the true purpose of the Ceremony of Recalling?”

But what do I know? I am just a curmudgeon from an older time, and my reflections on the nature of the Order and Beyond are only my own – influenced and shaped as they are by those whom I knew and who came before me, and who only really told me that which they wished me to know. And with this effusion at an end, I shall crawl back under my stone (to dwell where the invasive roots are).

Some Solitary Seeker
Summer 2017


Such A Confusion

Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles

Regarding the following quote, no comment by “us” is necessary.

{begin quote}

“Such a confusion in great numbers is one of the stated purposes of the Labyrinthos Mythologicus, and it is what makes it inherently elitist at every level. That is to say, it is not elitist because it brags or because there is an authority denying entry, but because it asks from the practitioner a wide variety of abilities, at least in potential, and the willingness to develop them through hard work. Some of these are stated explicitly, and others are required by the sheer complexity or lack of explanations of certain things, which end up pushing the seriously interested practitioner to find ways, bridge gaps, interpret and discover his own unique way. Being unable to do so, either out of incompetence or mental intransigence, is to be culled by the design of the ONA, or to be culled out of the loop by one’s own mediocrity, incapacity or emotional blockage and blinding (often the case among clever occultists).

From its inception, the Seven-Fold Way was intended to see most fail, to see most crumble under pressure, by a reluctance to try again, by carelessness leading to mental or physical injury or destruction. It should be clear to any objective and intelligent student of the materials (not to speak to a practitioner, I presume) that personal discernment is the foremost of all ONA requirements, once a holistic and balanced view of its rather wide assortment of ideas throughout the decades has been at least partially digested. To even suggest that the failure of many (most?) ONA would-be initiates is a sign of failure of the system, or to suppose that the bickering between ONA-inspired/derived groups implies an alarming state of affairs threatening to take it down, is to not to be able to see beyond the proverbial nose.”

{end quote}



Order Of Nine Angles
Order Of Nine Angles
The Manchester Attack And Western Government Hypocrisy

Following the May 2017 bomb attack in Manchester England in which 22 people – mostly women and children – died there was an outpouring of grief in Britain and messages of condolence from “world leaders” who without exception spoke of “evil”. There was a scheduled “minute of silence” in the days following the attack and Western newspapers were full of articles and editorials condemning “Islamic extremism” and “terrorism”.

However, it seemed to have escaped the notice of those “world leaders”, of Western newspapers, and of Western people in general, that well over a thousand times more women and children have, in the last fifteen years, been killed by bombs in places such as Iraq, Syria, and Pakistan.

For example, in just the past few years, a bomb in Hilla, Iraq, in 2016 killed over 77 people (woman and children included), and a bomb in 2015 in a Kuwait Mosque killed 27 people, and a bomb in Damascus in 2017 killed 40 people (woman and children included), and a bomb in Al-Miqdadiyah, Iraq, killed 38 people (woman and children included), while a bomb in Parachinar city, Pakistan, in 2017 killed over 21 people, women and children included. Not to mention the 68 children killed in a bomb attack in Allepo, Syria, in April 2017, and which 68 children were among the 127 dead.

And so on and so on.

Who in the West mourns for or even knows about the thousands of such victims? Far far more victims that those who lost their lives in the 9/11 and the 7/7 attacks.

Who in the West holds a minute of silence for such Muslim victims of such attacks? For such children killed by bombs? Who in the West even knows the names of the adults and the children killed? How many politicians in the West have described such attacks in such foreign lands as “evil” and vowed to “hunt down” and “bring to justice” the perpetrators?

No one. For how long would we have to stand in silence to mourn the Muslim victims, in the past decade, of such atrocities, such bomb attacks? A day, a week, a month?

Instead – given that the majority of those thousands upon thousands of dead in the past decade as a result of such bombs were Shia Muslims – all the governments and politicians of the West can do is denounce Iran and support, and arm, countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, who detest both Shia Islam and Iran.

Why? Has it anything to do with the fact that the current government of Iran supports holocaust revisionism, and thus does not accept the new Western religion of Holocaustianity? Has it anything to do with the staunch anti-Zionist stance of the current Iranian government? With its support for the oppressed Palestinians?

But, irrespective of such assumptions of ours, is there, in respect of the victims of bombings, a double standard here? Is there hypocrisy in respect of women and children killed by bombs in the West and in the Mid-East? Obviously. But to point out such things – in the West – is of course sacrilege; genuine heresy.

Where therefore are the sacrilegious statements of self-confessed “antinomian” Western occultists – of self-described Levey inspired “satanists” and of self-described followers of the Left Hand Path – denouncing such Western hypocrisy? Where are their messages of support, and their practical support, for Iran and for Shia Islam?

Their silence on this matter – contrasted with denunciations by the O9A of such Western government hypocrisy – is proof enough of that their claim to be heretical, antinomian, is fraudulent.


The Mythos Of Vindex: An Analysis

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

David Myatt And The Vindex Mythos: An Analysis

We publish here an article by Reichsfolk which provides an informative overview of what has been termed the Vindex mythos. The article provides an analysis of Myatt’s two works on the subject, his Vindex: Destiny of The West, published in 1984, and his The Mythos Of Vindex, written and circulated in the later 1990s, with Reichsfolk publishing a revised edition in 2005.

As the author of the article concludes:

     What emerges from the two works by Myatt that we have considered is that his mythos of Vindex is political and yet also spiritual in a quite pagan way. It is political in that both texts praise National Socialism, decry what is considered to be Magian, are revisionist about the holocaust, and urge the creation of new societies, new ways of living. It is spiritual in that there is an emphasis in both on the numinous.


Another Point Of Order, Mr Speaker

O9A Insight Role
O9A Insight Role

Editorial Note: We reproduce here an extract from a comment recently posted on an “anti-O9A” blog and which comment makes excellent points, and echoes what we wrote in an article posted on our blog here:

“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.” Source:


{begin quote}
“Regardless of whether one remains anonymous, engages in pseudonymous inter-course, or attempts to maintain some transparency in their identity, there is an estrangement in this medium of communication that cannot be overcome. I may know who you are, what you look like, your name, and where you live. But until I grace your eyes with the intimacy of a son or daughter of the morning, only then am I able greet you as an enemy or friend and lower the consternation of my brow in joyous exaltation! Estrangement begets the inauthentic, regardless of intent, and honesty in this medium can only conceal so much.

There is a perversity here, one that conditions a certain psychological response and erects an impasse that can only be antagonized. The more I engage, regardless of how honest I may believe myself to be, regardless of how obdurate I am in my resolve, festering this decretum of validation only breeds alienation, one that is usually shaped in two primary directions: voyeurism and exhibitionism. It should not be encouraged. I would say that these are not only abnormal, but can pollute larger collectives when working together in a transformative process, specifically at the levels of the unconscious. There is nothing more mundane than estrangement.

On this note, when one examines the writing of the ONA for many years in isolation; when one attempts to evaluate what is said; and when one’s valuation of what is said is grounded in the virility and vitality of its application, it is strange that the regal pith of this magnificent python is somehow surrogated and undermined by a familiarity with who said this or that, rather than what they said; by the infantilizing infatuation of who one associates with and their associations. These associations of associations are second-cousin to conversations-that-are-not-a-conversation. These can be engaged in until the end days. I, however, despite my brief lapse from solitude, will continue the only thing that matters: ONA work. And it is work, significant work, real work. Music does not write itself. Nor does ontology.

The ONA is a powerful system, one that works and is beautiful. But until one emaciates themselves from these influences, or at least makes a significant effort to do so, to live ascetically and purely, there are few things more arrogant than critiquing the world around them as Magian or mundane. Many critique the mundane as if they weren’t intertwined in abnegation. This is often evidenced by the resistance apparent in their reactions, by a lack of humility, and by a claim to some unique vantage point. Without said emaciation, or a significant attempt to do so, there is not only no view from nowhere; there isn’t even a view, and this alone, on my view, is mundane.

This is my third response on a blog. Ever. I do not have a facebook, I do not have a blog, I do not engage in social media. Such exchanges are a toxic waste of time and energy, and are more pernicious than we realize. They are unhealthy, and this is a perversity that is not befitting of adults. They affect the ONA writ-large through a substratum of various levels of the unconscious, particularly when working together directly. If we do not start redirecting this poisoned trough into a constructive, creative aqueduct – through artistic and serious academic enterprises, for example – our triumph will have no standard to stand on.”
{end quote}


Time therefore to give up “pushing buttons”, writing polemics, and being mischievous and offensive? Perhaps. For there is no escaping the fact that so many who write anti-O9A polemics (whose polemics vastly outnumber “our” polemics) continue to commit the fallacy of illicit transference, taking our personal opinions, our interpretation of matters O9A, and our polemics as representative of the O9A when in reality they are just our non-authoritative personal opinions, our non-authoritative interpretation of matters O9A, and our silly polemics.

No matter how many times we explain the reality – of the O9A authority of individual judgment, of O9A personal pathei mathos – they just don’t, won’t, or can’t, understand.


We Try To Give Them The Benefit of The Doubt

O9A Insight Role
O9A Insight Role

We – “propagandists in the most literal and dramatic sense of the word” – try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but almost invariably fail. We’re talking about three types of people.

Type I. Those who once claimed association with the O9A but who found actually doing such stuff as Insight Roles and succeeding in the physical challenges required of an External Adept were a step way too far – or who got lost in or confused by our Labyrinthos Mythologicus – and who thus end up “switching sides” and ranting about and denouncing the O9A.

Type II. Those who, while claiming association with the O9A, feel it their duty – their mission – to lambaste those O9A folks whom they believe or assume have a different interpretation of matters O9A.

Type III. Those trying to pass themselves off as clever or even as intellectual who write or who rant about the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA). Often these pseudo-intellectual types self-describe themselves as ‘satanists’ and invariably follow the so-called ‘satanism’ of the Magian showman named Howard Stanton Levey.

All three types in their internet-based rants (and occasionally in their self-published books) commit logical fallacies (such as the fallacy of illicit transference and resorting to argumentum ad hominem) and all three types make such ludicrous assumptions about “us” that we cannot but help falling about laughing. These three types also and always garnish a following of mundanes who compliment them and agree with them about “us” and about the O9A, which mundane followers always make those three types of ranters pleased with themselves and make them believe they really are clever and/or really have discovered “the truth” about us and/or about the O9A.

When “one of us” condescends (and condescends is the correct word) to reply to the assumptions or to the rants or to the allegations of such types they invariably end up banning us from commenting on their blogs or on the forums where they post, just as they invariably fail to answer our relevant questions, instead resorting to argumentum ad nauseam in the hope of convincing their mundane readers, which again they invariably do.

In addition, when “one of us” condescends to write a criticism of them, such as this, then they – or one or many of their mundane followers – immediately respond, replete as such responses often are with psycho-babble of the kind found in popular books about psychology or with silly accusations about us such that we’re “stalking them”, or are “obsessed” with them, or we’re “hiding” behind fake accounts, or something equally amusing and mundane. Never, ever, do they enter into a rational, intellectual, discourse with us.

Rant over – for the moment – let’s talk examples.

§ Here is just one typical and recent example of type I.

Someone – using some silly foreign (non-Western) sounding name and who admits to taking advice, and gaining ‘knowledge’ from, ‘spirit guides’ or ‘demons’ (such as Niantiel) – made accusations about the O9A “being entirely unoriginal”, claiming among many other things that “the Atazoth of the ONA is the same as the Azathoth of Lovecraft.”

When “one of us” replied with evidence from primary sources – such as medieval alchemical texts – the accuser simply repeated the accusations, then made other ones, and then indulged in argumentum ad hominem. There was no intellectual discussion about such primary sources. In truth, we demolished – with evidence – every one of their assumptions and allegations. {1}

When their repeated failure to rationally discuss primary sources was pointed out to them, they banned “us” from making further comments and in typical mundane fashion went on to make further silly claims. Claims such as that we’re obsessed with them, and claims about “us” and about the O9A, such as their claim about the Vindex mythos and the O9A, writing banner headlines as they did such as There Is No Vindex. Naturally, inevitably, their mundane followers praised the assumptions about and the allegations made against the O9A by the person using some silly foreign sounding name who admits to summoning Magian demons and taking advice, and gaining ‘knowledge’ from, ‘spirit guides’.

That person was obviously oblivious to – or for delusional paranoid reasons (or for propaganda purposes) chose to ignore or because some ‘demon’ or some ‘spirit guide’ told them to ignore – the fact that the Vindex mythos was out and out neo-nazi propaganda by David Myatt, and propaganda which the O9A purloined for the own nefarious purpose in pursuit of their anti-Magian esoteric agenda. That is, to understand the Vindex mythos it needed to be understood in its original context, which context was political and neo-nazi and mystical in a non-occult way, and thus had nothing whatsoever to do with the O9A. That the person with the silly foreign sounding name ranted about what some O9A people had said or written as “proof” that there is no Vindex, and completely ignored the reality that it was pure mythos, made us smile. For as some of “us” mentioned years ago:

        As defined in the complete (and printed) Oxford English Dictionary (second edition, 1989, 20 vols) (i) the word exist means “to have place in the domain of reality, have objective being,” and (ii) the word real means “having an objective existence”, with (iii) the word ‘being’ defined as “livelihood, living, substance.”

Thus Vindex – as mythos, as a prophecy, as an idea – clearly exists, is real, has substance, because it has been described (by Myatt) in some detail by means of the written word circulated, and read by others, in various formats including printed. That is, it has an objective existence, in such material. That the mythos and the idea of Vindex have been discussed and written about by others, whomsoever they are and for whatever purpose, also clearly makes it real.

But of course such facts never bother delusional or propaganda-inclined individuals, especially as the one with the silly foreign sounding name has posted on their blog scores upon scores of items in homage to Magian occultism which invoke this Semitic demon or that Semitic demon, and has even gone so far as to invent some Magian ‘demons’ of their own.

Naturally the planned book by this Magian-inspired (now anti-O9A) and demon-guided person will doubtless, if published, be a success with mundanes, with mundane occultists falling over themselves in order to praise and recommend it, in thrall as those mundanes and mundane occultists are (even if they do not know it) to the Magian ethos, to Magian-bred archetypes, and afraid as some of them undoubtedly also are (unconsciously or otherwise) of doing anything even remotely antinomian – heretical – which might upset Magians, or Magian fellow-travellers, or the Magian status quo.

§ Here is a typical and recent example of type II.

Someone wrote about Hypocrisy In The Order Of Nine Angles and accused some ONA people “of hiding behind false accounts.”

In the matter of hypocrisy they clearly committed the fallacy of illicit transference because they assumed that what someone, claiming association with the O9A, wrote was O9A policy or was written to declare what O9A policy is or should be, despite the fact that in our view the O9A principles of individual judgment and of pathei mathos mean:

(i) that no one O9A or claiming to be O9A can speak or write “on behalf of the Order of Nine Angles” so that their opinion about or their interpretation of matters O9A or about satanism or about whatever is just their personal opinion or interpretation and has no authority whatsoever; and
(ii) that the only “authority” and guide in the O9A is the individual one that arises through pathei mathos; through individual experience and learning; and
(iii) that all interpretations of O9A theory and praxis, and all evolution/developments of O9A theory and praxis, by whomsoever, are equally valid.

Instead of just accepting that our view and interpretation of matters O9A is not theirs, they ranted on and on about our “motives” and about us failing to answer their irrelevant questions; questions irrelevant because “our view and interpretation of matters O9A is just our view” and because that view is encapsulated in points (i), (ii), and (iii) above.

        In the matter of the accusation of ONA people “hiding behind false accounts” the person omitted to mention, or ignored, the following:

(i) the fact that someone has a public (verifiable) profile or publishes material under their real-world name does not per se make the opinions, views, or interpretation of that person more valid, or more “true” than the opinions, views, or interpretation of someone who for whatever reason (professional or otherwise) does not want to reveal their real-world name;
(ii) the fact that we “wyrdsisters” have all affixed our names to various articles on various blogs and in the past on various forums, with our locations well-known among the Occult cognoscenti. Thus we – and a certain Mr Parker – are in actuality not anonymous people “hiding behind fake accounts” but are certainly as public and known (among the Occult cognoscenti) as the person making such a silly accusation.

§ Here is a typical and recent example of type III.

Some self-described ‘satanist’ made a great fuss about O9A polemics published in the last six or seven years and directed at people like Crowley, Levey, Aquino, and critics of the O9A, writing that “such polemics show the O9A is laughable, a joke”.

They obviously forgot (for whatever unconscious reason) or did not know that the anti-O9A polemics written by opponents and critics of the O9A over the past ten and more years greatly outnumber the – in comparison – relatively small number of O9A polemics. For instance, one O9A critic, a Nazarene who writes under an assumed name and who claims to live in a certain European land, has written more in the past five years about the O9A – on forums, on blogs, in the comments section of other blogs, and on FB – than all O9A folk combined, and loves to indulge in ad hominems. Thus, in a recent post about “us”, he/she just repeated one of their favourite ad hominems, writing that what “we” of the wyrdsisters nexion say is what they “would expect a high school child to say.” And that from someone who consistently failed over a period of four years to answer serious questions about O9A esotericism.

Such types also – conveniently – forget to mention the vastly greater number of non-polemic, and informative, articles and essays that people associated with the O9A have produced in the last six or seven years. Items such as the 159 page document titled The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles with its chapters such as Lapis Philosophicus, Isaac Newton, And The Septenary System and The Pagan Order Of Nine Angles. Which items (replete as they are with references to primary sources) they, of course, have never rationally, intellectually, discussed or reviewed. Instead, they simply and continually commit the fallacies of ignoratio elenchi (often argumentum ad hominem) and argumentum ad nauseam, hoping in their mundane way that they will convince other mundanes, as of course, they invariably do.


We tried to give such types the benefit of the doubt, but failed. Failed, because their assumptions, their accusations, their continued committal of logical fallacies, their abject failure to engage in rational, intellectual debate, and the sycophancy of their mundane Magian-loving followers, not only made us – and many other O9A folk – laugh but also revealed them for the mundanes, or the pretentious pseudo-intellectuals {2}, that they are.

Consider the following statement – the latest from the aforementioned Magian-inspired and demon-guided person with the funny foreign name – that “wyrdsister is a propagandist in the most literal and dramatic sense of the word […] She wrote an article on Christmas day, typo-free, with citations.”

Of course we are propagandists – persons devoted to the propagation of a particular doctrine, idea, etc. – and have openly stated that “we” are, just as the Magian-inspired and demon-guided person is and just as the person who wrote about Hypocrisy In The Order Of Nine Angles is, even though they deny it. The Magian-inspired and demon-guided person assiduously propagates their views, their ideas, about the O9A, just like the author of Hypocrisy In The Order Of Nine Angles does. Columns upon columns of their ideas, their views, about the O9A in internet post after internet post.

As propagandists, we certainly are people who “seek to disseminate or seek to influence others by propaganda” just as they do. Only we openly and honestly admit it, just as we openly and honestly admit that we write polemics, partly to engender dialectical responses (success!), partly because of the O9A’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus {3}, partly because we’re unashamedly Satanic (deceptive, sly, mischievous, offensive, blah blah blah) and partly because it’s fun.

As for us – we self-declared satanists – writing “an article on Christmas day, typo-free, with citations,” comment by us really is superfluous.

But most important of all, and as we’ve said and written many times, our view and our interpretation of matters O9A is just our view and our interpretation of matters O9A. So why all the fuss about our view, our interpretation, and our propaganda? Answers please on the internet blog or internet forum of your choice…


{1} See

Another example, from another O9A critic, is here:

{2} Such pretentious pseudo-intellectuals were exposed years ago. See for example the chapters titled Documenting Pretentiousness In Internet Occultism and Documenting Plebeian Physis In Modern Occultism in


Myatt’s Mythos Of Vindex


The Mythos Of Vindex


Editorial Note: We republish here (see link to pdf document below) an edition of Myatt’s pamphlet The Mythos of Vindex written in the 1990s and revised by him between 2002 and 2005. The pamphlet contains a useful Introduction by Mr & Mrs Stirling which places the mythos into perspective. As they point out, in order to understand the context of what Myatt writes the reader should be familiar either with Myatt’s text Vindex: Destiny of the West published in 1984, or with the ideas expounded in that text. In their Introduction Mr & Mrs Stirling provide sufficient quotes from Vindex: Destiny of the West text to give the reader a good grounding as to what those ideas are. {1}

Since those ideas are neo-nazi it is not surprising that The Mythos of Vindex devotes space to lambasting “the Magian distortion” which Myatt claimed has replaced the natural, numinous, ethos of the West which he described as a warrior one based on concepts such as tribes, clans, and the principle of honor.

Of Vindex, Myatt, carrying on the political theme of his earlier Vindex: Destiny of the West writes that

     “Vindex is the generic name for that revolutionary noble warrior who leads the practical fight against the Magian and their allies, manifest as the Magian are now in the so-called mis-named New World Order whose twin centres of power (both ideological and practical) are in Amerika and the Zionist entity that occupies Palestine.”

In essence, therefore, and in our view The Mythos of Vindex is political and neo-nazi propaganda, with Mr & Mrs Stirling concluding their Introduction by writing that it presents

     “a new interpretation both of what the essence of the National Socialism of Adolf Hitler and of our Western culture was, and of what that essence could imply for our future if sufficient people were inspired by [that Mythos] and by the archetype of Vindex; an archetype that Myatt has assiduously strove to being-into-being – or rather to presence – over a period of some twenty and more years. An archetype foreshadowed by Savitri Devi in her book The Lightning and The Sun.”

It is in the context of political and neo-nazi propaganda that we believe The Mythos of Vindex should be understood.


{1} We provide below an edition of Myatt’s Vindex: Destiny of the West so that interested readers can make their own minds up about the text. As the distributor of this edition noted: “This pdf edition was produced some years ago by a member of an Australian ONA nexion, who added a few footnotes to the text and an essay at the end. While the transcriber introduced a few typos into the text, these – and his few footnotes and end essay – do not detract from its value: 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 high prices when they come up for sale, and thus kudos is due to the person who transcribed the printed text and produced this pdf version.”


Vindex: Destiny Of The West

Point Of Order Mr Speaker

O9A Insight Role
O9A Insight Role

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.


Comment #1

“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.”


Comment #2

“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.”