.:.I will tell you guys the story of how I once became so-called “Outer Representative” of the ONA, and about what happened to that office/post/title.
Seems as though every time I leave ONA, ONA slowly gets sick, becomes disarrayed, people leave, things get chaotic/disorganized/incoherent, and what few people are left in ONA start claiming titles and setting themselves up as the “New Leader.” I’ve left ONA now 3 times. ONA is now publicly dead… again.
Originally, way back in 2006, when I first learned about the ONA, I wanted to be a member of it very badly. Unfortunately at that time, ONA was publicly dead. There were only 2 significant ONA people around back then [circa 2005-2006]: 1) the Old Guard “DarkLogos,” & 2) Kris [Ryan Anschauung] of the Temple of THEM.
You can’t be a member of something which is dead and defunct. And so, my only option I knew of, was to help revive it, so it can come back to life, that way I can be a member of it. Me [and my WSA friends] ended up joining forces with DarkLogos and Kris/Ryan, and so the three of us, along with another Associate nymmed “Saturnyan352” worked together behind the scenes to resurrect the ONA from the dead.
During that era of ONA’s “dark ages” [circa 2005], ONA had died due in many parts to the Outer Representative Michael Ford leaving ONA to start his own thing. As with dead things, you have vultures encircling the carcass. And so, during those dark ages, a vulture named Grand Magister Blackwood [Tom Raspotnik] ran around the internet claiming that somebody in New York had made him the Grand Master of ONA. Me and DarkLogos spent a lot of time having fun with Blackwood, getting rid of him. Those were fun times. Blackwood’s claims were fraudulent, because there are only a number of legit ways that he could have been made the leader of ONA: 1) Michael Ford gave him the leadership, 2) Anton Long gave him the leadership, or 3) One of the Old Guards gave him the leadership. None of those three were the case.
By the year 2008-2009, I had my own WordPress blog. At my blog, I began to write “ONA” stuff. Except, most of what I spent my time writing about was Buddhism. Why? Well because I honestly had not fucking clew/clue what exactly the ONA was besides that it was a cool denomination of Satanism. And so, not knowing what ONA exactly was, I was not able to write anything actually ONA. And so, I wrote about Theravada Buddhism.
Around the year 2010ish, the Old Guard SinisterMoon [my liaison to Anton Long] told me that she and the other Old Guards were leaving the internet. SinisterMoon says to me: “You have everything under control. You don’t need us anymore. You can be outer rep if you want.”
At that time, I had no idea what outer rep was, because I simply had not yet read most of the ONA MSS to see that post or title used by anybody. I accepted the nonchalant offer anyways.
But I told SinisterMoon, that I can’t just tell people in my blogs and on the internet that I am the new outer rep, because it would look fake and people would accuse me of making false claims. I told SinisterMoon that I need the Old Guards to somehow make it known that I am the outer rep, in order to authenticate things. SinisterMoon and the Old Guards disappeared for a while and returned with two of their own ways to help me. Their first way was to delete the contents of nineangles.info, which at that time was the only ONA site run by the Old Guards, and in place of the old ONA content they had placed a link to my blog, and had redirected traffic from ninangles.info to my blog:
The second way the Old Guards helped me out was to get David Myatt’s own historiographer Julie Wright to actually say a few things in a biography of David Myatt she had written on her now defunct site. I had downloaded that essay and uploaded it to archive dot org for record keeping. The essay, called “A Short Biography of David Myatt,” says this on page 16:
At this same time, Dr. Monette was interviewing a few of us in ONA as he was writing a university text book which had a chapter in it about ONA. I asked Dr. Monette for help also. I told him my predicament, that I was offered the post/title of outer rep, but that I can’t myself make any such claims to such titles. I need people of name and reputation to inform people. Dr. Monette helped by writing a whole section about me as outer rep in his ONA chapter [which never made it into the actual published book], which can be found here: https://archive.org/details/ONA-ChapterFive
And so, I have never made any claims that I was the “leader” or outer representative of ONA. The objective fact was that: 1) An Old Guard nymmed SinisterMoon offered me said post/title, which I accepted, 2) David Myatt’s historiographer made the claim in her biography of David Myatt that I [the young Asian woman of Khmer heritage in question] led the ONA, & 3) A reputable professor of a university reiterated such.
I accepted the offer. Note my words. I use my wording very carefully. Nobody ever officially made me outer rep. Anton Long never chose me to be outer rep. It was simply offered to me by an Old Guard in a very nonassertive and nonchalant way. As if she said to me: “So yeah… since we’re leaving and all… I guess you can be outer rep… but only if you want! You don’t have to be outer rep, but if you want you can.” If anybody – regarding my former post/title offered to me – was making claims, or even false claims, they would be: The Old Guards, David Myatt’s biographer Julie Wright, and Dr. Monette.
Eventually, before I left ONA back then [I wrote about this leaving in Nexion Zine 1.0], I wrote my Resignation Paper and turned it into the Old Guards. When you are a subordinate of a superior in a proper and professional setting, and you desire to quit or leave your job or post, it’s protocol to turn in a resignation paper which must be accepted [your resignation must be accepted by your superior]. In my resignation paper I specifically vacated the post of outer rep and I specifically RETURNED that post and title back to the Old Guard who offered it to me: SinisterMoon.
And so, like a football or a Trophy, when I returned that ball [the title of outer rep] back to SinisterMoon, that ball was in her possession and in possession of the Old Guards. Unless those same Old Guards gave or offered that ball/title to you, or unless Anton Long gave or offered that ball/title to you back then: you are making fraudulent claims of an office or title that does not legit belong to you.
So I left ONA, and a year later I returned to the online world and checked up on ONA, to see how it was doing. It was sick, once again dying, all of the people I once knew in ONA were gone, all of my allies like Beast Xeno, Dan Dread, etc were gone. And there were vultures circling ONA’s sickly body.
Upon my return that era [2013-2014], I reestablished contact with the Old Guard DarkLogos to inform him that I have returned to ONA. I wanted to help nurse ONA back to health. And so, my first conversation with DarkLogos was roughly: “Have you read Dr. Monette’s book yet? He’s published it.” DarkLogos says to me: “I’ve ordered it, but it hasn’t come yet. What do you think of it?” I said back to DarkLogos: “Dr. Monette, in his chapter on ONA, claims that some person named Jall is outer rep? Who is this Jall? I don’t know this person. Did you guys make Jall outer rep? Cuz if you did, then I’m cool with it and will support your choice. But if you didn’t make Jall outer rep, then we have a problem.”
The problem is the “Blackwood Problem:” people playing power games, usurping titles, and trying to make themselves leader of ONA. The Old Guards and I worked things out with Anton Long to have him retire and stop writing and to get rid of the old office of “grandmaster” of ONA because of this problem. DarkLogos stated that neither he nor the other Old Guards made this Jall person outer rep. DarkLogos said that he’d have a word with Dr. Monette about the said claim. I complained, saying to DarkLogos: “That post and title needs to go. They keep finding ways to play their power whore games. If the office of outer rep remains in ONA, ONA will always be mired in power struggles like the old days.” DarkLogos agreed, and disappeared for a few days. Days later Anton Long and the Old Guards everywhere online removed/dissolved the post and title of Outer representative saying that such post/title was a jape or test. It was a real office and title: David Myatt also created Reichsfolk National-Socialism, and Reichsfolk does have a post/office/title of “Outer Representative.” Richard Stirling [who has written quite a few ONA stuff] is the Outer Representative of Reichsfolk. Same David Myatt: same pattern of implementing an office/title of “Outer Representative.”
I’m slightly different from most ONA people: I’m not a product of ONA Mythos. I’m not going to tell stories about how such offices were clever japes and tests. I am an honest person and I keep shit real: There once did exist an office of Grandmaster and an office of Outer Representative, but since ONA has evolved to be an open source Subculture and a decentralized leaderless movement, those two offices and titles have been dissolved by Anton Long since the 2011-2014 era of ONA and are defunct. Anybody who has been in ONA for over a decade knows this. Which beings us to the real issue:
SUBCULTURE
A subculture is a little small culture. For example, the Punk scene [people who listen to punk music]. If you are a punker, a punk rocker, you belong to that punk music subculture, and you dress a certain way, listen to a certain style of music, speak with punk subcultural jargon, but: there is no such thing as a leader or representative of punk rock subculture.
Likewise with the surfing and skateboarding and hip hop subculture: there simply is no such thing as a leader, grandmaster, potentate, inner circle, outer representative of any of those subcultures.
But in cultures and subculture there are 1) Adepts & 2) Influencers. Adepts are like computer jocks who can program computers and build their own computer from scratch. Influencers – such as influencers from TikTok and social media may not be adepts at shit regarding their subculture [as an American, I doubt the TikTok Influencer Bella Poarch is an adept American where she can recite the US constitution from memory, name all the capitals of all 50 states, name you all the grandchildren that George Washington had, and shit] but due to their looks, or social skills, or charisma, or whatever: they wield a large influence upon their peers.
As a subculture and leaderless movement, it simple makes no logical sense for ONA to have leaders and inner or outer representatives. But yes: ONA subculture has its Adepts and Influencers.
And that is the bedrock or fundamental issue of the Blackwood Problem: people in ONA who claim to be leader of ONA or claim to be Outer Representative of ONA are fundamentally wanting Influence.
MARKETING
If it is influence that you are seeking, then making yourself the leader or outer rep is not good marketing. Why so? Well, it’s as if you came to ONA and you said to ONA people: “I understand that you are a self-described leaderless movement and subculture, and that’s all great, but I will be your leader anyways because I have all of these great ideas that I want you guys to adopt… and on top of that, not only do I want to be your leader and make you adopt my ideas, but there are a few things I don’t like about ONA and boy do I have wonderful ideas to make ONA better for you guys!”
In a market/audience which feels and understands itself to be leaderless and a subculture: how do you sell yourself and ideas to such people by going against the grain of their subculture and claiming leadership titles?
I watched a whole lot of Hitler and Third Reich documentaries. There was a time when Hitler was asked what Charisma was. Charisma is the fundamental factor/ingredient [there are a few other factors] of influence in any culture, subculture, religion, cult, organization, political party, and social setting. Hitler answers: “Charisma is a special relationship between me and the German folk.” What Hitler was saying is that Charisma is the bond and relationship between you and your audience/market. It’s one of the reasons why Hitler publicly tried hard to appear as if he was single and not in a relationship with a woman. The relationship is Hitler + German people. The same public presentation and technique can be seen in popular Influencers like Bella Poarch and Amouranth, who both kept their marriages a total secret from their audience/market, until their recent respective divorces.
Which means that if you do not know your audience/market: you will fail in selling yourself and your ideas [fail at inspiring and influencing] to that audience/market. Which defeats your premise in the first place doesn’t it? You want influence on or in ONA, but you don’t know your audience/market. The ONA market/audience is a leaderless subculture: people who don’t need a special and sanctioned person to tell them how to be a Satanist, a Pagan, or an Occultist. But yet you insist on being a leader or an Outer representative.
I have been around online Satanism since 2003 on MySpace, and I’ve been around ONA since 2006: I have seen Satanists, many of whom were very intelligent, come to Satanism or ONA claiming titles – reverend, grotto master, high priest, blah blah blah – and 100% of the time those same people huff and puff for a good year or two and fall off the face of the earth failing to have any influence on Satanism or ONA because they didn’t know or have an audience. 100% of the time.
And so, in closing: I can’t police ONA subculture and I can’t make people stop claiming to be leader or outer representative of ONA. People – other human beings – are free agents with free will and most often, with egos [hence the grand claims] – but I can try to reason with some of you who are in ONA who are intelligent and who seek influence: if it is influence that you seek in ONA, claiming titles is counter productive and will cause you to fail in time, 100% guaranteed.
What I can also do is to give ONA people a second perspective, point of view, from those that make such claims of title and leadership: ONA is 1) Leaderless, it is a subculture, you don’t need nobody to read a few ONA MSS and be a Satanist or Pagan or ONA Associate, 2) ONA has always, from its birth, been an individual process of just you yourself going thru the Seven-Fold Way on your own time and terms; and so as an individual process, having a leader or outer representative is stupid and irrelevant, 3) The only real and genuine Leader of ONA is Anton Long simply because Anton Long created/codified the Order of Nine Angles, it belongs to him, it is his; & 4) ONA or the Order of Nine Angles is a name of the ONA Corpus, which is circa 5000 pages of stuff written by the only genuine Leader of ONA [who gave up his title and office of leadership in 2011]; and so, as such, 5000 pages of writing has no leader or outer representative. People will always make claims, you as ONA people just need to have the simple understanding of what a subculture is and the understanding of what ONA is [how it was put together by Anton Long].
I find it very disappointing that ONA people can say, act, and pretend that they look up to Anton Long / David Myatt, that they respect him, that they study his writings and even see such writings as scripture but: the same ONA people don’t seem to have the honor and capacity to simply emulate Anton Long. Anton Long gave up his leadership role and titles way back in 2011, and never since then, has he ever made any claims to be its leader or representative. In fact, even before 2011, in the Letters of Steven Brown, Anton Long has made it known that even he is not the leader of ONA. But yet – but yet – there are ONA folks who have and still do insist that they are leaders or titled/entitled representatives of ONA. It’s like those Christians who bible thump and quote scripture… but who lack the spiritual capacity to emulate Jesus and be Christ Like. Actions speak louder than words, as they say. By their fruit… this outer representative thing is a test like the Old Guards said isn’t it? A test of actual character and ulterior motive.
And if Perseus is proud of Andromeda too in the stars, do but cast your eye towards that side of the heavens, where the brilliant Ophiuchos is conspicuous holding up his encircling Serpent, and you will see the circlet of Ariadne’s Crown, the Sun’s companion, which rises with the Moon and proclaims the desire of crownloving Dionysos.[1]
The subject of mimesis casts a rich historical shadow across its diverse roots in ancient Greek thought, literature, narrative theory, art, and avant-garde theater. The word carries an equally rich nest of meanings. It roughly translates as “imitation,” originating from the Greek word, mimeisthai, which means “to imitate.”[2] It is sometimes translated as “representation,” sometimes “re-doubling,” and can occasionally connote a sense of mimicry, replication, and impersonation.[3] In the ancient Greek world, the oldest usages of the root “mim-” seem to have something to do with music, as evidenced in Aeschylus’ lost tragedy Edonians, “where noise-making musical instruments are referred to as ‘bull-voiced […] frightened mimoi’,” in addition to Democritus’ claim that, “just as crafts follow the example of animals, music imitates birdsong.”[4] The Homeric Hymn to Apollo refers to “a choir of maidens who know how to imitate/represent (mimeisthai) men’s voices and castanets.”[5] Both cases demonstrate how musical mimesis transmits an acoustic image created by an animated being in order to trigger a strong emotional effect in the public.[6]
Historically, mimesis had to do with two complementary aspects: artistic imitation, which was associated with representation and re-enactment, and behavioral imitation.[7] In terms of art, mimesis concerned the expression of certain attitudes and emotions, in addition to guiding the representation of the perceptible world and the ideas, ideals, and values that informed it.[8] Evidence for behavioral imitation can be found in various ancient sources, such as Aristotle’s Poetics where he remarks that human beings learn by imitating, or in the work of Democritus who argued that humans imitate animals through crafts.[9] In epic poetry, Socrates distinguished between “narrative (diegesis) as the general aim of the poem and the local imitation (mimesis) of the character’s direct speech,” holding that the emotions expressed in this form of mimesis could be “contagious” and thus occasionally “weaken the soul’s commitment to virtue.”[10] Plato had a similarly troubling relationship with artistic activity, viewing the artist as a kind of deceiver concerned with representing appearances rather than reality itself, one complicit in eikasia, where the artist as a producer of imitations of imitations takes us even further away from knowledge.[11] By contrast, Aristotle, who did not subscribe to Plato’s theory of forms, emphasized mimesis in terms of its “natural … [and] this-worldly [aspects],” both with respect to mimetic art and poetry.[12]
Mimesis thus typically has something to do with imitation. But by the time Aristotle wrote the Poetics, the issue of what works like tragedies or poems were imitating became a philosophical problem. Aristotle’s solution was that they were imitating an action (mimēsis praxeōs). In the twentieth-century, his idea of an imitation of an action or mimēsis praxeōs was taken up in the work of the famous French Continental philosopher, Paul Ricoeur. Ricoeur’s rich understanding of mimesis moved beyond its general sense of “imitation,” “representation,” or what he sometimes referred to as a kind of “re-doubling” into a complex process that can be termed an arc of operations. For Ricoeur, this arc is comprised of three movements, beginning as a symbolic system within a culture, then transforming into a fixed form like a work of literature, and finally re-emerging in a cultural context where the consciousness of the participant or reader is altered as a result. Ricoeur’s understanding of mimesis was thus tightly linked to the concept of mythos or narrative emplotment in Aristotle’s Poetics.
Mythos and mimesis are tethered together. Both involve the ability to permanently transform the inhabitant of a given culture, tradition, or society. For Ricoeur, this tethering serves as part of the basis for the emergence of meaning in human consciousness. One of Ricoeur’s great discoveries about mimesis concerns the way our experience of the world involves an irreducible narrativity: the sense in which that experience always unfolds as a kind of story across time. In this, the individual transformation of consciousness may be said to occupy a broader archetypal domain of myth, one that Freud, Jung, and Joseph Campbell pick up on. Speaking to the power and importance of myth, Campbell says the following:
Throughout the inhabited world, in all times and under every circumstance, the myths of man have flourished; and they have been the living inspiration of whatever else may have appeared out of the activities of the human body and mind. It would not be too much to say that myth is the secret opening through which the inexhaustible energies of the cosmos pour into human cultural manifestation. Religions, philosophies, arts, the social forms of primitive and historic man, prime discoveries in science and technology, the very dreams that blister sleep, boil up from the basic, magic ring of myth.
The wonder is that the characteristic efficacy to touch and inspire deep creative centers dwells in the smallest nursery fairy tale—as the flavor of the ocean is contained in a droplet or the whole mystery of life within the egg of a flea. For the symbols of mythology are not manufactured; they cannot be ordered, invented, or permanently suppressed. They are spontaneous productions of the psyche, and each bears within it, undamaged, the germ power of its source.[13]
Campbell’s characterization of myth bears a close resemblance to the Order of Nine Angles. From the “formless forming” and weaving of the Wyrdful web that my co-conspirator Ariadne describes in the article below, the hidden and hard-earned Aracadian truths behind the many corridors of the ONA’s winding labyrinth are not static but fluid, cascading and emerging as a canvas of appearances, much like the “instar” stage of a cicada that Ariadne describes. But these appearances are appearances; and many mistake these “moving articulations” as stationary identities, ideas, things, always trying to put a face or a name or something knowable to an irreducible opacity. (How many times have we been warned about “abstractions”?) Nevertheless, as a subculture founded on a wide horizon of mythic imitation, there is something underlying the many difficult and dangerous appearances one inevitably encounters within the labyrinth – not something “beyond” or “within” or “apart” from them, but a deeper invisible layer, something intangible, outstretching, eternal, ubiquitous, conspicuous in its absence, a condition for possibility of all appearance: “always the one, shape-shifting yet marvelously constant story that we find, together with a challengingly persistent suggestion of more remaining to be experienced than will ever be told.”[14]
This tradition is not fixed, nor is it complete. With the ONA’s characteristic efficacy to reach and inspire just the “deep creative centers” Campbell describes, neither can it ever be manufactured: it cannot be “ordered, invented, or permanently suppressed,” because it is a spontaneous production of the psyche, one in which every inhabitant, every associate, every individual that wishes to transform its participatory dead letter into a living word partakes in. Each and every individual here bears within themselves the undamaged “germ power of its source.” But this world, our world, the world of the Order of Nine Angles – it is a theater, one where the appearances we encounter in the labyrinth are constituted, populated, and erected by the very psyche that spontaneously produces them.
What then is the task of the Outer Representative? I have considered this question carefully against the event horizon of tremendous responsibility that it carries. Endorsed by those who, with no pangs of conscience or hesitation, continue to bear the weight of my unconditional admiration and respect without complaint, and whose august presence within our tradition sustains its better nature, it is with deep humility and respect for those individuals, this tradition, and the responsibility of this position that I now rise from a place of immutable honor to acknowledge and accept my role as Outer Representative of the Order of Nine Angles.
What then is my task as Outer Representative to every “brutal and beautiful interconnected sinister soul shared by those ensnared within … [the] Wyrdful web” of this tradition? It certainly is not to manufacture, presume to lead, or even guide. Nor is it to officiate, guard, or gander some thinly veiled Arcadian “truth” guarded by the Minotaur at the heart of the labyrinth! No, my purpose here is simple: to tap into that deep creative center of spontaneous emergence and transmit the “one, shapeshifting yet marvelously constant story” that we find together – one that occupies the ensouled world of our individual narratives as we make our way into the primordial unknown. I will always carry that in my heart; we all will. My role here is to make the invisible visible – not as an appearance or mere appearance, but as something that can permanently alter the consciousness of anyone who encounters it, changing the course of history for that individual, for the ONA, and for our tradition in however infinitesimal or monolithic a way.
Thomas Mann once said that, “The writer must be true to truth,” to which Joseph Campbell remarked: “the only way you can describe a human being truly is by describing his imperfections. The perfect human being is uninteresting…. It is the imperfections that are lovable. And when the writer sends a dart of the true word, it hurts. But it goes with love. That is what Mann called ‘erotic irony,’ the love for that which you are killing with your cruel, analytical word.”[15] Nothing is perfect in the ONA. Least of all myself. There is much room for improvement, much work to do to enact that as a practical reality, and many long years ahead to uproot and undo much of the damage done by the actions and activities of various associates all the way back to the founding of this tradition. But we will see it through before the curtain to this theater closes. As the French artist, surrealist, poet, playwright, and theater theoretician Antonin Artaud described with respect to a “theater of cruelty,” “Those who have forgotten the communicative power and magical mimesis of a gesture, the theater can reinstruct, because a gesture carries its energy with it, and there are still human beings in the theater to manifest the force of the gesture made.”[16] Indeed, in terms of the theater’s value as an “excruciating, magical relation to reality and danger,”[17] the Order of Nine Angles is a theater of cruelty, one that, within its living labyrinth, will often seem as if “everything that acts is a cruelty.”[18] But it is upon precisely “this idea of extreme action, pushed beyond all limits, that theater must be rebuilt.”[19]
This is my task as Outer Representative: to help rebuild this theater of cruelty by making the invisible visible deep within the heart of the labyrinth. I end with a quote from Jacques Derrida who, in noting Artaud’s uncanny ability to do both, describes something that equally applies to the task of Outer Representative: a “passionate, heroic negation of everything that causes us to be dead while alive.” The full quote is as follows:
I do not have to account in his stead for what he has experienced nor for what he has suffered…. I know that Antonin Artaud saw, the way Rimbaud, as well as Novalis and Arnim before him, had spoken of seeing. It is of little consequence, ever since the publication of Aurelia, that what was seen this way does not coincide with what is objectively visible. The real tragedy is that the society to which we are less and less honored to belong persists in making it an inexpiable crime to have gone over to the other side of the looking glass. In the name of everything that is more than ever close to my heart, I cheer the return to freedom of Antonin Artaud in a world where freedom itself must be reinvented…. I salute Antonin Artaud for his passionate, heroic negation of everything that causes us to be dead while alive.[20]
alea iacta est
Nameless Therein
November 4, 2022
Notes
[1] Nonnos, Dionysiaca, trans. W. H. D. Rouse, vol. 2, Books 16-35 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1940), 261.
[2] Andrew M. Colman, “Mimesis,” in A Dictionary of Psychology, 4th ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015).
[3] William H. Gass, “Mimesis,” Conjunctions, no. 46 (2006): 192.
[4] Thomas G. Pavel, “Mimesis,” chap. 16 in Literature Now: Key Terms and Methods for Literary History, ed. Sascha Bru, Ben De Bruyn, and Michel Delville (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2016), 215.
Saturn’s waning acted as a harbinger for a distinct and rejuvenating shift in the tenor and tone of my path. As the first chilled breaths of the season’s cool first glance from the eye of Winter lands into my lungs I feel warmed by the comprehension of what exactly is waning and waxing. However, in parallel, I am aware of a war that rages on – in forms both kinetic and cold. There is a war with bullets and there is a war with narratives, stories, and mythos.
I bring these different forms of warfare to your attention with the intention to remind my reader that wielding narrative itself can be – and often IS – ACTION. At the least, it is itself a will to action. My writing here is a kinetic action that I take with consciousness and vital responsibility, due to a passion so large that it cannot help but extend beyond my self.
Your time in this world, as far as we know, is limited.
Your impact, your legacy, what you leave behind, is what you choose to make it. Your words, your narrative, your role in the dialectic, your mythological contribution, is larger than any fist. A myth can be an even more powerful and lasting tool than a nuclear missile. More than that, the limitations of your word extend no further than your own ability to use it.
That is because mimesis (μίμησις) acts in funny ways.
Like the name of this website suggests, it is a subject I have interest in seeking out new ways of understanding.
The name of this website betrays a great deal to those who know what they are looking at. Indeed, to some, my intentions are transparent, and it has come to my attention that the time has come for this to be worth exploring.
An “instar” is a stage in the development of an insect, like a cicada, before it emerges from the earth. Much like the cicada, a myth can be in a similar stage of emergent development, recalling itself through a living, kinetic force of nature before it arises in the form of action or replication from those through which it inspires yet another spark of kinetic energy – a transmutational fire.
See, we do not exist in a vacuum. Nor do our words, nor do our myths. Somebody is reading this and it is meaningful. Ideally, inspiring them to write/say something that MATTERS. Somebody is inspired to the action of expression by my Will to share my own expression.
This concept is deeply moving to me.
Somebody else is reading this and rolling their eyes. Either way – spending time inside my writing, having tea with my words, this is how you are choosing to spend your time – within what I have woven.
Sincerity and originality are always able to be conveyed, even in a mimetic replication of a myth – such as that of Theseus and Ariadne’s journey through the Labyrinth and back. If you possess an ounce of creative kinetic energy, or think you might with a little practice, the written word is one of many worthy acts in and of itself.
In such a stage, “mimesis” is sort of that real kinetic energy passed along, and the kinetic inspiration from which it is recalled and to which it unfolds.
The mythos grows through its instar phase to The Emergence, at which time it unfolds – except, it is no linear process. It is always unfolding – it is only up to the individual who is touched by that kinetic spark to unfold in turn, the process of mimesis – replication, recalling, becoming through nonsensuous similarity – to unfold with it.
To Emerge in ACTION – through the mythos, from the mythos, to the mythos.
I recently had a conversation with my close and dear associate – and far more articulate and well-read philosopher – Nameless Therein, who wrote of mimesis:
“‘Mimesis’ is one method of aeonic magick that has come down over the centuries,” involving the imitation of “some aspect of cosmic/Earth-based movement/working, and then either following the natural pattern or slightly altering that pattern to bring about a subtle change.” Additionally, given that it is this “alteration” that “forms the basis for ‘black’ magick”it is quite telling that so few “Satanists” have a sense of what that means. In an attempt to remedy this, and as a practical way of encouraging others to develop the faculties required for advanced magickal applications […] I will be introducing a series of chess hermeneutics”
That recent dialogue I had with Nameless Therein on the subject was a myriad of illuminations, including among them, a mutual reverence for that observation of The Emergence of the mimetic, phenomenological heart in those who carry the mythos of the tradition we inhabit within them. That tradition and mythos has been in its phase of necessary incubation – much like the instar phase of the cicada – before the recalling of its emergence as something much more than it has ever been.
We are experiencing it within our own Emergence. It is my humble belief this change is palpable and present in every meaning-starved recalling of the living mythos – now finally ready to emerge and evolve far beyond what it once was.
The mimēsis praxeōs of our living, Wyrdful, active mythos has been undergoing a great and painstaking time of much-needed, decisive growth, just beneath the surface of the world we both inhabit. It is a garden that hungers and thirsts and has been trampled by those who choose poison over water. The low humming of its arrival is growing to a fever pitch and the entirety trembles in kinetic excitement with its vibration.
A lesson for those who believe traditions die and myths exist only as faerie-fables: The Emergence lies in wait, always, just beneath the crust of the Earth.
For The Emergence to successfully bloom, it only needs a small yet passionate, emboldened, and authentic few. Those who care enough for that myth that grew them to grow it back in return. It needs only those few to be inspired once more, to tend the garden to grow, re-grow, and become much more than it ever was.
The Emergence lives by mimesis and duration, only enriching itself in a new, unique iteration. In this iteration, it will grow with the intentions of introducing the honor it has lacked, the creative and original spirit that it has sustained with pretension, and the sincerity and earnestness brought only by those who have been touched by the brutal and beautiful interconnected sinister soul shared by those ensnared within its Wyrdful web.
Mimetic emergences such as the Insidious Way and Antithesis Press are such examples of the creative force of life extending beyond, through, and surpassed within that web. They are the low hum energizing those who can feel the harbingers of a new game.
We ARE that pure Telos of Duration – that “supreme end of man’s endeavor” – that n/ever unfolding end-goal – that mythological beginning and end, itself, alpha and omega. We are the ever-unfolding and our myth is written BY us, FOR us – OR without us. We are duration itself, unfolding and SURVIVING itself. It is truly an exciting time to be ALIVE.
[Henri] Bergson, Sorel tells us, asks us to consider ‘the inner depths of the mind and what happens during a creative moment’. Acting freely, we recover our Selves, attaining the level of pure ‘duration’ that Bergson equates with ‘integral knowledge’. This new form of comprehension was identified as ‘intuition’, a form of internal and empathetic understanding, and it was precisely this form of intuitive understanding that Sorel believed was encompassed by his category of myth.
–Reflections on Violence, Jeremy Jennings on Georges Sorel
It is a coward who willfully chooses the mad and mindless escape of meaningless disregard. It is a coward who chooses to reject their divinity and its emergence in their own unfolding physis of their very being. It is only that coward who would willingly inhabit that bland, dysteleological limbo, day in and out, in pursuit of ever more flailing, cynical hysterics about the Nigh End with no regard for the time one possesses in life TODAY.
To enact one’s true passion and sincere creative will, TODAY, is to seize our age by the balls and LIVE – in spite of what age it may be.
This living myth, this endless end, this mimetic duration, is worthy of vitality. And YOU possess it – HERE AND NOW.
Tell it. Live it. Act it. Re-create it. With passion and zeal for this one life you have.
Until such an end arrives, for better or worse, our world continues ever-onward with us, alive and vital. We welcome it with gratitude in our hearts for this Wyrdful opportunity to create and explore our days and our years to come, pressing onward together.
We welcome new games and new ways to play them. Afterall, we have but one life in this world of infinite depth and opportunity. We have one divine, powerful existence. Why limit ourselves to the same tired jape? Why not laugh? Why not create?
If your lines of dialogue run cycles around the same inevitable sewage drain, ask yourself:
What is my aim in speaking at all?
What narrative am I recalling?
What are the myths I am reenacting?
It is boring to echo the same eschatology of putrefied, fermented dysteleological, aimless rot. That end-time cynicism and hate that adds its tone deaf voice to the chant of collapse for no purpose but to sit back on wherever it arbitrarily identifies a symbolic “winning side” from its limbic mind – that is truly the primordial impotence of the coward of every age.
See, that pickled myth of decay belongs to those afraid of REALLY LIVING, such that they rather defecate in the face of sincere insight than face their own shadow.
To recall Reflections on Violence once more: there is harm to the progress of an idea when objections brought against it arise from the incapacity of the official representatives rather than the principals of the doctrine itself.
As Sorel stated: “It is the myth in its entirety which is, alone, important.”
To be duration, the formless forming, the weaving and the web, that is evolutionary. No one person can represent all of that for any one other, let alone many. Even so, Nameless Therein is, as a wise person recently stated, “actually qualified” to “transmit, evolve, and presence” our subculture as we see it. As that person also said, that Lapis Philosophicus will presence differently for all. If this living tradition deserves the new life the few of us who embrace and embody it are willing to breathe into it, and should it find that what it needs is a new spin to its living mythos, a new song for its telosic transmutation, a new “official representation” or rather, Outer Representation, it seems clear that Nameless Therein holds that mimetic tetrahedral fire it has hungered for, and has found that for himself.
It will always be up to the individual following the path, that individual alone, to BE The Emergence, the unfolding, the teleological life-force, for his/her Self, by his/her Self. We are capable of great deeds and great causal legacy.
Rather than cast aside your divinity – LIVE.
SURRENDER to your own unfolding.
Take DECISIVE aim at your goal, load the pistol, and shoot that motherfucker like your life depends on it – because it DOES.
Mimesis has kept our myth alive. Whatever it may mean for you or I, it is what we now hold, and its meaning can be defined only by you. Live for it. Authentically, decisively, passionately, creatively. Empathetically.
Like the instar, tunneling to the surface\n
We must shed our own circumferences;\n
Find the divinity within and emerge.
In allegiance. For hope, for vitality, for the coming phase.
The work contains three 2022 texts which challenge the post-2018 campaign against the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) and which campaign is the basis for demands by antifascists, politicians, and others, that the O9A be banned as a terrorist entity.
Chapter I: Black Propaganda, The FBI, And The O9A.
Chapter II: A Cautionary Tale, Revisited.
Chapter III: The FBI View Of The O9A: An Analysis.
Appendix: Knowing, Information, and The Discovery of Wisdom.
The case of Ethan Melzer is a classic example of: (i) why followers of O9A philosophy do not trust people they have not personally known for some time; (ii) why the Internet, and especially social media, encrypted messaging applications and e-mails, are flawed if occasionally useful causal mediums, and (iii) what following an esoteric philosophy or tradition such as the O9A involves, and in the past has involved, in the real world. In 2011 Anton Long publicly wrote about the perils of the Internet and how it had become a useful tool in the service of the O9A-pretendu crowd. More recently it has become a useful tool in the service of individuals and governments seeking to discredit the O9A, entrap people like Melzer, and trying to infiltrate the O9A.
It is interesting and instructive to consider the official US government view of the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) as described in a sworn affidavit by Special Agent Faye Stephan, assigned to the FBI New York Joint Terrorism Task Force, before Judge Stewart D. Aaron, Southern District New York, on the 4th June 2020. Which affidavit formed a core part of the criminal prosecution by the US Department of Justice of Ethan Melzer on charges of conspiracy to murder US military members, attempted murder of US military members, and of providing and attempting to provide material support in support of terrorism.
A section of the affidavit is devoted to the O9A under the heading Background Of The Order Of Nine Angles and the views and opinions expressed therein have since 2020 been widely quoted and paraphrased by the mainstream Media, by independent journalists and by antifascists all of whom have considered those views and opinions authoritative because deemed by them to be from a reliable source. The section lists five main points about the O9A, each of which we consider in detail.
The text concerns the origins of the campaign against the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) by the Establishment and which post-2018 campaign is the basis for demands by antifascists, politicians, and others that the O9A be banned as a terrorist entity.
The campaign was and is based on ‘black propaganda’ which is material which does not appear to be propaganda; whose real origins are concealed; which is misleading or designed to discredit, and which gives the impression it has been produced/circulated by a particular person or persons or by a particular group/organization or by a State-entity. Black propaganda was used by Allied governments during the First and Second World Wars as well as during the ‘Cold War’, and also between the 1950s and 1970s by the FBI as part of a Counter Intelligence Program to discredit domestic American groups and individuals including the Ku Klux Klan.
In the more recent case of the O9A, the ‘black propaganda’ was produced and circulated by an FBI informant turned agent provocateur.
For decades opponents of the Occult subculture known as the Order of Nine Angles as well as antifascists who have a hatred of David Myatt because of his past as a neo-nazi activist, have claimed that Myatt is not only the person behind the pseudonym ‘Anton Long’ but also founded the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) in the 1970s and wrote most of its primary texts.
When asked by proponents of O9A subculture or by supporters of Myatt to provide evidential facts (evidence acceptable in a Court of Law) they have: (i) remained silent, or (ii) taken refuge in the fantasy that anyone asking for such evidence is Myatt himself, or (iii) committed the logical fallacy of ad populum, claiming it is “self-evident” because so many others believe it, or (iv) committed other logical fallacies such as argumentum ad verecundiam – appeal to authority – by citing the personal opinion of some person or some opinion piece (propaganda) by antifascists or citing someone who committed the fallacy of Incomplete Evidence.
Some antifascists have now threatened to engage the professional services of an ‘author profiler’ who using forensic linguistics they believe will be able to show that Myatt was Long and the author of most of the primary O9A texts.
Chapter I, Desertam Indefensamque, was a memorandum sent to Occult colleagues by the Oxfordshire-based Sapphic group the TWS Nexion at the beginning of November 2021. It led to the discussions recounted in the section titled The Esoteric Philosophy And Seven Fold Way Of Anton Long – A Debate in chapter II, A New Beginning, the gist of which discussions concerned the anarchist/nihilist O9A principle of the ‘authority of individual judgement’ and what had recently resulted from that principle: such as the Black Propaganda of a fake American O9A nexion run by an FBI agent provocateur.
The TWS Nexion was of the view that the principle of the ‘authority of individual judgement’ – described in chapter III, Paradox Of The O9A Authority Of Individual Judgment, whose consequences are described in the Debate section of chapter II – were on balance detrimental to the quest for Lapis Philosophicus. Hence their reformation as The Seven Oxonians and their development of a new esoteric tradition which they termed The Hebdomian Way, described in detail in chapter IV, The Sevenfold Seeking And Noesis Of The Hebdomian Way. They thus returned to the fundamentals of Hermetic philosophy as described in the tractates of the ancient Corpus Hermeticum, with chapters V and VI – Julius Evola, The Seven Fold Way, And The Corpus Hermeticism and A Review of Myatt’s The Divine Pymander – providing an overview of that Corpus. This work presents the new esoteric tradition in detail as well as the background to its development involving as that did ceasing to publicly defend or explain Longusian Occultism because it had been abandoned in favour of The Hebdomian Way.
In an early typewritten text titled Diabolic Etymology written many years before the era of the public Internet and included in volume one of Hostia published in 1992, the O9A defined ‘evil’ by reference to its early use in the English language: “The word ‘evil’ derives from the Gothic ‘ubils’ which meant a ‘going beyond’ (the due measure) – and did not have a ‘moral’ sense. Only later (under the influence of Nazarene theology) did it acquire a strict moral sense, and became an abstract absolute.”
Thus, when Anton Long and the early ONA – that is, ONA 1.0 and until around 1992 – used the term it was in accordance with this definition which expresses the antinomian, the Left Hand Path, the heretical, nature of the word.
° O9A Definition And Use.
° Confusion, Tests, and A Labyrinthos Mythologicus.
° Conclusion: The Aeonic Perspective
