Unable To See The Nexion For The Nexions



Unable To See The Nexion For The Nexions:
The Trouble With Critics


The trouble afflicting many critics of the Order of Nine Angles is two-fold. First, they seem unable to see “The Nexion” for “the nexions”. That is, they confuse a nexion – be it a sphere or spheres on the Tree of Wyrd (and the associated archetypes and Occult praxises of such spheres) or be it a group or lodge or temple of those associating themselves with the O9A – with The Nexion that is The Seven Fold Way and thus the O9A.

Second, they illogically generalize from the particular, assuming as they so often do that the opinion of someone associated with the ONA is “ONA policy”, thus ignoring as they do the fact that no one has the authority to speak or write “on behalf of the O9A” because there is no O9A “authority” and never was any O9A “authority”. There are only personal experiences, personal opinions, personal interpretations since the only real “authority” in the O9A is what the individual discovers, learns, via pathei mathos both esoteric and exoteric, when they undertake the anados that is the Seven Fold Way.

Similarly in respect of works about or inspired by the Order of Nine Angles. They have no “authority”. Which is why neither the Deofel Quartet nor any essay or essays about ‘the sinister feminine’ (or about anything else, such as the Seven Fold Way) represent O9A policy. They present only the the opinions, the interpretation(s), and perhaps the experiences, of their authors. And this applies even if the author is or was Mr Anton Long.

Given that all this has been explained many times in the past twenty and more years – including in the 1992 publication The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown – then why do critics of the O9A continue to be so afflicted?

The answer is simple: because of their physis, their character. Some are so afflicted because they are territorial, needing to defend what they believe ‘satanism’ and/or the Left Hand Path are, with some of these types additionally claiming that the O9A is just “one man with a typewriter” and, latterly, “one man with a word-processor”, and now, recently, just “one man with a computer and an internet connection.”

Some are so afflicted because they have gotten lost in the O9A’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus and emerge confused, finding their bearings again by believing that the O9A is ‘fake’ or ‘not real’ or ‘a joke’.

Some are so afflicted because – to be blunt – they lack the intellect to grasp the difference between “The Nexion” and “the nexions” let alone grasp the subtle intricacies of the Seven Fold Way.

Some are so afflicted because they are just ignorant about the O9A, having prejudged it often on the basis of reading a few O9A texts and what others have written (usually on the internet) about the O9A.

Some are so afflicted because of hubris, sincerely believing that they “know all about the O9A” even though, when asked, they cannot answer questions from O9A Adepts regarding O9A esotericism. Lacking the honesty to admit that their knowledge about the O9A is limited, such critics either arrogantly dismiss such questions as “nonsense” or as “without meaning,” or ignore them. One of the markers enabling diagnosis of this type of physis is that they cannot read primary esoteric sources in their original language and have to resort to translations.

Some are so afflicted because they sincerely believe themselves to be very knowledgeable about the Occult and, believing they have discovered flaws in the O9A, trumpet their “findings” in order to establish a reputation for themselves and in the hope of attracting followers. When their “findings” or their knowledge are challenged, they invariably resort to argumentum ad nauseam and/or to argumentum ad hominem, with some of these types sincerely believing that they are on a “justified crusade” to “expose the ONA.” As with the ‘hubriatic type’, one of the markers enabling diagnosis of their physis is that they cannot read primary esoteric sources in their original language and have to resort to translations, which lack of direct knowledge of such primary sources reveals the limitations of their knowledge of matters Occult and O9A.

Finally, some are so afflicted because they have a personal agenda, such as a belief in the dogma of the Nazarene, or an irrational dislike of the person they fervently believe is behind the pseudonym “Anton Long”.

Of course, despite what we wrote at the beginning about the two-fold cause of such an affliction, many of the afflicted critics will continue to inflict their criticisms on others, given that for them their criticism of the O9A seems to have become a necessary part of their public (usually internet-created and internet-managed) persona.

And in the matter of the genesis and the spread of such an affliction, we were glad to help



ARCHON delivers harsh noise ambient intended and designed for the coming days of terror. Their inaugural full-length release, UNDEAD NOISE is dedicated to the cult of the Commandant and the nuclear fire which is Her hallowed emanation. UNDEAD NOISE presents five tracks of radiation drenched electronic horror, masterfully executed and freshly exhumed from the blood-stained […]


Another Instructive Example



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: https://omega9alpha.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/o9a-questions-2017-v5b.pdf

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

(a) https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/another-anti-o9a-example-v3.pdf
(b) Documenting Pretentiousness In Internet Occultism and Documenting Plebeian Physis In Modern Occultism in http://www.o9a.org/wp-content/uploads/o9a-modern-satanism.pdf

{3} The quotation is from the article Satanism Plebeianized, published in the 2015 compilation The Joy Of The Sinister, available at https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/joy-of-the-sinister1.pdf