Prolegomena to Any Future Satanism: Order of the Nine Angles and Supremacy of the Fringe pt. 2

The second part of the analysis of the LHP system focuses on the metaphysical principles of the Order of the Nine Angles and the peculiar emergence of Martin Heidegger’s notions in some of the core writings of this hyper-modern Satanist organization. The affinity is by no means accidental, because, after all, there’s only one Modernity and only one Satan.

Part 1.

 

 

 

Read/listen to: Part 1. Part 3.

Transcript:

As an anti-religion Satanism has to be an antipode to the metaphysical principles of the religion it subverts.

Metaphysics proper is in its essence a methodical mental approach towards principles and causes that lie beyond partial experience of finite existence, i.e. it is an attempt at thinking of the unbounded origin(s) of all.

It cannot be enclosed in a system of science or in any way bounded by limited, that is, human, intelligence, but can only be approached by the free act of thinking. Any knowledge we can properly call metaphysical is a gift from the higher to that which is lower. Let us keep this in mind, because it is crucial to understand how both religion and metaphysics can be subverted by its antipodes.

As we are dealing here with the modern Satanism, which I don’t consider as being identical with  Satanism proper – not out of any lack of will on behalf of its adherents, admittedly – it is essential to point out that it has its own humanist based metaphysics;  one that turns the traditional notion of metaphysical knowledge on its head.

As we shall soon see, this means that LHP is conditioned by Modernity and is using  modern and postmodern kinds of mental methods (methodologies?) to get in touch with its origins; one could argue that ONA’s insistence on radical individualism (“individuation”) and personal experience (“dark empathy”) as conditio sine qua non of the “true Satanic character”, “aural tradition” and “numinous” knowledge, are examples of hyper-modernity transcending even some of its greatest excesses embodied in the radically totalitarian political projects of the Twentieth Century.

At this stage of our analysis we’ll attempt to depict what this metaphysics or – should we  say –  counter metaphysics, really is.

A fringe not too far

The astonishing thing is that it is extremely resonant with what is considered to be an academically respectable and established outlook in  Twentieth Century philosophy, i.e. the so-called “continental tradition” of  contemporary academic philosophy; because both David Myatt and contemporary French or German professors of philosophy share some common points of intellectual origin, clearly exemplified by a tendency to acclaim the same founding father, namely:

Martin Heidegger.

 

The German thinker of “radical new beginnings” seems to pop up every once in a while when you nosedive into deeper LHP waters, where big intellectual sharks prowl. While Alexander Dugin made a great fuss about Heidegger as a “Prophet” and an “Envoy of Being”, other less famous but none the less sinister individuals such as  David Myatt used his phenomenology with less fanfare yet with the same motive: to demonstrate the truth of their metaphysics and the political ideology stemming therefrom.

In this respect, we’ll refer our analysis to one ONA text from 1980, entitled “Symbols and Being”[1] which is  devoted to an explicitly Heideggerian interpretation of the LHP notion of the relationship of acausal and causal as an interplay between non-Being and Being.

The purpose of ONA metaphysics is, as we repeatedly discern from its writings, a practical one: the working of magick. However, the usual modern definition of this practice is somewhat amended or, rather, hyper-modernized.

The magick,in this case, is something more than “bringing about change through an act of will”:

“For a long time the nature of the LHP had been misunderstood. The traditional definition as magick use for personal/destructive/negative purposes is meaningless because it assumes a framework of moral opposites, which does not, in reality, exist in relation to magickal energies. All evolution of consciousness is a magickal act – an expansion of the acausal into realm of the causal. From the ‘traditional’(sic), moral/ Nazarene (this term denotes Christianity. Myatt obviously endeavors to follow Satanist’s tradition of never pronouncing the name Jesus Christ, KT) point of view all such evolution, of necessity, becomes evil. It is unfortunate that, for a long time, this simple fact has been obscured by silly systems like Qabala (meaning Kabbalah, KT) with its notions of a Dark Side of the Tree (meaning cabbalistic “Tree of Life”, KT). No dark side exists, because what actually exists (…) is(emphasis in the original, KT) dark of itself because it presences non-Being.“[2]

 

Therefore, by going beyond good and evil the individual must step into absolute evil; the Evil which has no opposite because it itself is all there is or, more precisely and at the same time, everything that isn’t;  “a transcendental horizon”  – to maliciously use the Heidegger’s term – of any future question on the meaning of Being and a prolegomena to any future Satanic political project.

Let us not get confused by fancy philosophical terminology, because this is what Myatt, and with him some other individuals we mentioned in the first part of this analysis, want to practically introduce into the world (‘causal’ or ‘phenomenal’ realm). As we shall see, it is the utmost extremity of the metaphysics of evil and, astonishingly, at the same time, the utmost extremity of Modernity, or at least the modern mentality.

 

 

Satanic core of  Modernity – Heidegger’s philosophy as  a prolegomena to metaphysics of evil

By mentality I denote the relationship of man towards metaphysical origin(s).

The modern mentality is thus qualified as a certain anti-metaphysical rationality, i.e. rationality that strives to put man in the center as creative originator or at least, as is the case in Heidegger and the ONA, a necessary mediator of those attributes of the world that were traditionally ascribed to God. Everything successive to him – i.e. angels, soul, Spirit, magic, providence, demons, etc. – is swept away too in the course of the process Max Weber aptly denoted as Entzauberung or disenchantment of the world.

Heidegger was seemingly the most radical philosophical critic of this process in the Twentieth Century, yet the truth is that he was in fact more likely its consequent propagator – the one who really made a life-long intellectual effort to drive it to its pseudo-apocalyptic conclusion.

David Myatt, writing under the pseudonym Thorold West, proves to be his apt pupil although with a pronounced affinity to natural sciences which Heidegger detested. Although LHP luminaries are more prone to use C.G. Jung from whom they borrow and to an extent distort a good deal of terminology (numinous, acausal, archetypes, etc.), Myatt’s treatment of Heidegger is ominous because there really is no need for distortion of the original terminology – it fits the ONA mentality hand in glove.

Heidegger’s thinking revolves around the notions of “ontological difference” and “oblivion of Being” (Seinsvergessenheit), where the former denotes the difference of beings (Seiende), as disclosed in the answer to a question of ‘what is (each) individual being?’, and Being (Sein) as a meaning of “is” disclosing the meaning of every being without being any one of them, while the latter term refers to the human tendency to forget this difference.

Namely, the human being, insofar as it is in meaningful relationship to Being, has a necessary tendency to lose itself among beings, while forgetting both its and other being’s origin in Being itself. This is Dasein or the existence, a notion that Heidegger introduced by giving a new meaning to a rather profane German word: Dasein (literary: being-here) can be understood as human being only insofar as human has some relation to Being itself.

This means that Dasein is primarily the being of relation, a kind of mediator that discloses Being, because it is the only being whose essence consists precisely in an ability to have a meaningful relation to Being in general.

Heidegger argued that oblivion of Being originates from the conflation of individual beings and Being itself, i.e. from picking the one being from the world and turning it into some kind of metaphysical principle – more or less always a God or at least a “divine” or “eternal” substance. This is the consequence of oblivion of the ontological difference between beings and Being itself he wants to go beyond and, after 2500 years of philosophical tradition, start “radically” anew.

What needs to be done is a “destruction of traditional ontology” – all the way down to Plato and Aristotle – as an attempt to find that which was partially disclosed but always simultaneously veiled in the epochal insights of great philosophers. Now, epoch or epoche for Heidegger has a strict meaning of finite disclosure of meaning of Being that sways the given historical moment and not a historical epoch in the sense of an aggregate of political/economical/social events.[3]

So there was a time when Being was disclosed as eternal idea (Plato), an eternal origin of continuous process (kinesis, kinoun akinéton) in Aristotle or, at the peak of the Modernity, will unto power and eternal recurrence of the same (Nietzsche).

All of these notions are not simply mistakes of individual philosophers, but disclosures conditioned by Dasein’s being-delivered unto Being, its making present (anwessen) of what is by its nature always absent (abwessen) from the world yet necessary to endow it with meaning.

This presenting (gabe), or as LHP practitioner would put it, presencing, stems from the tendency to comprehend Being in  terms of “present” while forgetting its “past” and “future”. This is what Heidegger considers to be the “oblivion of Being”, namely the Being itself is being concealed through its revealing of different epochal insights of traditional metaphysics.

The Being is congenial with time because  time is the one phenomena that is a horizon in which man comprehends the world, but is never present as it is in itself; it is, by virtue of its very nature, always absent.[4] Heidegger tries to express this by removing the temporal notion of presence, inherent to copula “is”, and replacing it with a very hard to translate German expression “es gibt” (“es gibt Sein, es gibt Zeit”) which we’ll translate with “coming-to-pass”, hence: “The Being is coming-to-pass, the time is coming-to-pass”.[5]

This coming-to-pass is radically different from that which is, i.e. that which is “present”. It is, by its very essence always absent yet necessary in order for individual beings to exist and always simultaneously disclosed and veiled, in and through them. And this absence is caused by what Heidegger considered to be his main insight: radical finitude of Dasein.

Namely, Dasein is in essence determined by its individuality and temporality. Individuality stems from the fact that Dasein is ‘always-mine’ (je-mein, eigentlich),[6] i.e. its meaning cannot come outside of it and its ‘always-his’ individual relation to Being. He is thrown-in-the-world (Geworfen) in the sense that he is a contingent, accidental, fact: there is no way he can find any meaning in his ‘whence’, so he is originally pointed, or projected, towards ‘wherefore’ or the future.

The essence of Dasein is to make itself a temporal meaningful project. That project is, however, originally meaningless. Namely, while it has to project meaning, Dasein’s origin is absolutely devoid of it and the only authentically meaningful relation it can constitute is the one towards the end, that is: its death.

While in everyday living Dasein indulges in various, unoriginal – “never really mine” (uneigentlich), meaningful projects, if it reverts into itself in solitude it comes to realize the original nothingness and meaninglessness of its everyday-ness. This disclosure comes to pass through the mood of angst which Heidegger points out as a fundamental revelation of both Dasein’s finitude and his relation to Being. The angst reveals that Dasein is finite and that meaning stems from the defining moment of the finitude, i.e. its “always-his-own” death.

The authentic Dasein, retired from the fuss of everyday, inauthentic, existence projects itself towards it’s death, constituting meaning in accordance with this ‘absolute and unconditional possibility’ which makes him an authentic individual because one’s own death can never be appropriated by or from someone else . Only from this tragic position can it go forward towards the meaningful relation to Being in general.

 

A very instructive introductory lecture on early Heidegger

A few things are of note here. Namely, if you reflect on this, even – and perhaps preferably – without employing any notion from history of philosophy, you’ll notice that something is fundamentally amiss. The very notion of finite Dasein implies infinite, eternal Being. Heidegger always tried to obfuscate this existential and essential fact by pointing out that its fairly natural occurrence is a historical consequence of oblivion of Being, but he fails to convince because the notion that Being itself is finite in fact cannot be comprehended by the human mind and for a good reason. Namely, this is because the traditional terms of metaphysics are its naturally imprinted vocabulary, out of which it cannot comprehend anything higher or lower than everyday life.

Heidegger attempted to circumvent this problem by decommissioning the traditional terminology with pedantic care from his writings and lectures, which turned him into one of the most obscure thinkers in the history of philosophy. Most of his latter works, i.e. those that come after his crucial starting point from Sein und Zeit (1927.) are devised to develop a new, quasi poetical, language that should prepare a small elite of thinkers to think Being authentically as it discloses itself in a new epoch and new enthrallment (Ereigniss) of humans that will produce new meaning and transcend the Modernity.

The problem is, in order to make this happen, Heidegger abandoned not only terms – and beings – such as substance, spirit, cause, origin, mind, but also the notions of man himself.

Dasein is a man reduced to an individuum, that is a completely contingent and incomprehensible, isolated being whose essence is in fact, and in Heidegger’s own words, nothingness. We are then supposed to expect that from out of this depersonalized – and as we shall see later purely material – nothingness there will come-to-pass  new meaning. Croatian philosopher Marijan Cipra depicts the situation in these terms:

“This destruction only seemingly aims to “loosen up petrified tradition” in order to clear up the “obfuscations” and getting us in a more authentic touch with the truth of Being. For, as we have seen above, Being as relative to Dasein is for Heidegger originally (von je) congenial with nothingness. No destruction of tradition can bring us to authentic meaning of Being, because the a priori presupposition of “fundamental ontology” is radical “metaphysical isolation” of existence – individual and contingent, always “mine” (je-mein) Dasein. As individual and contingent “always mine” existence is in principle deprived of being and mind – as such indemonstrable and ontologically ineffable. Individuum est ineffabile – as Scholastics very well knew; there is no thinking nor speaking about non-being – as Parmenides very well knew.”

“Non-Being is” – the Tree of Wyrd

There’s a good reason why Heidegger’s philosophical project rings the bell with LHP luminaries. They also seek to affirm absolute, isolated individuality as a prime subject of their metaphysics and corresponding ideological practice – in the case of Dugin, even expanded to the notion of isolated ethnicity.

The LHP practitioner is a “sinister”, “satanic” individual insofar as he shuns the everyday meaning imposed by “mundanes” and strives towards tapping into “acausal energies”. Those can be disclosed only to one who has achieved this “always-mine” originality by complete rejection of all moral norms and practical subversion of them through the principle of adversary (see, “insight roles”).

The aim of magick is “presencing of acausal energies” that is: laying oneself open to “Abyss” through following the “Seven-Fold Way” of ONA initiation which, on closer scrutiny, proves to be a radical and difficult method of de-personalization.

Admittedly, ONA teachings are heavily infused with Jungian and pop-physics terminology, but are founded on the same, hyper-modern, assumption of getting back to the roots and starting anew, both in the individual and, as we shall see in the third part of this analysis, the political, sense. In contrast to Heidegger,  terms like consciousness, evolution, energies and such are used, but the assumption of nothingness as an origin of both man and the world that has to be affirmed and appropriated in a creative way remains the same.

This assumption is a tell tale sign of modern mentality, despite both Myatt’s claims that ONA is a continuation of ancient tradition and Heidegger’s declarative aim of re-appropriating the philosophical tradition, because it is anthropocentrically founded, that is: it in fact tells us that anything that can be called transcendent must be comprehended solely in human terms and, even more importantly, primarily on the grounds of comprehending what the human being is.

The knowledge of acausal is possible, not through applying the mind, but through individual openness to it that is always ‘mine’ and cannot be transmitted to others save by what is denoted as ‘dark empathy’, an ability to share the ontological mood that discloses the acausal. The LHP practitioner is to become a “nexion”, i.e. the gate between causal and acausal through various ordeals of initiation which include the “insight roles” we described in the previous episode of this analysis, but also through human sacrifice (“culling”), various rituals, physical challenges and finally a period of long isolation in nature that should finally “destroy the ego” and let the acausal energies flow through LHP Dasein to detach him from the world of “mundanes” and reattach him to the acausal origin of all.

Quite like in Heidegger, the knowledge comes as a destruction of natural human constitution seemingly being only the peeling of the layers of “false personality”, created by everyday living of one being-thrown-into-world, and the “sinister” mood which discloses, albeit never intellectually comprehends, the acausal.

This is also the rejection of the natural position of human being towards the metaphysical principles, because it, on the one hand, completely rejects – in fact aims to destroy – the mind as a subject of knowledge and, on the other hand, instead of uplifting towards that which is higher turns towards the lower, sub-human, sub-mundane and sub-causal that has to overwhelm the Dasein/Mage with its energies and channel them into the world at large through him.

However, as LHP is in essence a practical affair, we are presented with various methods of achieving this and for that purpose the whole conceptual framework has been built to aid the understanding. This is seemingly contradictory if we bear in mind that the ultimate aim is  utter irrationality, but only seemingly. Namely, Myatt is quite adamant about his elaborate system being only a means to an end; a map of consciousness to be used to approach its hidden, sinister root.

The universe, as understood by ONA, can best be described in a causal way by symbols, and an all-encompassing symbol is what is dubbed the “Tree of Wyrd”:

“The Tree of Wyrd, as conventionally described (“drawn”) and with its correspondences and associations and symbols (…), re-presents certain acausal energies, and the individual who becomes familiar with such correspondences and associations and symbols can access (to a greater or lesser degree depending on their ability and skill) the energies associated with the Tree of Wyrd. The Tree of Wyrd itself is one symbol, one re-presentation, of that meeting (or “intersection”) of the causal and acausal which is a human being, and can be used to represent the journey, the quest, of the individual toward the acausal – that is, toward the goal of magick, which is the creation of a new, more evolved, individual.”[7]

The Tree of Wyrd has been presented by ONA as the true, Aryan, form of what “Magian” Kabbalah distorted into the “Tree of Life”. The word ‘Wyrd’ is an old Norse term denoting “Fate” and the tree itself serves both a metaphysical and practical function: it causally describes the acausal, to the extent it is possible, and provides the mental and ontological map which can be traversed in order to reach the trans- (in fact, -sub) mental infinity of acausal. Therefore it is both a summation of the metaphysical system and a magical grimoire to be used for  practices ranging from hexing the mundanes (Myatt’s favorite examples are, of course, some way of killing at a distance or screwing the reluctant romantic interest) and dissolving the “causal form”, understood in Jungian terms of individuation as integration of psyche at the expense of ego consciousness, i.e. integration of unconscious (acausal) archetypes which, in contrast to Jung, are understood to unequivocally manifest Evil.

The seven stages of the Tree represent primarily seven planets and taken together with the Tree as a whole and its root dubbed “the Abyss” – acausal infinity – they are the eponymous nine angles of ONA.

The aspiring initiate is to apply the active imagination (Jung) to mentally traverse these quasi-cabbalistic stations and gain insight into correspondences between them as well as their multiple meanings, because the presupposition is that planets also represent alchemical elements which are understood in Jungian sense of being the attributes of the psyche.

In essence the Tree represents change, because in universe according to ONA there is no stability and one is obliged to realize this fact and manipulate it for his own ends (external magick) and/or to accomplish the individuation (internal magick).

The main method to traverse the Tree is an elaborate board game Myatt devised and dubbed the “Star Game”.

Star game and Heidegger’s gambit

“The Star Game is a re-presentation of the nine aspects of the basic three whose changing in causal time represents a particular presencing of acausal energy. That is, the nine re-presents not only the nexion that is the presencing of the acausal evident in our psyche and consciousness, but also many other nexions as well. This particular re-presentation is an “abstract” one, as distinct from the more “causal” symbology of The Tree of Wyrd (and of the septenary system itself).”[8]

The three aspects in question are ego, the unconscious and the self of Jungian psychiatry depicted as alchemical substances of salt, mercury and sulphur. The aim of the game is to experience the ways in which acausal invades the causal both in a metaphysical and everyday sense, so that the initiate can internalize and use them for various purposes – become a nexion.

“The star game has three main functions 1) it develops certain higher levels of consciousness 2) it is new way of magickal working appropriate to the twenty-first century and beyond; and 3) it is an aid to developing certain magickal skills (…) The first of the aims detailed above involves, in part, a new way of thinking. (…) This thinking, however, is not the rational, causal, logical type associated with science.”[9]

This hermetical nature of the ONA system is best demonstrated through the Star game because it is supposed to display the correspondences of the universe, with its own nexions called “stargates” denoting concrete locations in the world where acausal invades the causal, and the individual human being as a corresponding, self-evolved, gate which can serve the same purpose.

The game is played by an elaborate set of rules on seven boards built into a spiral to represent the Tree of Wyrd. We won’t delve into Myatt’s explanation of the rules of the game but only point out the essential thing about it: the Star game is supposed to be a manifestation of new thinking, a contribution to a completely new relationship between Dasein and Being supposedly based on the unwritten folk traditions of British isles to which one can re-attach only with the ontological mood of “dark-empathy”.[10] It points out to what is considered in ONA system as an advent of a new, galactic Aeon the sinister dialectics – ranging from harassing disabled woman to terrorist attacks – is intended to bring about.

If allusions to Heidegger seem strenuous, let us hear what Myatt/West has to say about him:

“Since Being is an issue for man (Heidegger’s notion of primordial disclosure of the meaningful relation of man to Being from Sein und Zeit, KT), man interprets causally because everyday Dasein, the Dasein which takes time, can be characterized as causal, or that interpretation of Being as beings which is the there-is (an alternative etymology to Dasein in English, KT). However, man interprets other than causally: this other interpretation, which is prior to the causal by reason of its existence, may be termed ‘acausal’ (a-causal: with-out the causal) – and this acausal is what Homer, in the “Iliad”, speaks of when he says Calchas is the most wise seer because he understands all that is, was and will be. Heidegger understands this as revealment and concealment or, elsewhere as un-hiddenness (Unverborgenheit, a-letheia in Greek, KT), and the primordial time of his Sein und Zeit is akin to this acausal or potentiality of man’s being (…)”[11]

The LHP interpreter applies his own terms to Heidegger’s fundamental ontology, and quite rightly so. Namely, Dasein can indeed be seen as originally experiencing the meaning of Being a-causally because Heidegger himself considers causality to be a notion of traditional metaphysics which veils the original potentiality, disclosed through acceptance of the absolutely certain potentiality of death; an authentic being-towards-the-end (zu-ende-sein).

Namely, the original relation to Being is not thinking, but mood (Befindlichkeit) which always lays out (auslegen) some kind of openness (Erschlossenheit) of the meaning of Being. The most authentic mood is  angst which is  fear without a cause, or the fear of nothing-ness. This mood lays out the question of the meaning of Being, because it opens (erschliessen) both Its absence and Dasein’s original nothingness.

Causality is here observed as merely a presencing/presenting of mundane/inauthentic existence which attempts to cover this fact by understanding  reality as actuality, while the authentic reality is precisely the potentiality of Non-Being which, as it necessarily (causally of course, but why should Heidegger/Myatt care about semantics) follows is identical with Being itself.

This pure potentiality and identity is not to be understood in a dialectical sense – as is the case in Hegel’s logic – where it necessarily unfolds its opposite and creates “something”, but phenomenologically – that is in relation to Dasein’s mood.

This means that moody blues of the acausal Being is unconditionally related to man and his way of approaching it in utter irrationality, because the mind is supposedly a derived, inauthentic, mode of understanding. If there were no man, there wouldn’t be Being. But, since the man is finite, the Being itself has to be finite.

Heidegger calls for the hermeneutics of facticity that is: an authentic laying out of the facts of existence as they are prior to the emergence of Logos in the Platonic and/or Christian sense of intelligible order underlying it. And as such, the Faktizitat of the existence is completely and utterly meaningless and order-less because it is conceived as Dasein’s own projection, prompted by a bit of a nudge from the murky (Non) Being itself.

The only way open to understanding this is as a new way of thinking that is utterly negative in the sense that it seeks to go, not beyond, but below the level of actual beings and into the pure potentiality out of which we should expect a kind of voice of Being, the Last God (Letze Gott), Enthrallment/Event (Ereignis) or some such pseudo-intellectual-cum-quasi religious crap, and finally appropriate it in a new, non-metaphysical (meaning quasi-poetical) language.

The LHP luminary is, however, not satisfied with Heidegger’s insistence on Language as a “House of Being”, i.e. his insistence that authentic revelation of Being can come to pass primarily in the field of speech (Sage), the original essence of language in which the Being is disclosed. The reason for this is the original purpose for appropriating Heidegger’s analysis, namely: to demonstrate the fundamentals of the Tree of Wyrd and the Star game:

“However, these correlations are, at best, hints concerning the nature of the causal and the acausal – their true description, and thus that of Being and Being as beings, can only be, as will be shown later, symbolic, through mathematics.”[12]

In LHP metaphysics, symbol is understood as the primordial causal form of Being, which is later obfuscated by losing the primordial intuition of the acausal for the sake of living out a causal, mundane, existence. Thus, the true revelation of Being is through symbols and if the authentic system of those symbols could be constructed it can lead towards the dissolution  of Dasein in primordial change which is the original meaning of Being:

“The fundamental characterization of the causal is consciousness, that of the acausal, the unconscious. This conscious horizon may be expressed, in terms of the history of Being, by thought and feeling, the unconscious by sensation and intuition  (…) This experiencing is the symbol from which word derives. For man, thought is part of this unconcealment – intuition the other, since Being possesses as potentiality in the change that is man not only thought but also symbol, and this symbolic perception of Being, this experiencing of Being as the One, as that which presences or transforms, is explicit for Western philosophy in the Pre-Socratics. As Tao, this perception is today becoming understood again, and with Heidegger the task of its understanding is begun.”[13]

Of course, “Nazarene” Patristics, Platonism and such trivialities which quite consequently – alas, causally! – unfolded and developed pre-Socratic insights and what was contained in them a couple a millennium ago are nothing but “inauthentic” rationalism that gave birth to Modernity, so we’ll just start all over again authentically and stand “against the modern world”.

Give me a break.

This pompous pseudo-intellectual – pseudo-human even – crap is only good to show how depraved the real essence of Modernity is; because Myatt/Heidegger’s attempts are consequently modern, no Medieval or Ancient thinker would dream to “start anew” from “nothingness” because he knew that the only “nothingness” – the Other of every being (heteron panton) – is a pure Being, pure Eternity, pure Light and, most of all, pure causality.

In any case, this violent (Gewaltbrauchende) interpretation of pre-Socratic philosophers, Heidegger probably misappropriated from German mystics as Meister Eckhart and their metaphorical interpretation of Scriptures, is as persuasive as a Bulldozer mechanic teaching gynaecology class.

Moreover, it is by its very nature confined to its practitioner – Heidegger himself – because it can only stem from isolated individuality laying out the ontological mood disclosing the Being. There is absolutely no way this “laying out” can really be communicated to another except by deliberately and consequently (alas! Causality again!) weaving the pure illusion as the essence of truth and knowingly accepting it as such. The same applies to the wannabe LHP Heideggerian.

It is my contention that precisely this standpoint demonstrates the most extreme pitfall of Modernity; an attitude which hates it so much because it is unable to see any good, beauty and truth of Being in it, that it affirms its worst excess. It is in this sense consequently hyper-modern, affirming that only human being exists and then trying to transcend this by digging below its foundation, dissolving it into nothingness which it, when observed in isolation, really is.

I beg the reader to excuse my “Nazarene” prejudice, but there’s no escape from the conclusion that the only way to eradicate the order of cosmos and its Author – because this is what it boils down to in the end – is to dig your own grave in the metaphysical mud called primal matter.

LHP stargamer, again to our aid:

“The most fundamental symbol is Being, from Being there is change. The abstraction of change (as a consequence of man’s being) is the idea of extension which leads to the concept of transformation or potentiality. Potentiality itself is implicit within Being, and through man’s existence this potentiality becomes the striving toward authenticity (…) The idea of the essence that is the symbol-change is extension: the idea of the essence that is Being is unity, and the idea of change leads, through abstraction, to the concept of transformation,  or duration. This duration, by identification with man’s terminality, embodies time, and accordingly time is understood as implicit in man’s being, projected onto the world (…) Abstractly, this duration is the continuum and the concept of number: thought’s perception of change as it issues in man through apprehension of individuality. Only change exists for Being, not time or number. Further, the concept of ‘set’ derives from that of continuum and number, since intuitively a set is a totality or aggregate.”[14]

Here, dear reader, we have a pure, unadulterated example of what Rene Guenon called the Reign of Quantity. The pure potentiality of acausal can be intuited through its projections of extension and aggregate of individuums – from Aristotle onwards depicted as categories of quantity which cannot exist in themselves, let alone be primordial expressions of Being. What Myatt does here, quite consequently (alas, again …) following Heidegger, is nose-diving into the very midst of matter and attempting to go, not beyond, but below materialism and dissolve symbols in their origin – a pure, non-existent, potentiality of matter. Hence the Abyss, Chaos, acausal; hence adversary principle, terrorism and sinister dialectics; hence, to repeat a quote, an insight that:

“No dark side exists, because what actually exists (…) is dark of itself because it presences non-Being.“

 Indeed it does, if you’re a psychopath or, to put it more consequently (I’m running short of “alases!”), mental-o-path, because this is far worse than simple degenerative psychology – it is a mental adjustment to the essence of what is the worst in Modernity: an attempt to understand the world on the basis of pathological or otherwise depraved human individual, something shared by founding fathers of modern intellectual culture like Marx, Freud, Heidegger, Rosenberg and their followers, academic or otherwise.

In respect to Martin Heidegger, Marijan Cipra again deserves to be quoted at length here:

„Obviously, after Hegel, there came to pass, both in thinking and in actual reality, a certain “abandon of mind” which, perhaps, began long before in the ancient world, but became manifest only then. The rule of blind affects and the will deprived of ideas is fundamental characteristic of post-Hegelian Modernity.

This was clearly felt and expressed by premier thinkers of the age. By Marx in his formulation of radical humanism (“the man is the root of the man”) and world revolution born in the class hatred; by Nietzsche in his experience of nihilism and affect of loathing towards everything that is (the Great Loathing, “to understand everything means to loath everything”), and, finally, by Heidegger himself from affects of fear and angst, disclosing the congeniality of Being and Nothingness.

There we have three fundamental modern affects: hate, loathing and angst – wherefore it follows: revolutionary change or destruction of the world (Veränderung bzw. Vernichtung), will unto Overman stemming from loathing towards man and, finally, the angst of care, stemming from fundamental nothingness of existence.

To be modern in any of these senses – or indeed in all of them at once – consequently means: to be alone (Jemeinigkeit) in the world (in-der-Welt-sein), where everyone hates everyone, everyone loathes everyone, and everyone fears everyone.

In the midst of such Modernity, which represents a perfect deprivation of mind, it’s ultimate descend, Heidegger descends the deepest – that being, in my opinion, his major philosophical accomplishment. He grasps and lays out “the eminent”, in fact the only, possibility of such Modernity, and it is death.“ (source)

Fringe and the Centre

So, in conclusion, let us repeat why is this descent  into the  fringe of the fringe relevant and what does it teach us.

ONA is the most radical formulation of the LHP metaphysics and it is  astonishingly congruent with some of the most prominent and influential ideas of Modernity, ideas, one might add, quite prominent on the Western Right and further radicalized by luminaries of Alt Right, above all those influenced by Alexander Dugin who is, as I have demonstrated elsewhere, quite on board with this kind of un-thinking.

When we put this in the context of fringe ideas creeping into centre, this kind of thinking ceases to be darkness at the edge of the global city, but could very well start to emanate from its centre. Let us not forget Heidegger’s supposed “lapse” into Nazism, in which he was, of course, looking for authentic (eigentlich?) form of truly National and truly Socialist German Europe. The most of the LHP prone thinkers – both on the fringe and around the centre – seek to politically affirm “a true Right”, “true nationalism”, “true white identity” and so on.

So, in itself this kind of thinking is not at all removed from academic and political circles. For example, one American professor of philosophy in answer to a comment to his rather good lecture on Heidegger has this to say:

The conclusion could very well be put in some of ONA manuscripts. And the person is a regular, mainstream and, probably, quite socially acceptable man.

But truly sinister, in a quite ONAish sense, is the worldview emerging from the bowels of internet, carried by young people lurking the chans and forums, about which we already have written at length. Namely, the invocation of “dark god” by technological “meme magick” seems quite congruent with ONA principles laid out in the previous passages. The invocation of KeK/Pepe the Frog who supposedly helped imagine Trump into existence, together with the belief in synchronicities which are acausal links that nevertheless display meaningful connections, seem to be precisely the kind of delusional sinister magick LHP practitioner would prefer: the image was invoked from below, i.e. from the utterly chaotic bowels of internet, and then got enmeshed in an infinite web of meaningful connections which are completely horizontal, hence unrelated to anything above but only to the interaction of irrational mass intuition and an unknown something that supposedly answered its call.

Did Kek really put Donald Trump on the throne? Yes and no. In the chaos yes and no are the same in a quite positive way, namely the acausal is based on ontological and not merely psychological delusion. This is the way the Abyss of matter behaves when it starts to dissolve under the feet of gullible humans trying to reflect their desires upon it. Matter in the primordial sense of infinite possibility without the intrinsic principle of reality can best be described as a fluid mirror which reflects images projected upon it. The thinking of matter in the metaphysical sense is impossible – it can only be imagined and serve as an infinite possibility to reflect imagination.

I consider the supposedly marginal political fringe of the Alt Right, ONA, chans, etc. as a prime example of Modernity pushing its worst extremity towards its consequent conclusion: the metaphysical illusion starts to really act upon the world in a quite autonomous way. The fact that it is an illusion does not diminish its influence, because it is capable of acting upon  humans and deepening their own delusion that they can absolutely reform the world in their own image. This is sub-materialism, sub-humanism based not upon metaphysics but on sub-physics, a counter image of truth.

The ONA system worked upon this possibility long ago, on the fringe of the fringe, and devised a philosophy of history and political ideal, that now, as crazy as it may sound, can slowly move into the centre. The idea of “Galactic Imperium” and the development of “new man” now doesn’t seem farfetched – not on the grounds of some inexistent technological achievement that could make it possible, but precisely because people are growing accustomed to accepting something like that as a relevant political goal. After all, some of its equivalents can be seen in the “white ethno-state” sought after by Alt Right leadership, as well as in the Neo-Eurasianist existential empire of Dasein promoted by Alexander Dugin.

And a lot of people now do not see this as anything farfetched, although twenty years ago it would have been considered pure insanity – like gay marriages, as Richard Spencer aptly puts it in Al Jazeera interview.

To demonstrate the depravity of politics built upon this counter metaphysics, which I define as LHP across the board: from Alt Right to Dugin, because Myatt is definitely the most consequent (alas!) un-thinker who developed it, we’ll proceed to expound the ONA political ideology and the idea of “dark gods” in the third and final part of this analysis.

 

[1]Naos. (ONA manuscript), pg. 112.

[2]Naos, pg. 86.

[3] “Zeit und Sein”, in: Heidegger Zur Sache des Denkens. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1976, pg 4.

[4] Famously, the purpose of the Heidegger’s fragmentary philosophical blockbuster Sein und Zeit published portion (2 thirds of the first volume were published, while the third section and the whole projected second volume were either never written or destroyed by the author) is: “Interpretation of Being in respect to temporality and explication of time as the transcendental horizon of the question of Being”, Martin Heidegger Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1967, §8.

[5] ZS, pg. 4 and further.

[6] SZ, §9

[7] The Requisite ONA, pg. 33

[8] Ibid.

[9] Naos, pg. 29.

[11] Naos, 113.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Naos, 114.

[14] Naos, 115.

 

Branko Malić

 

Read/listen to: Part 1. Part 3.

 

Kali Tribune runs on reader’s support. If you found the above informative and/or enlightening, consider making a donation