David Myatt is Anton Long; or Anton Long and David Myatt are two different people. What are the pros and cons of each scenario?
It’s like trying to make a nonliving pen-name into a real person. If we were to hold a trial, and I were to present to the court documents, essays, and such to the court to examine for whatever reason, sans the names; two main points would first be noticed:
A) All documents and essays contain the same near exact basic thoughts, ideas, concepts, and mentality. Even when we consider time into the equation: that being 30 years of continued writing, such documents and manuscripts associated with the “ONA,” “Numinous Way,” and “Ethical National-Socialism” still retains the same “mental signature,” the same overall concepts, ideas, thinking process, and even “visions.” The Black Book of Satan being an odd exception.
You would think [assume] that if Myatt and Long were in fact two very different people, that somewhere within the 30-40 year time frame of continuous writing of these two that there would be a DIVERGENCE of mentality, belief, opinions, convictions, and conceptualizations.
B) All documents, essays, and manuscripts are written using the same writing style; same choice of wording; same grammar; and same occasional use of Latin phrases.
Based on the two above observations alone, I would personally deduce that all said documents, MSS, and essays were written by the same single person. Then I would call up witnesses to the stand. Witnesses who have intimately known Myatt as exhibit C:
C) I won’t name any names; to protect the innocent; but there are a few people behind several associate wordpresses; groups; and websites that personally have known Myatt for many years. These individuals know who they are; and each do not seem to express a state of doubt or confusion as to who Myatt and Long are. Whether Myatt and Long are the same person or different is besides the point in exhibit C. What matters is that those few individuals who are closely associated with Myatt aren’t confused and have no reason to question.
This would lead me to believe that when one or two of these “witnesses” mentioned in Exhibit C presents information that generates doubt or provokes questioning regarding this issue – that there is a reason behind such act.
One of the pros of Myatt = Long theory is it keeps things simple, and it doesn’t hijack quality thinking time from striving to evolve oneself; as opposed to spending a great deal of time making Myatt/Long the center of [the ONA’s] attention. You can just say all those MSS and ideas came out of one person using a pen-name.
The Con to this is that Myatt consistently denies [publicly, during his tryst with Islam] that he is not Anton Long, and actually challenges people to prove it. I think he even publicly stresses that he is not a “Satanist” or is associated with the ONA. This makes it slightly unfair because something like the Numinous Way can constantly have Myatt at the helm in the background; but the elusive Long ends up being an “on-off” character in the ONA that comes and goes. This ends up being counterproductive for the ONA.
I understand that Long himself says that no-one should be or is the single central authority of the ONA. This is fine and agreeable to a certain group of ONA Initiates who are esoterically mature enough to stand on their own, and evolve the ONA by themselves. But this democratic esprit – like democracy itself – doesn’t work long term wise. Those Initiates of the ONA that may be considered the thinkers, developers, innovators, have it in them to duplicate Anton Long’s 30 year effort; but such types of Initiates are few. The majority of the rest of the ONA are the type of people who may be classified as “Consumers.” Consumers need a visible CEO of some type. The Executive Board of a corporation knows intuitively that it collectively “owns” the public corporation and could function fine without a CEO. But a corporation, nation, tribe, or clan without an executive officer of some type is weak.
This isn’t just an opinion of mine. It’s written in human history. Of all the 200,000 years that our modern homo sapiens species has existed, what tribe, nation, people, state, did not have a chief? Of all the many possible forms of group structure, national structure, how many human civilizations have been kingdoms and empires, and how many have been direct democracies? And of those kingdoms and democracies, which of the two is more numerous, more longer lasting, more productive long term wise; and which rarely lasts long at all. Having an “alpha male” is unfortunately embedded in our species make up.
Those ONA Initiates who are the thinkers, innovators, evolvers, and progressers, must figure out what the future of the ONA will be. If the ONA should be pointless or if it should have a purpose and a long term objective. If the ONA is to last long, and is to have a purpose and long term objective, then we must understand that this democratic “we all own the ONA” needs to be traded off for organizational coherency. This ONA may have to be organized as a body is organized: with many different organs [clans] cooperating as a whole, yet doing their own thing – and it needs one central brain.
The ONA fortunately already has experience and should recall what eventually happens to it, when a certain someone took some time off to find himself. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with Myatt having the impulse to be Muslim back then. Perhaps he overestimated the ability of the ONA to exist by itself and “cut the umbilical cord” too soon. What happened, had to happen. And from it we learn and adapt. But have we learned from the ONA’s experience during the latter part of the 90′s? Or will this new generation of ONA initiates commit the same mistake again by continuing to give life to old forms and concepts now known not to work?
But maybe Myatt doesn’t want to be the leader of anything because it’s stressful? That’s fine; he can pawn “Anton Long” on somebody he knows. Which is what I thought was happening when I read that odd Caviar Lecter post. I actually told Kayla after we read it: I guess Myatt and friends are working on pawning “Anton Long” on somebody; let’s hope it’s someone we know; who the hell is that Oxford Don person? The only person we know associated with Oxford and Myatt is Ms. Julie. We don’t know her personally, but we were hoping she’d be the new Anton Long.
That “Who is Anton Long” post is actually a great idea. I would suggest that this “Who is Anton Long” be the 8th “So you think you’re an Adept” Question. At least it causes those “outsiders” to continue to believe that AL and DM are different people. What for? I don’t know.
The Pro to having AL being a different person from DM is that it makes it less confusing to new initiates knowing that David Myatt was the one that became a Muslim, and not Anton Long. Anton Long has always been Sinister.
The Con to this is that Anton Long would be confined mentally to the ONA/Satanism which is a limitation; whereas Myatt has mentally and spiritually traveled about and is a source of new insights.
But “Anton Long” himself as a person/character is his own con because nobody knows anything about him. He has no story. People can’t related to Anton Long, because their is nothing to grasp emotionally to relate to. This is bad business strategy. It means the ONA lacks the animal magnetism to attract people who may resonate with Anton Long – because he has no image, no face, no story, to resonate with.
On the other hand David Myatt as a person and character has a certain seductive force to him simply because he has a story. He is a normal man. He’s been married. He has children. His heart’s been broken. He started off wild back in the days. He searched. He discovered himself. He writes poetry. He shares his visions and mind. He admits to making mistakes. And over the past 30 years we have seen him grow and evolve. Myatt “keeps it real” as they say in the hood. In essence Myatt gives us many things to emotionally grasp and relate to – to resonate with. This makes him very attractive [not sexy], and that attractive quality is imbued in whatever he is associated with: the Numinous Way, Islam, Reichsfolk.
To have someone like Myatt who keeps it real and who isn’t pretending to be something he is not is very meaningful when you consider all of these other thinkers of other organizations: all those messiahs; those mahatmas; those grand pubas; those high priests; or whatever. These egotistic titles get old quickly. David Myatt is just David Myatt – it’s simple. And in it’s simplicity there is something beautiful and down-to-earthy about it all – a down to earth beauty which many can feel and relate to.
What honor, respect, and even admiration Myatt has garnered thus, has never come from some grand title and make believe story of how he became bless with enlightenment. It all came gradually from the insights he fought life for, which he shared to anyone who would listen.
Knowing this much about Myatt; IF Anton Long is not David Myatt, then who is he compared to a Myatt. Even if Anton Long is actually a learned Professor who originated the concepts that became the ONA, and through Myatt, the Numinous Way and Reichsfolk – what good would he be? What use is a hidden Professor whose only talent is writing odd manuscripts, compared to a Myatt who gave life to those writings; who lived its sinister concepts in the streets; who innovated it into new things; and from it evolved himself into a new – more numinous – and insightful person. A person we can relate to, whose footsteps we can follow. Compared to this – what good is the Professor? What has this Professor Long DONE. What value does this Professor Long have to an ONA which values ACTION over words and theories? Anyone can write. Anyone can come up with theories and “Satanic” rites – Michael Ford did it, didn’t he, so did LaVey and even Crowley. But of all the writers and theorists that have come and gone and written books and founded organizations; how many Myatts have there been? By that I mean how many DOERS have there been? How many not only talked the talk, but walked the walk – getting busted by the law for actually doing sinister things? How many kept it real, struggled with life and found their own private enlightenment? How many engineered a Way so anyone who wished could also find that personal enlightenment?
Genuine Wisdom comes later in life from the mindless and passionate experiences of youth. Many of us know in his early years Myatt went out and caused trouble. From those earlier experiences during reflective maturity grows genuine wisdom. A wisdom born from Empirical Experience – from directly touching and tasting life. This erudite Professor – sheltered by colleges and books – what wisdom does he have to impart which has not already been written by others?
Myatt is the life force of Anton Long. If you take Myatt out of the equation, all that you have left is a phantom – a shadow without a face.
If we compare this alleged Professor Long with the thug David Myatt we see yet another difference that favors the thug: What kind of a college Professor can’t expand his mind beyond “Satanism,” and Satanic stuff; but yet some hoodlum Nazi like Myatt can expand his mind beyond “Satanism,” apprehend other Ways and philosophies; extract insights out of these and innovate and create new institutions? Because if we are honest with ourselves, for the past 30 years “Anton Long” seems to only write “Satanic” stuff for the ONA. There is more to Life, Nature, and the Cosmos than this “Satanism” stuff. Existence isn’t entirely dark and sinister. It’s also bright and beautiful; mysterious and awe inspiring – something Myatt often tried to capture in his poetry and writings. Rumi tried to also capture that awe inspiring essence of existence. Albert Einstein said you’re as good as dead if the universe doesn’t inspire a sense of awe and mystery inside you. But yet our alleged Professor Long is stuck in a dark satanic box somewhere in the corner of life – out of touch with the rest of Life.
It would be very productive I think if we left this subject as is: amorphous [left unanswered]. This way, if it benefits the ONA in some way to have these two be the same person, then we can make them the same person. Then if the sinister strategy calls for them to be two different people, then we’ll make them two different people. I don’t mean to demote DM into a utilizable product. Hey, we’re all friends, friends use each other 
Considering what the ONA has now become: a Myattian Triad of Reichsfolk Culture, the Numinous Way, and the Seventh Way: Does it even matter if DM and AL are the same or not? Since their three things have evolved into single triad or “continuum?”
I do have a bias, as do many here in our WSA. It’s hard to explain what exactly “Myatt/Long” is to the WSA. Although he or they are real people somewhere out in the real world; the essence, persona, character of “Myatt/Long” is itself a living indivisible aspect of the Seven Fold Way; Reichsfolk Culture; and the Numinous Way – which is the foundation of our WSA.
I have to admit, its kind of exciting to try and figure out who this mysterious Professor is – this hidden hand and “his” pen; who may have influenced and inspired Myatt. And through Myatt thousands of people – one of these people being me. It would be very interesting if Julie W was actually “Professor Anton Long,” a girl! That’s sinister. I hope it is but unfortunately Ms Julie has a different writing style [according to my judgment] and was she ever raised in Africa and the Far East? There was this one person who, some months ago, told me that Myatt is such a trickster that Anton Long and Blackwood are just Myatt. Professor Tom? But Blackwood doesn’t have an English accent! It can’t be DarkLogos, because DL lives here in America with the rest of us cool people.
A Professor professionally working as a teacher at a classy college, with a sense of the sinister strategy, and a desire to keep their professional job would not be “himself” as Anton Long the Professor and Anton Long the Satanic Grand Master. If Anton Long is a different person other then Myatt; this “Anton Long” is still a pen-name or sinister role of a different individual – one who is mostlike the most unlikely of suspects: Julie! She’s the perfect suspect. She’s a girl, educated, Myatt’s Confidante. Now if only somebody could tell me Julie W is a college teacher!
Chloe 352
