A US Soldier Allegedly Gave Classified Information To Satanic Neo-Nazis With The Goal Of Starting A New War

Ethan Melzer allegedly told members of the extremist group he was prepared to die in the attack if it meant starting another war in the Middle East.
Salvador HernandezBuzzFeed News Reporter


Posted on June 22, 2020

,
Melissa Sue Gerrits / AP
US Army soldiers at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, in January.
A US Army soldier allegedly gave sensitive and classified information to a Satanic neo-Nazi group, hoping to help the extremist group carry out an attack on his own unit, federal prosecutors said Monday.

"Ethan Melzer, a private in the U.S. Army, was the enemy within," Acting US Attorney Audrey Strauss said in a statement. "As alleged, Melzer was motivated by racism and hatred as he attempted to carry out this ultimate act of betrayal."

The soldier allegedly provided the group with his unit's location, strength, travel routes, and weaponry, prosecutors alleged, with the plan that the white supremacist group would share that information with jihadist terrorists and kick off a new war in the Middle East.

Melzer joined the US Army in 2018, and a year later, he allegedly joined an extremist group known as Order of the Nine Angles, or O9A. Members of the white supremacist group have, according to federal prosecutors, "espoused violent, neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic, and Satanic [beliefs], and have expressed admiration for both Nazis, such as Adolf Hitler, and Islamic jihadists, such as Usama Bin Laden."

When the 22-year-old soldier was told in April 2020 that he would be deployed to Turkey, he allegedly started to help plan an attack on his unit, using an encrypted app to communicate with members of O9A known as the "RapeWaffen Division."

"Ethan Melzer plotted a deadly ambush on his fellow soldiers in the service of a diabolical cocktail of ideologies laced with hate and violence," Assistant Attorney General John C. Demers said.
The group, investigators claim in court documents, has expressed belief in the "inequality of races," that Hitler was "sent by our gods to guide us to greatness," and that the Holocaust was a lie.

O9A has also praised the Nazis for the "practical expression of the Satanic spirit," and held that the world has become "perverted by, among other things, Judeo-Christian beliefs," leading members of the group to plot an overthrow of Western civilization.


Department of Justice

An image captured from Melzer's cellphone, including a text from the extremist group O9A, an Army beret, and a skull mask.

The goal of Melzer and the people he messaged was to instigate a "jihadi attack" during his deployment, killing his fellow service members, prosecutors said.

By May, Melzer allegedly had passed on information such as surveillance, security, and defense capabilities of the facility where he was deployed to an alleged member of al-Qaida.

In encrypted messages, prosecutors said, Melzer wrote that he believed the attack would cause a new war because of the number of deaths.

Melzer allegedly acknowledged that he could be killed in the attack as well, but he told members of the extremist group: "who gives a fuck."

"I would've died successfully," he allegedly said in a message, according to court documents, explaining that "another 10 year war in the Middle East would definitely leave a mark."

Prosecutors said Melzer had also been keeping tabs on other members of the military who were recently arrested for allegedly plotting attacks and linked to white supremacist groups.

"Don't want to end up like that faggot from who got caught while he was in the military," he allegedly wrote the group in April. "Bad shit."

He allegedly promised to send over more information, but before he could, he was interviewed by FBI agents and military investigators.

During the interview, prosecutors say he declared himself a traitor to the US and admitted to his role in the plot.

"He turned his back on his country and his unit while aligning himself with members of the neo-Nazi group O9A," FBI Assistant Director William Sweeney Jr. said.

The soldier, who is from Louisville, Kentucky, was charged with conspiring to murder US nationals, attempting to murder US nationals, and conspiring to murder US military service members, as well as attempting to provide and providing material support to terrorists, and conspiring to murder and maim in a foreign country, among other federal charges.

If convicted, he could face up to life in prison.

Salvador Hernandez is a reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in Los Angeles.

U.S. soldier confesses to plotting attack on unit with neo-Nazi group


A photo found in Ethan Melzer's iCloud account that was included in the criminal complaint shows a knife, a neo-Nazi book, a skull mask and a U.S. Army beret. Photo courtesy of U.S. Attorney' Office. 

YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THE RED BULL 

THE ORDER OF NINE ANGELS IS A SATANIC ARYAN SECT, MORE OCCULT THAN OVERTLY POLITICAL EXCEPT FOR IT BEING INFLUENCED BY EVOLA AND OTHER FASCIST OCCULTISTS. THIS IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR SATANISTS. THE FBI MAY BE CONFUSING O9A WITH A SIMILARLY NAMED NEO NAZI ORG IN GERMANY 

ITS MATERIALS ARE ON LINE, IT WAS FORMED BY A COUPLE OF FRIENDS, AND IS NEITHER OF ANY POLITICAL OR OCCULT SIGNIFICANCE.

MOST SATANISTS ARE RIGHT WING POLITICALLY,DESPITE CLAIMING TO FOLLOW THE LEFT HAND PATH

THE RELIGION OF AYN RAND ANTON LAVEY CALLED THE CHURCH SATAN,  ARYANISTS, LIKE THE TEMPLE OF SET, BROKE AWAY FROM COS AFTER ACHIEVING THE HIGHER ORDER GRADES.

THE SATANIC TEMPLE IS ON THE TRUE LEFT HAND PATH BY BEING LEFT LIBERTARIANS. 

THE MASK IS FOR THE BAND THE 'MISFITS' A COMMON PROTEST MASK RIGHT OR LEFT PRIOR TO THE USE OF GUY FAWKES.

THE PERSON IN THE STORY IS A SINGLE DELUDED INDIVIDUAL THE FBI HAS ABOUT AS MUCH EVIDENCE TO PROVE HE WAS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A NUTTER 

AS THEY HAVE FOR CATTLE MUTILATIONS CASES THEY INVESTIGATE

June 23 (UPI) -- A U.S. Army private has confessed to planning a terrorist attack with a satanic neo-Nazi group to kill as many members of his unit while deployed overseas, prosecutors said.

Ethan Phelan Melzer, 22, has been charged in a 19-page indictment unsealed Monday with a slew of terrorism offenses for sharing sensitive information about his unit with members of the Order of the Nine Angels that prosecutors described as "an occult-based neo-Nazi and racially motivated violent extremist group." 

OH HE SHARED IT TO AN EMAIL ADDRESS FOR AN OBSCURE SATANIC GROUP

"Ethan Melzer, a private in the U.S. Army, was the enemy within," Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Audrey Strauss said in a statement. "Melzer allegedly attempted to orchestrate a murderous ambush on his own unit by unlawfully revealing its location, strength and armaments to a neo-Nazi, anarchist, white supremacist group."

ANARCHISTS ARE ANTIFA OPPOSED TO NAZI WHITE POWER

The Louisville, Ky., native was arrested June 10 after his plot was thwarted by the Federal Bureau of investigation and the U.S. Army in late May, prosecutors said in a statement, stating Melzer's plan was fueled by "a diabolical cocktail of ideologies laced with hate and violence."

"Our women and men in uniform risk their lives for our country, but they should never face such peril at the hands of one of their own," said Assistant Attorney General John C. Demers.


THE FBI CREATES A FALSE FLAG CONSPIRACY 

According to the unsealed indictment, Melzer joined the Army in 2018 and joined O9A the year after.

Prior to planning the attack, Melzer consumed propaganda from O9A and the Islamic State as well as other groups, prosecutors said, adding they found in his iCloud account an IS-issued text that describes attacks and killings of U.S. personnel.

After being told in April that his unit was to deploy overseas, he used an encrypted message application to provide information  of Oto members9A and RapeWaffen Division, a U.S. neo-Nazi terrorist network that follows O9A philosophy, "to solicit assistance for a mass casualty attack on his U.S. Army unit once it deployed to Turkey," the unsealed complaint said.

In late May, he transmitted information including his unit's size, anticipated travel routes, weaponry and defensive capabilities. TO WHO?Melzer and his co-conspirators planned what they called a "jihadi attack" with the objective of creating "mascal," meaning mass casualties, with the purpose of starting another war in the Middle East.

During a late-May interview, Melzer confessed to his role in the plot and declared himself to be "a traitor against the United States whose conduct was tantamount to treason," prosecutors said. 

THIS IS ALL BASED ON HIS SOLE CONFESSION THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY EXCEPT IN HIS AND THE FBI'S IMAGINATIONS

Melzer has been charged with conspiring and attempting to murder U.S. nationals, conspiring to and attempting to murder military service members, providing and attempting to provide material support to terrorists and conspiring to murder and maim in a foreign country and faces life in prison if convicted.

"Melzer declared himself to be a traitor against the United States and described his own conduct as tantamount to treason -- we agree," said FBI Assistant Director William F. Sweeney, Jr. "He turned his back on his country and his unit while aligning himself with members of the neo-Nazi group O9A. Today, he is in custody and facing a lifetime of service -- behind bars -- which is appropriate given the severity of the conduct we allege today." 


 THE ONA/ON9 IS A PHILOSOPHY OF NECHAYEV NIHILISM NOT ANARCHISM 
AS ANTON LONG IT'S FOUNDER CLAIMS 

FBI: The Order of Nine Angles • MuckRock
https://www.muckrock.com › foi › united-states-of-america-10 › fbi-the-or...
Sep 28, 2018 - The Order of Nine Angles is a secretive Satanist/Occultist group, which comes from the ... (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Myatt).



FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH

A brief history of the Order of Nine Angles. The ONA is the second oldest codified school of Satanism. It has been around for 40 years.

https://archive.org/details/OnaHistory/page/n9/mode/2up

A Modern Mage - Anton Long and The Order of Nine Angles

https://archive.org/details/AModernMage-AntonLongAndTheOrderOfNineAngles

Abyssal Anthology of David Myatt aka Anton Long
by Hagur (Philippe De Coster)
Topics Traditional Satanism, Dark Philosophy, Occultism, History
Language English
Presenting here an Anthology of David Myatt founder of the Order of Nine Angles. He was also a Neo-Nazi, and later converted himself to the Islam, the extreme Isles. The purpose of his conversion is not clear. While he has achieved positive things, he is also known as a dangerous man. The compiler of this Anthology does not agree with all the ideas and acting of David Myatt, let the reader judge for himself. The life and work of Myatt belongs to history, and this is the purpose of the compilerâs work as found hereby.
https://archive.org/details/AbyssalAnthologyOfDavidMyattAkaAntonLong/page/n3/mode/2up

Establishment Orthodoxy About The O9A

°°°

pdf version:

O9A: The Establishment Orthodoxy
(pdf)

°°°°°

Text version:

There are three main problems with items about or mentioning the Order Of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) published in mainstream Media, by certain anti-fascist groups, and by others.

Problems which the unprecedented reportage of the O9A in 2018 and 2019 have clearly revealed, with items about or mentioning the O9A published (i) in mainstream British newspapers such as The Independent, The Sun, The Guardian, and The Daily Telegraph, (ii) in reports issued by anti-fascist groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and “Hope not hate”, and (iii) in the music section of the newspaper LA Weekly, and on the popular youth-and-music-orientated Quietus website.

§ The first problem is that the reporting is decidedly Old Aeon: decidedly part of the Establishment, of the status quo, with reliance on a dialectic of, a struggle between, conflicting opposites such as “good and evil”, “fascist and anti-fascist”, “nazis and anti-fascists”, “racist and anti-racist”, “Right Hand Path and Left Hand Path”, “Satanist and Christian”, and on clichés such as “we are anti-[this], pro-[that]…”

§ The second problem is that the reporting reflects what has now become the accepted modern orthodoxy, by the Establishment and the Media and by anti-fascist groups, regarding both the O9A and Mr Myatt. Which orthodoxy is the deception that the O9A is a Satanist and a “neo-nazi” group; that Mr Myatt is Anton Long, was the founder and “leader” of the O9A, is a Satanist, is still a neo-nazi, and is still pursuing a subversive or a terrorist agenda by means of the O9A.

Acceptance of or belief in this orthodoxy by journalists, by anti-fascists, and by others, means that journalists, anti-fascists, and others (i) do not bother with providing, or feel it is unnecessary to provide, evidence which has probative value in regard to such orthodox claims and allegations and beliefs about the O9A and about Myatt, and (ii) do not bother with doing, or feel it is unnecessary to do, their own research into the O9A and the life of Myatt, and so do not inform their readers of the necessary wider context, which – in the matter of the O9A – is the “sinister-numinous” esoteric philosophy and methods of the O9A {1}, and which – in the case of Myatt – is his documented post-2010 rejection of extremism {2} and his mystical philosophy of pathei-mathos {3}.

Thus, in respect of O9A esotericism and praxises the wider context is that the O9A is neither Satanist nor neo-nazi but has suggested that those reaching the third stage of the decades-long O9A Seven Fold Way might usefully, as learning experiences and for a year to eighteen months, undertake an Insight Role as a neo-nazi and/or as a ‘satanist’, after which they move to other tasks and other learning experiences such a living alone in the wilderness for between three and six months. {4}

§ The third problem is that those who report on or who write about the O9A often rely on or quote from two forgeries, respectively titled Diablerie and Bealuwes Gast. Both are claimed to have been written by “Anton Long”, are purported to be autobiographical; are assumed to document the hidden O9A aspects of Myatt’s life, and thus are regarded as “proof” that Myatt=Long.

However, both Diablerie and Bealuwes Gast have been described by Myatt as forgeries {5}. In addition, as mentioned in A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie the “evil deeds” that are described
                  “are lame or laughable or sound like the adventures of a frat boy” {6}

with the text containing
                  “clipped sentences of the type often found in first-person ‘action’ novels or comic strips of the Dick Tracey type. It is as if Diablerie is pulp fiction, a first-person narrative of fictional anti-hero and evil Satanist, Anton Long, with – and importantly – some quotes from the writings of the real person who the author wants people to believe is the inspiration for his fictional Anton Long. Quotes inserted as ‘background’ for credibility.”

As described in Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery, the writer of Bealuwes Gast
                  “egoistically boasts that “he does not care,” that he has “exulted in life” and that he is “a nasty piece of work,” all of which statements and sentiments are profoundly at odds with everything Myatt has written post-2006, and in many of which writings he expresses remorse for his decades of extremism […]
                  The sinister sections – detailing Anton Long’s experiences and “exulting in life” as a sorcerer – are rather contrived, fanciful, and unconvincing, not to say more suited to a work of fiction.” {7}

The author of Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery then goes on to describe the errors made by the forger.

In addition, as noted in a little-known and humorous O9A text published in 2015:
                  “Diablerie, like the role of ‘outer representative’, was part of that Sinister Game which we played for several decades. Diablerie was a work of fiction written by a certain friend of mine, and contained some (not many but just enough) facts, and designed as it was to not only create a certain mythos, a certain mystique, but also to test, confuse, mislead, entice, and perhaps inspire a few individuals to do their own primary scholarly research and so discover the truth.” A Most Brief Discourse On The History Of The Order of Nine Angles {8}

The ponderous sub-title and the Preface of A Most Brief Discourse On The History Of The Order of Nine Angles are a homage to John Dee’s A True & Faithful Relation of what Passed for Many Yeers Between Dr. John Dee and Some Spirits published in 1659 by Meric Casaubon.

The Preface of A Most Brief Discourse, complete with archaic spelling and archaic capitalization and relevant as it is to understanding what part of the O9A’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus means, is:
                  “What is here presented might well be deemed and termed A Work of Darknesse. A work by some gladly believed; by others an entertainment; because it is very possible that every Reader will make of it what they will. For the World is full of imposture. Yet there was a Time when sorcery was the delight of many mortals, and many and various Divels were believed in and when things impossible to ordinary sense were believed done by Nature.
                  Finally, if there were any such thing really as Divels then surely they would appear to such as did call upon them as a Mythos and a Mysterium Esoteric even to this day. I read over the transcript exactly and taking note of the most remarkable passages (as they appeared unto me) I present them here for Anton Long was indeed a myth maker, the best sort of Sorcerer.”

That journalists, anti-fascists, some academics, and others have assumed that both Diablerie and Bealuwes Gast are genuine manuscripts written by Myatt proves (i) the efficacy of the O9A’s Labyrinthos Mythologicus, and (ii) that such people have not undertaken “their own primary scholarly research” into both the O9A and the life of Myatt, and (iii) that they have accepted or believe in the prevailing Establishment and Media orthodoxy regarding the O9A and Myatt.

§ The fourth problem, deriving from the previous three, is that those who report on the O9A and who write about Myatt do so in ignorance of the facts and thus present a prejudiced, a biased, view of the O9A and Myatt. A biased view which in the case of politically active anti-fascist groups is propagandistic and often deliberately biased, driving as such bias often does from an irrational dislike or a hatred of those deemed to be their “enemies”, in this case the O9A and/or Myatt. A prejudice and a hatred enshrined in the anti-fascist motto “Never Forget, Never Forgive, Never Again”.

Thus do such anti-fascists invent and propagate rumours and hearsay, and make malicious unproven allegations about those deemed to be their enemies {9}. And thus do they make derogatory remarks about or try to demean those deemed to be their enemies, while hypocritically asserting that they champion “hope” not “hate”.

Thus do they also unknowingly or knowingly make use of forgeries, and fabricate “evidence”, such as misattribute quotations, and claim without providing evidence from primary sources that a certain person said or wrote “this” or “that”. {10}

Thus do they make assumptions and claims – without providing evidence from primary sources – about who is behind pseudonyms such as “Anton Long” and “dark logos”, and thus do they commit fallacies such as (i) Incomplete Evidence, where evidence which does not support their opinion or their view or their claims or their propaganda is omitted, (ii) consensus gentium, stating that since many people believe a thing it must be true, (iii) illicit transference, when for example they argue from the particular to the general, (iv) argumentum ad personam, where they appeal to the personal likes and prejudices of people, (v) appeal to authority, where they reference the opinion of someone regarded by them as an “expert”, and (vi) ignoratio elenchi, where an irrelevant or personal topic is introduced in order to distract attention, the most popular form of which is argumentum ad hominem where claims or allegations are made about a person or a group, or where they make derogatory or abusive remarks about or try to demean a person or a group.

Thus do they – in a classic example of argumentum ad hominem – speculate about the “motives” and the character of those involved with the O9A, and thus do they – in classic examples of presumption, bias and partiality – write such things as “it’s hard to take anything Myatt says at face value, so successfully has he enshrouded himself in self-contradictory disinformation”, {11} and that many of those they allege are involved with the O9A “are deceptive and manipulative so that what they say or write cannot be trusted”.

Conclusion

Such problems are not unique to those who report on or who mention the O9A and Myatt. Rather, they are indicative of two things.

§ First, they are indicative of the nature – the physis, the character, the being – of many individuals in the modern world. A human nature apparently unchanged in so many despite (i) the advantages in all Western lands of State sponsored primary and secondary education for children and young people, and the advantages afforded by tertiary education, and (ii) the existence of libraries (such as The Bodleian. The British Library, The Library of Congress) and the accessibility of many primary sources together with a scholarly tradition dating back over a thousand years.

For the character that is so indicated is one or more of the following: of an acceptance of a contemporary orthodoxy; of adhering to an ideology and placing that ideology before facts personally discovered; of believing what some ideologue or demagogue states is “fact” or “truth”; of being superficial, populist, unscholarly, quick to judge, opinionated, presumptive, and prejudiced.

§ Second, they are indicative of the nature – the physis, the character, the being – of most modern Media, from printed newspapers, to “social media”, to printed and digital reports and television “documentaries” produced for political or idealogical or propaganda purposes or which reflect contemporary orthodoxy about a subject, a person, or a group.

The nature of which Media is often superficial, populist, unscholarly, quick to judge, opinionated, presumptive, prejudiced, with a tendency or a need to sensationalize certain stories or events and stereotype certain individuals.

            We know and we understand that our efforts, in items such as this, to document or to draw attention to the flaws in most reportage of the O9A and of Myatt will not affect most of those who because of such flawed reportage accept the modern orthodoxy about the O9A and about Myatt and which orthodoxy is embedded in and reinforced and added to by such reportage.

We also know and accept that politically active anti-fascist groups and individuals will continue with their often prejudiced and often hateful propaganda against “us” because they deem us to be their “enemies”, just as they will continue to try to denigrate and smear us, and continue to try and agitate for the authorities (the police and the intelligence services) to immediately investigate “us” {12} for so-called “hate speech” and for “encouraging” acts of terrorism {13} with a view to the O9A being proscribed as a “terrorist” organization, with its literature banned, and with those deemed to be its “leaders” or “members” imprisoned. {14}

Such causal, Old Aeon, shenanigans by such Old Aeon individuals aside, we know and understand that such reportage and such activities to suppress the heretical dissent of our sub-culture has engendered in a few individuals, and only in a few individuals, a desire to undertake a detailed study of O9A works with a view to discovering for themselves the true nature – the physis – of O9A esotericism; a physis evident in the term the sinister-numinous tradition, with that tradition founded on and re-presenting in a modern way an ancient Greco-Roman pagan and hermetic mysticism {1}.

Such causal, Old Aeon, shenanigans have also engendered in a minority of those few individuals a desire to undertake a study of David Myatt’s life and works with a view to discovering for themselves his Aeonic legacy {15}.

Which is reason enough for us, and for the Occult cognoscenti who like us possess an Aeonic perspective, to amusingly smile at those who have designated Myatt and us and the O9A as their enemies.

Rachael Stirling
June 2019 ev

{1} (i) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/the-esoteric-hermeticism-of-the-order-of-nine-angles/
(ii) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2018/03/22/quintessence-of-the-o9a/
(iii) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/pagan-o9a/

{2} Refer for example to:
(i) Understanding and Rejecting Extremism, 2013, ISBN-13: 978-1484854266. Gratis Open Access pdf version: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/rejecting-extremism/
(ii) Myngath: Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life, 2013, ISBN-13: 978-1484110744. Gratis Open Access pdf version: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/myngath-2/

{3} Refer for example to https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/myatt-mystic-philosophy-second-edition.pdf

{4} A modern, progressive, version of the Seven Fold Way – which does not involve those specific Insight Roles – is given in https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/7fw-a-modern-guide/

See also (i) The Multiform O9A, https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2018/02/18/the-multiform-o9a/ and (ii) The Evolution Of the O9A, at http://www.o9a.org/wp-content/uploads/o9a-evolution.pdf

{5} https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/concerning-the-occult/

{6} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/a-sceptics-review-of-diablerie/

{7} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/bealuwes-gast/

{8} The text in question is A Most Brief Discourse On The History Of The Order of Nine Angles. The text is available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/o9a-history/

{9} One of the malicious allegations of a certain anti-fascist group in respect of the O9A is their attempt to link the O9A to paedophilia and to the promotion of misogyny and rape.

As so-called “evidence” of paedophilia they cite the case of two members of a neo-nazi group convicted of paedophilia, claim that group is linked to the O9A, and then in a classic case of the fallacy of illicit transference use those two examples to besmirch the O9A, despite the fact that O9A literature clearly states that
             “individuals of certain proclivities, involving children, are regarded by us as dishonourable individuals who most certainly are not of our kind.” Source: https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/o9a-and-children-v2.pdf

Similarly in respect of their smear regarding misogyny and rape, for they quote some things written by a few individuals claiming to be neo-nazis, again generalize from such examples, and neglect to mention that the O9A has and always has had Sapphic nexions, has published a Sapphic novel – Breaking The Silence Down – and has, according to an academic:
             “more female supporters than either the Church of Satan or the Temple of Set [and] more women with children.” Source: J.R Lewis, Satanic Attitudes, in Asbjorn Dyrendal, James R. Lewis, Jesper A. Petersen (editors), The Invention of Satanism, Oxford University Press, 2015. p.191, pp.194–196.

In addition, the O9A Code of Kindred Honour, one of the foundations of O9A esoteric philosophy, enshrines gender equality.

In respect of rape, O9A literature clearly states that rapists are suitable candidates for culling. See, for example, https://wyrdsister.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/culling-o9a-code-v3.pdf which describes a real-life incident.

Thus, such attempts to besmirch the O9A, and the failure of anti-fascists and others to quote relevant O9A texts, are sufficient to reveal just how hateful, deceitful, duplicitous, and hypocritical such anti-fascists are.

{10} Multiple examples, relating to the O9A and Myatt, are given in the articles (i) Exposing Twelve Basic Errors: Or, How To Spread Fake News, available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/fake-news/ and (ii) O9A Transgression And Subversion, available at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2018/12/03/o9a-transgression-and-subversion/

{11} Beyond The Iron Gates: How Nazi-Satanists Infiltrated the UK Underground, The Quietus, November 27th, 2018.

{12} Violent neo-Nazi movements endangering UK are driven by Satanists who want global race war, The Sun newspaper, 22 Feb 2019.

{13} Neo‑Nazis hijack gaming groups to spread hate against Muslims, The Times newspaper, March 23 2019.

{14} That the O9A has no “leader” and no “members” and is not an organization but rather is an Occult sub-culture or movement (or an “idea” and a mythos) is never mentioned by those who report on or who write about the O9A. Neither does such a reality form part of the modern orthodoxy about the O9A.

{15} Three different views are given at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/remembering-mr-myatt/

 

The Art of Reversal (Commentary on Gabriel’s Anarcho-Satanism)

Dec

07

2024

comments

From Aleph's Heretical Domain by Aleph Skoteinos

Satanism and anarchism have a long history together, despite the relatively recent history or rightoid or fascist Satanist movements beginning with the Church of Satan, and anarchist Satanism remains a strong and relevant current, perhaps now more than ever. So it is always important to explore the possibilities of anarchist Satanism, and in this regard I would like to bring attention to a talk was given by an anarchist Satanist (or “anarcho-Satanist”) named Gabriel at a conference on anarchist theory called the BASTARD Conference in 2017, whose contents were published in a book called Evil, The BASTARD Chronicles 2017 by Ardent Press. I had only recently heard of its existence, and had only seen the conference in the last weekend. I’ve been told that I can’t get that book anywhere anymore, but the conference is still available in the form of podcasts on the Immediatism website. Given the importance of anarchist Satanism, I believe it is worth examining Gabriel’s concept of Anarcho-Satanism.

To begin with, though, we might as well start from the end of Gabriel’s lecture, because that’s where he addresses the definition of his Anarcho-Satanism. For Gabriel, Anarcho-Satanism is essentially a reinterpretation of satanic mythology through the lens of anarchist political thought in order to a create a vehicle through which the cultural values of anarchism might be communicated. These form him include anti-authoritarianism, voluntary association, mutual aid, solidarity, autonomy, and direct action. It is also framed as the pursuit of a positive social movement away from injustice and oppression (which basically means that he sees anarchism as a form of the Positive Political Project), which is effected by undermining religious apologetics for injustice and oppression. Gabriel also defines Anarcho-Satanism pretty rigidly as atheistic and anti-theistic opposed to “elite mysticism” and any belief in the supernatural (Reddit). Of course, it also critiques the state and corporate hierarchies as being basically based on the hierarchy of the church, which all rely on the cultural preconceptions of a celestial hierarchy. And of course, Gabriel treats Satan as an archetype, a symbol of anarchism, because Satan opposes the hierarchies of God. Gabriel imagines a Satan organising angelic labourers against the boss that is God and struggling for equality as either a political prisoner in Hell, an escaped fugitive, an illegal immigrant, or a refugee, making an unauthorised crossing into Eden (mind you, he never intended on making Eden his home). I suppose I can’t help but think, bold of him to assume the whole third of the heavenly host were workers, as though there were ever workers among angels.

Anarcho-Satanism is seen as something that utilises the allegory of Satan in both scripture and romantic literature to highlight the imbuement of religious narrative in popular culture. Satan is the most recognisable and almost universally accepted symbol of rebellion against divine hierarchical authority. Gabriel argues that myths connect the conscious and unconscious desires of individuals and cultures through symbolic association, and further extolls Anarcho-Satanism as using “reason and logic” to see beyond hierarchy and find ways to deconstruct hierarchical institutions, but also imagine beyond its scope, and the reimagining of the dominant cultural framework is taken as the logical starting point for it. Already, then, one can see that Gabriel’s project operates in rigid conformity to the presumptions of the Enlightenment, and is destined to encounter the problems that plague the dogma of rationalism. Reason in abstract remains the central value determinant by which to organise the social body.

There are two initial questions in that begin his lecture. The first question is, “is God evil?”. The second question is, “is Satan good?”. The operative point is that to simply ask these questions is to enter the territory of blasphemy, an offense to God that is still restricted or criminalised in at least half the world, and is even still punishable by death in some theocracies. Even the government of the United States, which is at least in theory supposed to be a secular government, leans heavily upon the authority of God (what Gabriel calls “the Abrahamic deity”) for all formal displays of political power and legitimacy as well as the historical bases thereof: oaths to office, Presidential speeches, flag pledges, predictive currency, the swearing in of witnesses in courts of law, Manifest Destiny expansionism, the christening of warships, all invoke the Christian God as a matter of course. For Gabriel, these are deliberate evocations, meant to forge a spiritual link between the worldly hierarchy of the state and the hierarchical authority of God. Human states borrow from God’s authority to legitimise their existence and their actions, and in so doing they attempt to borrow the implications of God’s authority, such as God’s alleged attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, and eternity, and this is at least partially in order to protect the conditions and effects of hierarchy from being dissolved or even just reformed.

As I see it, the significance of this understanding of the state is that it presents the state or social hierarchy as a kind of magical activity, or at least based at root upon a particular kind of magical activity. The central purpose of this activity is consolidate power and authority by identifiying it with the authority of God, the One God Universe, or perhaps something functionally equivalent. Since the God of Christian monotheism and similar religious systems is supposed to be situated beyond the judgement of his creation, so powerful as to be literally invincible, and so benevolent as to be utterly beyond reproach, it makes sense for human states to attempt to borrow from God’s authority by invocation in order to legitimise both their existence and their actions, in the hopes of also borrowing God’s alleged attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, and eternity, thus allowing them to perpetuate their power and authority indefinitely. But all of this also entails the replication of God’s hierarchical cosmos on Earth by humans, populating the world with the will and authority of God. Gabriel is in this sense describing the arcanum of the Right Hand Path within “Western Occutlism”; that is, the “Great Arcanum” described by the occultist Eliphas Levi, in which the goal of magic is seen as gaining authority, power, or rulership over the whole universe by identifying yourself with the Godhead (which usually still just means the Christian God).

The conception of the state as being linked to God’s authority also means that to defy the authority of the state would also be to go against God himself. In the Biblical or at least Christian narrative, such defiance is obviously represented by Satan, the chief antagonist of God. One of Gabriel’s most importants points is the reversal of the moral position of Satan within this very narrative. To that end Gabriel establishes that Satan is assumed to be malicious because Satan always resists and conspires to destroy God’s divine authority, and that this assumption rests on no one ever comparing the actions of God and Satan together. Gabriel then of course makes exactly this comparison, but in so doing we also revisist the nature of the Christian God and thereby the ontological authoritarianism of the One God Universe.

Gabriel illustrates astutely that one of God’s first creative acts, besides the alleged creation of the universe, was to establish fundamental inequality in Heaven by creating a stratified hierarchy with himself at the top and a division of classes consisting of progressively less powerful beings under himself, who in turn exist only to glorify and perpetuate his will. Those beings are what we refer to as the angels and archangels. Then God creates humans, who, despite being supposedly the most beloved of God’s creatures, being made “in his image”, are nonetheless the lowest order of the spiritual hierarchy, being below the angels and far below God himself. As Gabriel pointed out earlier in his lecture, within God’s hierarchy, angels are God’s lieutenants, humans are God’s subjects, and demons are God’s enemies. Gabriel argues that, despite the cultural Christian assumption to the contrary, the existence of such a hierarchy surely impacted on Satan’s desire to rebel against God. It seems sensible to follow from this, though, that angels must have some desires of their own despite their purpose being to glorify and execute the will of God. After all, Satan wanted to contest the authority of God, and a third of the heavenly host wanted to join him. But while Satan is accused of envious motives, but God openly proclaims himself to be a jealous god in his transmission of the Ten Commandments. And that’s the least of God’s issues, if you remember God’s coveting, his penchant for mass murder, him being responsible for literally everything that happens in Exodus, his refusal to share knowledge with humans, him procreating with at least one human girl without her consent (and this is after he condemns some of his angels for having sex with human women), and, of course, his consistent failure and/or refusal to prevent countless tragedies and atrocities suffered by the humans that he claims to love so much.

One of the really interesting things about Gabriel’s project here is the parallel that he draw between the character of Satan and the historical anarchist projects. In the Christian myth, Satan rebels against God and is initially (at least apparently) defeated, but then goes on to tempt Adam and Eve to disobey God in the form of the serpent by convincing them to eat the apple of the tree of knowledge. Gabriel argues that this parallels with the historical experience of anarchist projects represented in the Spanish Civil War, the Free Territory of Ukraine, and other anarchist defeats in various wars and conflicts, on the grounds that anarchists know that even defeat does not end the ongoing struggle for liberty against oppression. With this comparison, the parallel in play is that both Satan and anarchism can be seen to embody Non Serviam (“I will not serve”) by itself for itself. Even if Satan and the anarchists may be defeated, they don’t care that they are defeated, because simply being defeated is not the end of their struggle. They fight anyway, they fight without end, because resistance goes on and the struggle is life. Non Serviam is the creed of Satanists, Luciferians (insofar as there is a difference), and, in many ways, anarchists as well, in that both Satan and anarchy speak at least one truth: resistance, or rather rebellion.

In this regard I see fit to interject on the subject of the LaVeyan Satanism, and similarly rightoid or outright fascistic versions of Satanism, who all position their Satanism as the ideology of Social Darwinism, by which is meant the idea that humans should be organised in social hierarchies where “the strong” have the right to oppress “the weak” (which they seem to view as the antithesis of Christianity, no doubt based on their subgraduate readings of Friedrich Nietzsche). These kinds of Satanist are clearly silly. If LaVey had even one point it’s that stupidity should be painful, if only so that LaVey himself should have suffered quite a violent seizure before ever getting around to writing his “Pentagonal Revisionism”. It is truly stupid to think that Satan ever believed that “the strongest” deserves to rule. If he did, then, if we were to follow the standard narrative of the Fall, Satan would surely not have tempted Adam and Eve in Eden, let alone sent temptations to the rest of humankind, because such actions would be inconsistent with that belief. If Satan was defeated by God and his angels, exercising their self-professed right to rule Heaven by force of arms, and if Satan believed that the strongest have the natural right to rule, then to consistently observe that ideology would mean acquiesing to God as the rightful ruler/dictator of the universe, on the grounds that defeating him grants him the right to dominate the universe, whereas repeatedly contesting God’s rule through temptation implies a denial of God’s professed right to dominate the universe and the power that supports this right. But, of course, there is still the question, was Satan defeated? As we will see, the answer is not so simple, even for Christianity.

Another operative point for Gabriel is that demonisation through mythology plays a role in social marginalisation. Those who identify with the good characters of myth frequently weaponise the notion of evil against marginalised groups by associating them with evil characters, which in turn creates a kind of social leverage for oppressors. Switching the position of good and evil, by recasting Satan as good and God as evil, is meant to disrupt the moral weaponisation of mythology and question how the mythological positioning of good and evil are constructed. This may be how anarchists have often used the myth of Satan’s fall to express anarchist principles. It’s hear, though, that we see a clear extension of the Romantic Satanist tradition, given the reference to the Miltonian Satan and the legacy of “satanic” poetry afterwards. It is clearly still a relevant tradition, but I think it does not quite go far enough. To go further still would be to flip the script on good and evil itself, and not just by association with the characters of God and Satan. Instead I would say that we could pursue another direction: not simply the idea that God is evil and Satan is good, but rather to associate all the violence, terror, and horror of God’s rule with the effect of the principle of his “good” and his “order”. But in this, Satan does still figure as a mythological personification of resistance against authority.

Another interesting parallel yet again focused on God more than Satan concerns a comparison between the coercive threats of divine law and those of human law. In this, Gabriel refers to a comparison attributed to George Byron (better known as “Lord” Byron). In this argument, God’s threat to punish people by eternally damning them to Hell is a reflection of worldly threats to punish people by incarcerating them in prisons. The punished subject is in both cases disembodied, whether supernaturally or in the sense of being cut off from the body politic. Both God and the state label people as demons or devils, whether that means sinners or simply criminals (and a criminal is just someone who happens to have broken the law, and that means any law), in order to disempower those individuals by cutting them off from the order of human life as linked to the order of God. Gabriel argues that Byron’s embrace of Romantic Satanism in his poetry serves to demonstrate how this process of demonisation can be internalised in such a way that allows it to be reclaimed as a source of personal empowerment instead of social disempowerment. Very basically, this is the concept of reclamation, or, alternatively, detournment, in effect. In the same Gabriel presents another relatively simple connection between this Satan and later anarchists, who face the violence of the agents of the state (or the collective violence of capitalist nations/societies) with the fulsome support of the Right.

Another very important aspect of Gabriel’s critique of Christianity is that God’s association with authoritarianism and state power was not necessarily the product of Romantic Satanist poetry or the Enlightenment, but instead (perhaps necessarily) goes back far beyond that era. Gabriel locates an early link between God and the state in the conversion of the Roman emperor Constantine I during the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. According to Christian sources at least, in the year 312, Constantine looked up at the sun in the sky and saw the sign of the cross hanging above it, along with Greek words saying, “in this sign, you will conquer”, and then he ordered his soldiers to place that sign upon their shields. After this battle, Constantine assumed leadership of the Roman Empire, and less than a century later, with the Edict of Thessalonica in the year 380, Christianity became the official and sole state religion of Rome. This meant renouncing the former pre-Christian Roman polytheism, which along with all belief systems apart from Christianity was thus criminalised. When the Roman Empire collapsed, the Vatican hierarchy became the official centre of Christian religious authority of Europe (though, by the time the Roman Empire collapsed, the Catholic Church had already become more central to Christian spiritual life than the Roman emperor). The Catholic Church sought to convert as much of the world to its brand of Christianity as possible and authorised violent persecutions of polytheists and sometimes even other Christians in order to achieve this aim. The Catholic Church also sought to conquer the so-called “Holy Land” of Judea and opposed the growing influence of Islam in the Middle East, and thus issued a series of religious wars of conquest known as The Crusades to achieve its aims of capturing Jerusalem and asserting dominance over Muslims. Of course, the majority of these Crusades were failures, and the entire campaign finally ended in defeat for the Christian armies. That much and more is the effective history of Christian power: a religion whose mission to “save” the whole human species through conversion, married to an institution whose function is to expand its authority and influence wherever possible. It really is a match made in Heaven, isn’t it?

One other aspect of Gabriel’s argument that I think truly extends his Anarcho-Satanist critique concerns the image of the Baphomet as presented by Eliphas Levi. This discussion is preceded by the mention of the Roman god Faunus during the discussion of Roman Christianity. Faunus was one of the oldest of the pre-Christian Roman deities who was also indigenous to Roman culture, but he was also equated with the Greek god Pan over time. Faunus was a god of forests, plains, and fields who was also associated with sexuality and fertility, and he was apparently still worshipped in Rome during the decline of polytheism, even despite the criminalisation of polytheism by Christian emperors. Worshippers of Faunus may have preferred polytheism and whatever values they may have associated with it over Christianity and its associated values, being more inclined to the inherent diversity of polytheism over the restrictive singularity of monotheism. Then, from there, after discussing the Catholic Church, Gabriel goes over the basic story of the Knights Templar being accused of worshipping Baphomet, and then moves on to the subject of Eliphas Levi, who derived from the pagan imagery of Faunus, Pan, and the Egyptian Goat of Mendes, depicted Baphomet as a goat-headed humanoid creature with wings. This led to Baphomet’s strong and enduring cultural association with Satanism and the demonic, and it’s here that we get to one of the really interesting parts of Gabriel’s argument.

Gabriel argues that the image of Baphomet embodies several anarchistic characteristics by itself. Being a intersexed mixture of female and male body forms, the body of Baphomet defies the dominant socially constructed gender binary, and for this reason may make for an effective symbol of gender conformity in comparison to what is traditionally a strictly male, patriarchal, human Godhead. The meme that Jesus was trans just doesn’t work in that same way. Even the animal symbolism such as the goat head, the bird-like feathered wings, and the serpent can have a meaning beyond Eliphas Levi’s intended symbolism about the unity of opposites within the metaphysical binary of Western Occultism. Their mingling with the human form may also entail a disruption of the hierarchy between humans and animals, showing a plurality of species together, in addition to the traditional unity of opposites. This would position Baphomet as a symbol of natural biodiversity, against the anthropocentric worldview of Christianity and similar religions which is at the centre of the current ecological crisis. But then you get to “solve et coagula” and Gabriel’s argument starts getting clunky. The Latin words “solve” and “coagula” that appear on Baphomet’s arms, translated respectively as “solvent” and “coagulant”, were intended by Levi to refer to some of the principles of alchemy, but they can also be interpreted as a reference to the dichotomy between individualist and collectivist anarchist philosophies. Because the neither that dichotomy nor its complementarity have any real existence, I’d say this feels like a kind of shoehorning in a way that the rest of Gabriel’s argument doesn’t, in that the political context of that argument doesn’t necessarily mesh well with the alchemical context that Gabriel tries to pair it with. Overall, though, Gabriel positions the figure of Baphomet, and Satan by extension, as a cipher for the deconstruction of the dominant forms of monotheism as well as the hierarchies of the One God Universe and the state.

There is one thing we can add to this, though, and it will be very relevant in advance since the theme of non-human life as a vector of subversion becomes all the more relevant in the rest of Gabriel’s argument. The Goat of Mendes was very much a symbol of lust and sexual desire (and more often than not male lust), which in turn was (a similar symbolism was also associated with donkeys, which often symbolised the god Seth Typhon), and in this light we should allow ourselves to see that sexual import as being in some way linked to that affirmation of animal or inhuman life against the anthropocentric “ego”. Those who allow themselves to feel and embrace their own lust or sexual desire are often likened to animals in such a way that implies a stature beneath “humanity”. That conception implies a notion of “humanity” that is strictly moral and ideological in substance: “humanity” is an ideology whose concern is not what kind of animal you are but what type of person you are. In other words, being “human” in practice is often not seen as a biological, naturalistic, or creatural description or condition, but instead a mental, social, political, or even spiritual construct. It is just this understanding that allows people across the political spectrum to separate between themselves, as humans, and their enemies, as non-human animals. In almost the same spirit as Gabriel, though, one can also locate a possibilty of reclamation, detournement, or reversal, but here this involves an anti-humanist ethos: in other words, working against the cage of humanity. It only makes more sense in the occult context of apotheosis: becoming divine in some ways means approaching the inhuman, such that staying bound to “your humanity” defeats the point.

One area of Gabriel’s argument where it really feels like he takes a page from Silvia Federici is when he starts talking about witches, or more specifically the medieval witch hunts and the institutional misogyny behind them. In this era, women, usually midwives or sometimes folk healers, would be accused of witchcraft and then arrested, tortured, and executed. Gabriel suggests that these women descended from an intergenerational oral tradition of folk medicine, passed down over centuries through the community by word of mouth. The fear of witches and their alleged conspiracy with Satan was invented and quickly exploited by Catholic authorities in order to allow them to completely remake society in the image of their theocratic and authoritarian desires, based on the sanction of religious patriarchy. The patriarchal fear not only of witches but also female sexuality, individuality, knowledge, and strength in general led to a concerted effort by Catholic and later Protestant Christianity to totally alter the cultural perception not only of witches but also the traits of independent women in general, to present these traits not only as undesirable but also ontologically evil. Gabriel argues that the witches of the medieval imagination were very often empowered women, who were independent and possessed both leadership skills and knowledge of folk medicine, and it is possible that they were viewed as local threats to patriarchal magisterial authority and the professionalisation of medicine.

It’s also worth noting the connections that Gabriel seems to draw between the concept of the “Witches’ Sabbath” and the background of medieval revolt. According to Gabriel, the medieval descriptions of “Witches’ Sabbaths” would sometimes tie in aspects of existing peasant revolts and sexual transgression, all portrayed as both a monstrous sexual orgy and a subversive political gathering or conspiracy, in which The Devil instructed witches to rebel against their masters, and the earliest of these descriptions also coincided with massive peasant gatherings and revolts that took place during the 14th century. In these revolts, Gabriel tells us, clandestine gatherings did indeed take place under the cover of darkness, and women were often leading agitators, but they did not worship The Devil in ritual orgies as Catholic authorities claimed they did.

Eventually we come to a problem: the emphasis on defining anarchism as a moralistic philosophy. While discussing attempts by Christian clergy and others to present the witches as anarchists with the intent to slander them, Gabriel argues that the association of anarchism, Satanism and witchcraft combined in a “moralistic” philosophy can allow us hinder the weaponisation as these labels as tools of dehumanisation. This is where Gabriel’s anarcho-Satanism encounters a familiar problem: its embrace of mythological and archetypical “evil” as a source of empowerment is combined with the understanding of anarchism as a positive moralism. In my opinion, the attachment to moralism would serve only to contradict and hinder the flourishing of the satanic aspect, and ultimately the anarchism as well. It seems to me that there is not enough egoism in Gabriel’s understanding of both anarchism and Satanism.

In fact, the moralistic angle has some odd implications when we get to Gabriel’s appraisal of the Enlightenment, in the context where moral criticism of Christianity seems to create space for the reversal of moral polarisation. Of note is the way Gabriel cites figures such as Voltaire and Thomas Paine as examples of this era of moral criticism. The problem comes in when we look at a quote from Paine that Gabriel cites as a contribution to the reversal of the polarities of God/good and Satan/evil:

Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.

Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

As I see it, Gabriel’s appreciation of that quote comes from a misunderstanding of the obviously Christian background of Paine’s objection to the Bible. In fact, in the above quotation, Paine is pretty clearly addressing the God of the Old Testament as a demon who cannot be the true Christian God. That the God of the Old Testament is a cruel demon to be contrasted with the benevolence of the Christian God is the exact same argument that the Christian dualist Marcion made during the 2nd century. Thus it is less Romantic Satanism (Paine certainly didn’t seem to have much interest in this project) and more like a rationalist version of Marcionite Christianity.

However, one thing that is insightful about Paine’s criticism of Christianity with regards to Satan, which Gabriel points out, is that, in The Age of Reason, Paine also wrote that the Christian theologists felt the need to support their faith by making Satan equal to if not more powerful than God, by granting him the power to liberate himself from the abyss and even expand his power after his fall from Heaven. Before his fall from Heaven, Satan is presented as merely an angel, of limited existence, and after his fall he seems to become omnipresent, existing all through the immensity of space, and able to defeat the power of the Almighty by stratagem in the form of one of his own creations, thereby implying an intellect superior to the supposed omniscience of God. Although Paine upheld a rationalist form of Christianity, centring on the New Testament strictly as a source of moral teaching, he did nonetheless establish a critique that might inform Satanism regardless. It tells us of Christian theology and narrative as a contrivance of storytelling and its logical necessities. It is built on a classic protagonist-antagonist power struggle dynamic, and this requires that even the “Almighty” God requires an equivalent or even greater power to rival his own. For this reason, Satan, as an entity capable of disrupting the will of God and the hierarchy of Heaven, emerged as the perfect antithesis.

This is also where parallels to anarchism are revisited. The Fall is a result of Satan’s direct action against the hierarchy of Heaven, thus emblematising the anarchist principle of direct action. Despite his exile from Heaven, his power is increased instead of being decreased, and his range of influence becomes universal rather than particular. This influence is an omnipresent anti-authoritarianism, or more preferably an omnipresent insurrection, that constantly threatens the authority and hierarchical power of God. Satan’s appearance in the form of a serpent may also connect him to the more of non-human biological life, possibly embedding Satan into the role of champion of biodiversity on behalf of all earthly interconnected ecosystems. Satan successfully utilises this animalistic aspect to counteract God’s ethereal authority. In my view, this is a bit more like it. We yet again approach the assertion of the inhuman against the anthropocentric ideology of “the human”. We also approach the narrative of Satanisms such as that of Stanisław Przybyszewski, who presented Satan as the god of the physical world, taking the form of Pan-Satyr-Phallus. It also invites comparison to the Buddhist figure of Mara, interpreted as the guardian of the whole continuum of generating life (procreation, growth, continuing, and death), or even a kind of “nature god”, who thought that the Buddha, in leading people into Nirvana, would end all life by empyting the universe of all living things. Mara and Satan have at least one other thing in common: as adversaries of their given religious contexts, they seem to be defeated (by either Jesus or the Buddha), but they do not accept defeat, and in fact continue to haunt their religious enemies despite their apparent victories.

I think that Gabriel ends up bringing this theme well into focus when discussing Giosue Carducci and his infamous Inno a Satana, which Gabriel describes as a call to resist the authority of the papacy. In Carducci’s hymn, he says that Satan breathes in his verses, which Gabriel argues establishes Satan as a literary rather than literal force and thus, in theory, aligns Satan with the atheistic and anarchist positions on religion. I would suggest that there is room to link him to more esoteric and ambient conceptions of Satan, such as you sometimes see in black metal. His conception as “the avenging force of human reason” is argued to posit Satan’s rebellion not as self-serving but on behalf of all humanity and all biological life on Earth. This of course is simply a humanist conceit, though such conceits were obviously endemic to Enlightenment rationalist thought. Still, that he should be framed as the guardian of earthly life has a resonance with Mara in Buddhism, who viewed the enlightenment of the Buddha as a threat to the generative world he governs, since it means souls leaving that world by passing into Nirvana. I would perhaps also stress that Carducci described Satan as a lord of nature, love, and the flesh, and linked him with pagan gods such as Adonis, Astarte, and Venus (while also identifying the Christian God with Jove).

In other cases, however, the comparison to anarchist principles can be a little stretched. An example of this is Gabriel’s discussion of Charles Baudelaire, the France poete maudit well-known for writing Les Litanies de Satan. Gabriel describes Baudelaire as having been seriously committed to a political radicalism similar to that of Pierre Joseph Proudhon, which at least implies anarchist leanings (to say nothing of the problem of Proudhon by himself), though in reality Baudelaire seems to have had almost no interest in politics except for his participation in the 1848 Revolutions as a journalist writing for a revolutionary newspaper. Gabriel suggests that, in Les Litanies de Satan, Baudelaire gives praise to Satan as the prince of exile and outcasts, possessing the attributes healing, knowledge, and even benevolence, being acquainted with and able to heal human suffering. This is something that Gabriel again links to anarchism by relating the generalised principles of solidarity and direct action, and its implication of reciprocal empathy between individuals, to Baudelaire’s language about Satan. In this case, though, I would be careful with taking the notion of Satan as a representative moral character at face value, in that it runs the risk of misunderstanding the general ethos of decadent poetry. To put it one way, I don’t think it is wise to treat the decadents as simply being radical moralists.

Then, finally, we come to the subject of revolutionary movements and anarchism, and here we definitely find some interesting examples of either reverse polarisation or simply criticism of Christianity. Emma Goldman, Moses Harman, Madalyn Murry O’Hair, Duddy Boukman, Che Guevara, Malcolm X, and Subcommandante Marcos all seemed to view themselves as fighting against the Christian God in different ways, although not many of them went all the way and considered Satan the good guy. Of these, it was only Moses Harman certainly elevated Lucifer as the symbol of individualist anarchism and the hope of human emancipation from both the state and the Chrisitan God. From Emma Goldman, though we certainly do get the picture that anarchism is to be seen as rebellion against the Christian God, or the One God Universe, and in Marcos we see God presented as the author of the exclusion clause. But with Marcos’ example, Gabriel allows the possibility of retroactively reinterpreting the War in Heaven as the result of an angelic attempt to unionise Heaven. There is, though, an extent to which this idea rather defeats the point: what is truly satanic is not to reform the kingdom of God by making it fairer and more just and more equitable for the little guys in the heavenly hierarchy, because the point is to destroy God’s Heaven.

All in all, there is actually a lot to work with when it comes to Gabriel’s concept of Anarcho-Satanism, or at least when it comes to the basic aspect of reversal, or the reversal of moral polarisation, but it should be expanded beyond the ideological confines of Gabriel’s atheist/anti-theist Romantic Satanism, and thereby beyond those of its intended form as a literary response. The notion of evil as a sacred power capable of dissolving the order or domination associated with seemingly positive godforms such as the Christian God, or the One God Universe, would do much to enhance the “reversal” that Gabriel was trying to put forward. But I suppose, to put it simply, the attitude I would prefer is more like that of Mechanical Violator Hakaider: “if you are justice, then I am evil”.