Terror Against the Demiurge
(Abstracts about the relevance of anarchism today)
Anarchism: A Look from the right
Anarchism is considered to be the most left wing product of leftist thought. This total critique from the left of all other forms of revolutionary ideologies: from the Marxists to Social Democrats. Anarchists scourged from other leftists the presence of all old,
reactionary elements. For anarchy, all other forms are but thinly veiled reference to the ancient and only enemy – power.
Anarchism seeks to justify a system of radical antithesis of a society based on the principle of power. From here comes the name “an archy”, literally – “the absence of power.”
Anarchy aspires to be left without any mixture of ‘right’, unfortunately this just isn’t happening. And here in anarchism very often we meet the elements that traditionally belong to the “right.”
Notable examples are Evola’s “right anarchism” and Ernst Junger’s concept of “anarch”.
Examples of the “right” components in anarchism are numerous. The most striking one is mysticism. Bakunin – mason, mystic – was interested in the movement of ‘beguni’ (‘runners’). The same for Kelsiev. Major figure of anarchism Theodore Reuss – Mason, mystic, founder of the “Order of the Oriental Templars” (together with Karl Kellner). Later Aleister Crowley. In Russia – Karelin Solonovich, circle around the museum of Kropotkin. Anarcho-Khlystovskaya sect of Alexei Dobrolyubov. Many examples are given in the book by Alexander Etkind “Whip. Sects, literature, revolution. “
Mysticism could hardly be classified to the “left,” “progressive” trend. It presupposes belief in somewhat beyond it, a certain archaism.
Another thing: what is this archaism? What is the structure of anarchic attitude towards mysticism?
“Against rulers, against powers …”
Mysticism of anarchists rests on a special gnostic formula.
The essence of it comes to this: there is not one reality, hierarchically organized, harmonious, virtuous in itself, but two (or more). Immanent reality rests on usurpation, on the attempt to show the best out of the worst, as the unique and uncontested.
And so the immanent power is the power which is ontologically and inherently wrong, unjust, evil. Early Gnostics relied on Apostle Paul’s saying – “For we struggle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual power of wickedness in the heavenlies”. Christian version of gnostic anarchism rests on this foundation.
Furthermore, however, the same Ap. Paul says, “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Orthodoxy combines the calls for social conformity and spiritual nonconformity. Radical Gnostic circles extend the call for non-conformism to the social level.
But this revolution against “this world” in a full anarcho-gnostic pattern presupposes also a second affirmative part.
Against this world for the other world, for a better world, for “our” world, a new world. And this alternative world had positive, constructive features. This – a universe of Light, the world of good and just divinity, the world of true Good, which was usurped by Satan, “the evil demiurge.”
Therefore structurally and typologically most revolutionary anarchism conceals in itself an extreme degree of conservatism, affirmativity, creativity, only a radical transcendent order.
It is not irresponsible nihilism.
This denial of that which, according to gnostic anarchism itself is total negation of Good.
Empire: Sacred and the Profane
To trace the mystical roots of Western anarchism does not pose any difficulty.
But how do the ‘runners’, old-believers, who are called to be the most consistent Russian anarchists? To whom the researchers erect the worldview of Bakunin? Those who Kelsiev tried to encourage for large-scale antigoverment terror?
Gnostics formulated their radical doctrines in pre-imperial environment where Christianity has not yet become the main ruling religion. Their rejection of this world was supported by observations of the pagan environment of unchurched late Rome.
confirming their radicalism rejection of all ‘outer’. That is to say, the Gnostics were “against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world …” is also because they were non-Christian – Jews or Hellenes.
When the Empire became Christian. Gnostic anarchism has dissipated. The resumption of this line falls on the period of Christianity, when the nominally Christian society begins to be alienated from it’s nature. And at this point becomes relevant again the same dualistic approach radically and uncompromising counter-position of this world and to the other world, “the authorities of this world” to the authorities of another world.
Diagnosis of ‘Beguns’ Mentors
It is during the period of total desacralization of Catholicism , arise the radical Masonic lodges.While the desacrilisation of nikoniate Rus, Romanovite, pro-western, ‘administrative’ Russia is tragically perceived/realized by the most extreme among the Russian Orthodox mystical patriots – Old Believers.
The ‘runners’ went into denial of “the principalities and powers of this government of this world” more than the others, assuming that the Antichrist had already crowned himself in the face of Peter the I (Peter the Great). That’s how happened the typological convergence of extreme priestless acords with the gnostic formula,
elements of which are already visible in those Russian ascetics who perceived the fall of the Byzantine Empire as an absolute apocalyptic catastrophe – especially with the line of ‘non-possessors’, and later followers of radical elder Kapiton.
Anarchy – Mother of Good
Extreme nihilism of anarchist impulse turns out by no means the last word in the desecration and denial of Tradition. On the contrary, it is based on a total disagreement with this desacralization, absolute rejection of it , the “world”, “this age”, which is ruled by an evil demiurge and his acolytes, “avliyi El Shaitan”, “Saints of Satan”.
The very famous formula of “anarchy mother of order” is a transfer to the social dimension of the thesis of the need for a radical abolition of this world of evil in order for a world of good to be found. Since the world of evil is a “barrier” at it’s foundation (“Satan” in ancient Hebrew means “barrier”), then it must be razed to the ground. It is important that anarchists understand the “new world” not as a creation, but as a discovery. They do not want to reform, rebuild, refurbish the reality, they want to radically transform the quality of reality. They were in this very successive conservatives, being the most consistent destroyers. But they destroy the very spirit of destruction, the idol of “the old order”, fortress of the demiurge.
Strange “Soul-Searching” Action
Anarchists are considered to be synonymous with radical terror.
But behind it there is not so much social but rather ontological and cosmological meanings. Terror is not a means for anarchists to achieve political recognition. It carries not so much socio-political as anthropological weight. Terrorist anarchists do not throw bombs at people, not at members of the class, not at socially significant figures. They throw bombs at the Antichrist and his servants, and the act itself carries already in itself its own excuse and its own justification.
Anarcho-terrorism is, eventually a “soul-saving action.” It is intended to save the “world soul” from the toxic embrace of the Usurper.
Right Anarchism and Russia
It is now easy to understand where the “right elements” of the classics of anarchism – Stirner and Proudhon are from. The two poles within anarchism: one – personalistic, the other – collectivist.
Stirner teaches about the uniqueness and true self set to spiral out of hypnotic might of this world, embodied in the social system, its stamps, hierarchy of its dependencies. And here he comes close to the gnostic concept of “atman”, the highest spiritual “I”, developed in Hinduism, and esotericism of other traditions.Hence the Evola’s interest in Stirnir, including him in his personal philosophical pantheon.Proudhon – is the opposite pole. His “truthfulness” is not in the “science of I” (the concept of “the One”), but in the idealization of rural communities, the autonomy of natural organic groups which by coming out from the control state’s alienating power (the demiurge) are returning to the roots of communal existence, associated with traditional ethics and earth.
This ideal is close to the ideal of the early Christian church, meaning yet another deep archaic and essentially “rightist” phenomenon.
Bakunin and Kropotkin are on even level as Stirner and Proudhon.
Russia has traditionally taken, at least half of the seats in the left movement, while the rest is made up of all the other European and non-European peoples. There is a clear imbalance. And the victory of the far left in October, happened with us.It is remarkable that only in our deep “reactionary”, “archaic”, “soil”, “conservative” country with the same people. This is no accident. To us this paradoxial spirit, the gnostic pulse is very close, this amazing spiritual, religious and social at the same time complex, is which is behind the phenomenon of radical mystical anarchism, this extreme form of Conservative Revolution.