Mysticism as the Path to Political & Social Change
The Aristocratic Radicalism of Mystics & Occult Thinkers
Robert Stark

You can buy James J. O’Meara’s Mysticism After Modernism here.
1,646 words
James J. O’Meara has a book out, Mysticism After Modernism: Crowley, Evola, Neville, Watts, Colin Wilson, and Other Populist Gurus, published by Manticore Press. The book is about where mysticism intersects with culture and politics, rather than being some purely academic look at mysticism and the occult. It is also about thinkers who used magic to enact real-world change.
Much of the Right is dismissive or derisive of the occult, their criticisms ranging from conspiracy theories about evil Illuminati occultists to dismissing the New Age scene as being solely for Left-wing hippies. Regardless, there is a lot of crossover appeal and syncretic occultism. Even New Thinking Allowed’s Jeffrey Mishlove, who comes out of the hippie culture in Berkeley and is a universalist, has many fans on the New Right. There is a rich tradition of occultism on the Right, as well as overblown allegations that there is an esotericism/occult-to-fascism pipeline which includes Savitri Devi and Julius Evola, not to mention the link between the New Age scene and libertarianism. Mysticism is in fact ideologically neutral and can be tailored to any political ideology or subculture.
The thinkers discussed in O’Meara’s book include William S. Burroughs, Aleister Crowley, Colin Wilson, Alan Watts, Neville Goddard, and Julius Evola. It is important to counter the stereotype about all New Age gurus and mystics being hippies, despite the fact that, out of these thinkers, only Evola is thought of as Traditionalist or Right-wing.

You can buy James O’Meara’s book The Eldritch Evola here.
Alan Watts was more a man of the Right than some assume, even if he often came across as a hippie, criticizing tribalism and calling for people to just go with the flow. Watts mocked the dilettantes of the New Age scene and hippie counter-culture, and also spoke out against modern psychiatry. Apart from Eastern spirituality, Watts’ influences ranged from Jung, to Evola and Nietzsche. Watts said that it was the inspiration that he took from Nietzsche’s courage and spirit that kept him from going to a university. Watts called upon people to escape the nonsense of modern society, including bureaucracy, meaningless jobs, conformity, arbitrary social mores, rules, and life scripts that are keeping us enslaved. This went beyond hippie egalitarian individualism, amounting to a call to tap into vitality and embrace non-conformity in a quasi-elitist or Nietzschean sense.
In Alan Watts’ youth he had been a follower of the quasi-fascist Serbian philosopher and mystical guru Dimitrije Mitrinović. Mitrinović was an advocate of guild socialism, social credit, and European unity, though he was anti-Hitler. In Watts’ book Behold the Spirit, which he wrote when he was an Anglican priest, like Oswald Spengler he held that there is a spiritual basis behind the way in which each civilization is formed. As an Anglican priest, Watts said “love your enemy, but love him as your enemy.”
Some excerpts from Watts’ speeches sound more Right-wing. For instance, in his speech “You Are It” he expresses spiritual elitist sentiments, and commented to a young woman that her beauty mattered more than her credentials because beauty comes from biology, which sounds like something that Bronze Age Pervert would say. In another talk, “You Cannot Improve Yourself,” he critiques both the cult of self-improvement and eugenics while also embracing hereditarian thinking. His point was that different genetic traits are suited for different circumstances. He also had seven children, so you could say that he was a traditionalist in his personal life, despite being married multiple times.
While Watts held the hippie Buddhist view that money was just an illusion, he also expressed anti-usury and anti-fiat money views, basically contending that wealth must be something tangible. There is an essay in his book Does It Matter, “Wealth vs. Money,”, where he advocated for something like C. H. Douglas’ social credit, which is superior to Andrew Yang’s universal basic income. In that essay, Watts’ most political piece of writing, he calls for restructuring society to replace work with leisure, but also for a society based upon aesthetics and beauty.
Watts had a strong interest in Buddhism. The Buddhist approach of detachment from all that is material and belief that everything is transient can seem demoralizing and nihilistic. Colin Wilson disliked Buddhism for this reason. However, a change in attitude and consciousness allows for a mindset of freedom and opens up realms of possibility for creativity. Watts was actually not an ascetic, but rather a dandy who embraced the passions of the senses, including the finer things in life.
The Traditionalist Right-wing framework is demoralizing, such as the idea that we must accept cycles of decay. Evola did not simply sit around waiting for the Kali Yuga, however. This relates to QAnon’s quasi-Gnostic, passive mentality of just “trusting the plan,” not to mention the fact that the woke Left is also quasi-Gnostic. Gnosticism does not have to be passive, however, and we must dream big and believe that anything is possible. If you want, call that the gold pill.
Colin Wilson was briefly famous for his book The Outsider, of which celebrities including John Lennon, David Bowie, Gerry Rafferty, and Muammar Gaddafi were fans. Wilson was a prolific author, writing about topics ranging from the occult and crime thrillers to science fiction and horror inspired by H. P. Lovecraft. Wilson is sometimes associated with the Angry Young Men literary subculture, which was basically the British equivalent of the Beats, even though the Angry Young Men were more Leftist and mocked and denigrated British culture. Wilson was actually critical of them.
In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, spirituality and the cult of Nietzsche fell out of fashion while materialism and rationalism prevailed. So it was during the heyday of the 1960s counter-culture that Wilson tried to get in on the newfound appreciation for Lovecraft, Aleister Crowley, and mysticism. While Wilson was associated with existentialism, he was much more of a Romantic, yearning for the nineteenth-century optimism and heroism that was missing in the modern era. Wilson’s approach to mysticism revolved around the theme of consciousness, searching for the sense of feeling alive and experiencing the full intensity of the senses in the peak experience.
While Colin Wilson was not overtly political, he was smeared as a fascist, due to his relationship with the British fascist politician Oswald Mosley. Wilson was involved with the human potential movement, believing that humans had hidden potential as well as in the Nietzschean ideal that humans can transcend the evolutionary ladder in order to become Übermensch. Wilson once wrote that “[h]uman beings are pretty trivial insects. No wonder so many of them are mediocre.” He also suggested that “cancer kills people because they lack vitality.” Wilson was an elitist because he had contempt for the conformist masses. But he was also a populist, having grown up working-class and never attending college; he scorned credentialism and the elite Oxford/Cambridge set.
Alan Watts was into Oriental spirituality, Neville Goddard was into William Blake and the Bible, Colin Wilson was into Romanticism, and Aleister Crowley was into rediscovering ancient lost magic such as Hermeticism. Most of these thinkers proclaimed themselves to be individualists, yet wanted to be part of something greater which liberal individualism can’t provide. These thinkers were all spiritual elitists, even if they never explicitly said so. That is what sets them apart from the Left, even if some of them may have supported socialism or embraced hedonism. Certainly Burroughs and Crowley — the latter being called “the wickedest man in the world” — were “degenerates” by “trad” standards. Even Wilson’s writings about serial killers and sexual deviants such as the Marquis De Sade talked about them as seekers of a radical expansion of consciousness rather than in moralistic terms.

You can buy Kerry Bolton’s Artists of the Right here.
Wilson’s The Outsider does not merely talk about non-conformity or rebelling against authority for its own sake. Rather, Wilson viewed the Outsider as an archetype for those who could not connect with society because they were exceptional. But the Outsider is also a spiritual archetype. He is not a cynic but rather an idealist and romantic who envisions how the world should ideally be.
The creative or artistic caste is the natural aristocracy. This view could be described as aristocratic radicalism or aristocratic individualism, or even as a brahmin/priestly or shaman caste. What is standing in its way are mercantile and managerial interests, as well as petite moralism, liberal egalitarianism, and the tyranny and sensibilities of the lowly masses. Viewing artists as a natural elite caste that is being suppressed is a major theme among thinkers and artists such as Wyndham Lewis, Oscar Wilde, H. P. Lovecraft, Colin Wilson, Aleister Crowley, and Ezra Pound. Their individualism was often a response to existing hierarchies that were insufficient or arbitrary . Aristocratic radicalism may seem like a cope, but just look at who and what our society rewards and incentivizes. Elitism is needed because, as in the 60s ‘counterculture, egalitarian individualism is easily co-opted by big capital and powerful institutions.
Economic elitism is the adversary of cultural and spiritual elitism, and represents a fundamental flaw in American culture. This was a significant theme in early twentieth-century thought, but it is especially relevant today. There just aren’t enough articulate and prominent voices to make this case. There is a need for leisure and economic patronage, which explains Oscar Wilde’s support for socialism for culturally elitist reasons. William Burroughs and Lovecraft, coming from old money, showed the limits to being self-made men, not to mention the need for patronage.
Creativity is a way of tapping into a spiritual force or metaphysical realm and stealing the fire from the metaphysical gatekeepers. While the imagination is all-powerful, not everyone’s imagination is equal. Mysticism requires training, but also natural-born gifts. I think mastering the occult is extremely difficult, and few people have the talent, with many self-proclaimed mystics and gurus being revealed as charlatans and grifters. There are psychological and spiritual prisons that only certain people can break through.
Mysticism%20as%20the%20Path%20to%20Political%20andamp%3B%20Social%20Change%0AThe%20Aristocratic%20Radicalism%20of%20Mystics%20andamp%3B%20Occult%20Thinkers%0A
Share
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
8 comments
It’s an interesting subject. I wonder if there might be any specifically illiberal magickal lodges or study groups out there.
The Order Of Nine Angles (in its original incarnation) and The Black Order are two that immediately come to mind.
I like the idea of a “golden pill” to complement the “iron pill.” As Sam Hyde would say “think it, dream it, do it.”
Something I have noticed over the years is that contrary to popular belief, the Right often thinks outside the box, but it lacks critical thinking. Mysticism is a perfect example, as it is completely bogus but very appealing to those who feel powerless. I know we all have our personal quirks, but we need to avoid anything that makes the movement seem even more unserious to the public than it already does.
I suppose “optics” is a thing, but whose optics? Who do we need to impress? The real problem with the Right has been its desperate search for the approval of some self-appointed “experts,” defined as people who do “sophisticated” things ranging from work at a neocon think tank or pontificate on NPR. I suppose they find things they call “mysticism” to be yucky, but do the rest of the population?
I suppose the “critical thinking” you call for involves things like data. Let’s ask a “critical thinker”, such as Jason Josephson-St0rm:
“To catch up those who are unfamiliar with my book, (*) The Myth of Disenchantment is rooted in the following observation: Many theorists have argued that what makes the modern world “modern” is that people no longer believe in spirits, myth, or magic — in this sense we are “disenchanted.” However, every day new proof arises that “modern” thinkers do in fact believe in magic and in spirits, and they have done so throughout history. According to a range of anthropological and sociological evidence, which I discuss in the book, the majority of people living in Europe and North America believe (to varying degrees) in the following: spirits, witches, psychical powers, magic, astrology, and demons. Scholars have known this was true of much of the rest of the globe, but have overlooked its continued presence in the West.
“[Moreover] I discovered that the majority of theorists who gave the idea of disenchantment its canonical formulations were living in Britain, France, or Germany in a period in which spiritualism (séances and table turning), theosophy, and magical societies like the Golden Dawn were taking place as massive cross-cultural movements and, as I show from archival research into these theorists’ diaries, letters, and so on, these occult movements entered directly into the lives and beliefs of the very theorists of disenchantment themselves.”
(*)The Myth of Disenchantment: Magic, Modernity, and the Birth of the Human Sciences (University of Chicago, 2017)
I hate to move from scholarship to memes, but there is much truth in the meme of the Bell Curve btw the normie, the midwit and the Galaxy Brain. Normies believe in spooks, you call for “critical thinking” but the titans of Thought, such as Carnap and Wittgenstein are having a shouting match over whose magic is more authentic (see the chapter on them in Myth).
In general, it’s interesting, isn’t it, that the “critical thinkers” of the Establishment tell us to sneer at “magic” while the elites seem to find it very real. It’s sort of like keeping the Bible away from the peasants.
Do you want to know how to get real political “Power”? Who did Argentina’s Milei visit first, the Pope or the home of the Messiah in Brooklyn?
The movement has to appeal to as many normies as possible.
While it’s accurate to say that most people have some degree of belief in the supernatural, that covers a lot of territory. Most of the people who strongly believe in the things you list are non-Whites and to a lesser extent, White women. Very few White normies believe in witches and psychics, for example. They would laugh at somebody who does.
As for our elites believing in the occult — I see no evidence of that whatsoever. Everything they do seems to indicate they’re hardcore materialists.
Your concerns are well-placed but I don’t see any reason to think that an interest in these matters somehow taints the Right in the eyes of normies, and considerable evidence for the opposite.
You say “The movement has to appeal to as many normies as possible” but your second paragraph seems to say you’re only interested in attracting White men. How will that work electorally?
Are even Christian Nationalist males worth cultivating? True, they generally oppose “witches and psychics” but only because it conflicts with their belief in what you call the “supernatural” rather than because they find it laughable. It seems that the only “normies” you deem worthy of being cultivated are found in the stereotypical common rooms at elite universities in the 1940s (today, they’re increasingly non-White and non-male).
There’s plenty of evidence for elite occultism, but consider: if the elite are hard-nosed secularists, who only pretend an interest in mysticism, the occult, or religion to fool the masses, what does that say about your strategy of doing the exact opposite?
Josephson-Storm even seems to have anticipated the questions you raise (I highlight the matching language):
“Bader, Mencken, and Baker ultimately summarize their findings in strong terms:
“’The paranormal is normal . . . . Statistically, those who report a paranormal belief are not the oddballs; it is those who have no beliefs that are in the significant minority. Exactly which paranormal beliefs a person finds convincing varies, but whether it is UFOs and ghosts or astrology and telekinesis, most of us believe more than one. If we further consider strong beliefs in active supernatural entities and intense religious experiences the numbers are even larger.’
“In sum, Bader, Mencken, and Baker also estimate that more than two- thirds of Americans believe in the paranormal.
“Demographic trends can also be extracted from the data as specific paranormal beliefs can be identified with different populations. For example, African American women were the most likely to believe in ghosts and the possibility of communication with the dead, while Caucasians were more likely to believe that they have been abducted by extraterrestrials. But believing in at least one form of the paranormal is not confined to a particular counterculture and is evidently the norm throughout the country.”
You say “The movement has to appeal to as many normies as possible” but your second paragraph seems to say you’re only interested in attracting White men. How will that work electorally?
It may not work, but White men are the primary group who would be interested in WN. If we get enough successful White men, then White women will get on board.
Are even Christian Nationalist males worth cultivating? True, they generally oppose “witches and psychics” but only because it conflicts with their belief in what you call the “supernatural” rather than because they find it laughable. It seems that the only “normies” you deem worthy of being cultivated are found in the stereotypical common rooms at elite universities in the 1940s (today, they’re increasingly non-White and non-male).
Christian Nationalists seem receptive to WN already. I know they have their own problems, but they are generally less crazy than the occultists. And by “normies” I mean regular Whites who live average lives.
There’s plenty of evidence for elite occultism, but consider: if the elite are hard-nosed secularists, who only pretend an interest in mysticism, the occult, or religion to fool the masses, what does that say about your strategy of doing the exact opposite?
Of course the elites talk of religious belief, but I can’t see any evidence they even pretend to be into the occult — unless you’re getting at something like the “pizzagate” thing, which is nonsense.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment