Uncategorized

Race Essential to National-Anarchism?

From the World National-Anarchist Alliance.

As soon as the perspective outlined here becomes the dominant consensus among anarchists generally, then anarchists will be in a position to assume the role of the leadership corps of a much larger array of secessionist and radical decentralist movments with a strong libertarian-populist orientation.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

People will be shocked to find out that I do not come from a racialist standpoint at all.

So why do I associate with National Anarchists when the majority of them are racialist?

I tolerate it because they wish to keep it confined to their own communities and out of those who do not want it. Also, the concept of anarchism according to tribes is in line with Mikhail Bakunin’s material. People have the right to associate along whatever lines they wish to, and no one else has to like it in order to give them permission.

Another thing to mention is that those who are racial separatists are not so due to belief of racial superiority. This is at least the case with the majority of National Anarchists. I get the true feeling that they are sincere when saying this. To them it is an actual matter of preservation, and I can learn to respect that much.

We all have ideals which we hope will pass on to the next generation. In my case it is syndicalism and Zen Buddhism. Also I believe that families should be strong. There are many things that I could go on about for hours, but they may not be important to the majority of people. This is my case in point why we should adopt National Anarchism. People are never going to agree with everyone else on even key points. Various communities are needed to suit the major preferences that people may have. The ideas worth anything will succeed. Those which are not too shitty will at least sustain. Those which are worthless will crumble to the ground. This will all be on those in the community who chose that particular path.

The beauty of National Anarchism is that tribes could be created upon any values. I believe that as this concept expands, race will become a minority view. Basically it is only a revival of Anarcho-Tribalism. However, people are no longer writing under that name, and no one can be found to associate with. Basically this gives us more opportunities for talks.

Associations between tribes can be helpful in dire circumstances. National Anarchism is an answer to the anarchist with suffixes syndrome. We have anywhere from Anarcho-Capitalists to Anarcho-Communists. With the National Anarchist system, each tribe could implement whichever system they want. This makes working across the various categories much simpler. If the other anarchists could stop calling it “neo-fascism in disguise”, we could have gained much more ground by now.

Part of this problem is the fault of some National Anarchists who refuse to acknowledge anyone who is not dividing along racial lines. Another part is on the other side not seeing that people have the liberty to do so if they so desire. They wish to use coercion to make people not racialist, and this simply will never work. I foresee a fairs being made in the future for tribes to debate ideologies. A debate with good ground rules and decency on both sides can convince someone of the better position. If no one is convinced, both parties go back home to the area of their tribe unscathed.

National Anarchism (Anarcho-Tribalism) is the way to unite all anarchists toward working for anarchy without compromise.

Categories: Uncategorized

4 replies »

  1. Makes me think of this article, “Us” and “Not Us”

    http://lingitlatseen.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/us-and-not-us/

    Among Indian tribes you’ll find tribes with a strong tradition of adoption, even across racial lines. You’ll also find tribes with little or no adoption that are concerned with preserving racial purity. At the end of the day the most important factor, I think, is not whether or not you can maintain your racial purity, but whether or not you can maintain your tribal identity. Can you tell a better narrative than the dominant culture? That’s what I think it comes down to. Gangs, clans, churches, tribes, etc. are competing with the message of the middle class/working class American dream. Can you tell a better story that will get your members to put the tribe before the Nation State?

  2. “Can you tell a better narrative than the dominant culture? That’s what I think it comes down to. Gangs, clans, churches, tribes, etc. are competing with the message of the middle class/working class American dream. Can you tell a better story that will get your members to put the tribe before the Nation State?”

    Yes!

    To some degree, that seems to be happening with the “big sort” that Bishop writes about. Even in the mainstream political culture, it seems to me that mainstream conservatives are really loyal to the Republican Party, or their own perceived leaders or ideology, than to the abstraction of “America” as a nation-state entity in and of itself. They talk about the Obama administration the same way they used to talk about the Soviet Union.

    And mainstream liberals are the same way. It’s funny how their patriotism starts kicking in as soon as a perceived “progressive” President takes office, and how it all dries up when the bad old fascist conservatives make a comeback.

    I don’t think that was as true of past generations who really did think of themselves as Americans first and partisan loyalists second.

    LOL, whenever I hear the phrase “American Dream” I always think of this old song from the Tubes that spoofed American consumerism (or at least American consumerism as it was in the 1970s):

  3. Thank you for the post of the article. Since it was written, a change was suggested to me. I stated that “the majority” of NA want racial division. It has been revised to “many” in order not to jump the gun on assuming how many people are NA, and what they all believe. I appreciate this site, because reading material on here has been very helpful in my research. Keep up the good work.

  4. Regarding the “American Dream,” I think that the American middle class and working class is willing to endure all manner of injustices and even support the system as long as the state is able to deliver them the house, two cars, and a full belly. For those who have bought into that narrative our message or that of a competing “global guerrilla” entity will be a hard one to swallow. I’m thinking of many of the people I grew up with who have no interest in politics, but support the troops, think its pretty cool that we have a black president, dutifully pay their taxes, and can’t wait for football season to start. They will be the last to “gang up,” so to speak. More likely they’ll be the subjects, living on someone else’s turf rather than being a member of anything.

    That’s why I think John Robb’s work is so important. I suspect, but I’m not entirely sure, that he is capturing the sinking middle class audience and actually motivating them to start thinking about these things and hopefully start building resilient communities.

    “I don’t think that was as true of past generations who really did think of themselves as Americans first and partisan loyalists second.”

    I think I’ll start referring to any and all opinionated Democrats or Republicans in my life as “partisan loyalists” and see how people react!

Leave a Reply