EXAMINING Schelling’s work in a philosophical context is one thing, but for readers of a political mindset it often throws up concepts that can be applied outside of philosophy itself. One idea, for example, relates to Schelling’s analysis of philosophical fallacy. As Jason M. Wirth explains, Schelling
“repeatedly insisted that the nature of philosophical error was not the fact that I was wrong about something, that I mistook x for y, [but] that I failed to realise correctly what x is.”
Within philosophy, therefore, being wrong is not simply about holding a false opinion but of allowing such an opinion to solidify to the extent that it becomes an obstruction. For Schelling, there is no end to philosophy and it would be foolish to imagine that we could ever set aside our propensity towards thought.
Transferring this notion to a political context, I would argue that the misrepresentation of National-Anarchism works in a very similar fashion. If one considers the Left’s erroneous claim that we are secret fascists, it soon becomes apparent that it is less a case of mistaking x (anarchism) for y (fascism) than a failure to understand the real nature of x itself. Similarly, when those on the Right find themselves attracted to National-Anarchism they commit the same error.
Indeed, it could even be said that by gravitating towards a political group that is so heavily misrepresented the Right has been deceived by the fallacious propaganda of the Left. Needless to say, fascists who fail to appreciate that x is not actually y and who retain such views are not tolerated. Furthermore, whilst the Left seeks to deliberately maintain the confusion between x and y by presenting National-Anarchism as a variant of fascism, certain people on the Right ignore our anti-fascist proclivities by stubbornly portraying themselves as ‘anarcho-fascists’. This, of course, being far more deserving of the very oxymoronism that we ourselves have been accused of in the past.
Returning to the realms of philosophy, Schelling was adamant that beyond any basic error of this kind lies the danger of “blocking” and “inhibiting” further progress. The logical conclusion, in other words, is that elements on the Left and Right are consciously attempting to hinder the progress of National-Anarchism in the way that a man who believes there is no longer any need to philosophise imagines that he has brought closure to philosophy itself. This, unfortunately, is the difference between those who bear the eternal flame of free thought and the rabid authoritarians who wish to perpetuate the darkness of ignorance and deceit.
