HERE, I intend to provide another brief example of how National-Anarchism and Absolute Idealism can work together. Hegel, by way of some youthful fragments that he produced in the summer of 1797, has some very interesting things to say about love. As explained previously, Kant was unable to reconcile the realms of the noumenal and the phenomenal, a problem eventually solved by Hegel in his subsequent appropriation of Schelling’s Naturphilosophie and timely announcement that unity comes in the shape of organicism.

Returning to Hegel’s fragments, these early writings were used to connect the loving relationship between two people to the ‘unity-in-difference’ that permeates the worldly manifestation of the single universal substance. Love provides the perfect example of the connection between subject and object, or self and other. When people fall in love there exists between them a single structure of self-consciousness in the sense that one individual knows itself in the other just as the other knows itself in his or her counterpart.

This process goes beyond mere identification, however, because there is also a moment of dissimilarity and it is this that Hegel describes as ‘unity-in-difference’. This happens because we are also attracted to someone on account of them being other than ourselves, something that leads to a mutual respect based around the complimentary tenets of equality and independence. Lovers both lose themselves and find themselves in each other, leading to a simultaneous self-surrender and self-discovery. Meanwhile, if one person tries to dominate or control the identity of the other the mutuality and trust that once defined their relationship disappears.

Let us now relate this philosophy to National-Anarchism. Given that we support a diverse plethora of communities, be they heterosexual, homosexual, Christian, Muslim or atheist, it is clear that we must learn to accept our differences. A heathen and a priest, for example, probably wouldn’t make an ideal couple, but this is where the wider principle comes in. The love that Hegel describes as uniting two people and yet differentiating them at the same time can be applied to National-Anarchism in terms of the universal principle to which we each subscribe. Not Judaism, Zoroastrianism or a taste for science-fiction, but something that goes far beyond the incalculable beliefs and proclivities around which our respective communities are formed. This principle is Anarchism itself, which, like Hegel’s thoughts on love, is given freely and brings us together at a deeper and more significant level. In the event that the unwelcome spectre of domination does appear, then the relationship comes to an end.

Despite our differences, therefore, National-Anarchists are bound together by their love for a comprehensive and all-embracing principle and something that can serve as the perfect expression of that ‘unity-in-difference’.