Canning Reactionary Leftism

by Keith Preston

“I put the following work under your protection. It contains my opinion…You will do me the justice to remember, that I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it.”

-Thomas Paine

Power is fluid and dynamic rather than static. Consequently, what was once considered “progressive” or “revolutionary” can, with a shift in power relations, become reactionary and retrograde. Anarchists are aware, or should be aware, of the role of Bolshevism in subverting and subjugating the revolutionary process and creating a new type of ruling class, indeed a ruling class bloodier and more tyrannical than any in history. This scenario has been played out repeatedly over the last century in nations ranging from Russia to China to Cuba to Vietnam to Zimbabwe to South Africa. A more subtle but similar phenomenon has occurred in the “democratic” states of the West as well.

The New Class and its Left-Anarchist Stooges

The classical anarchist Bakunin predicted that state capitalism would evolve in two distinct directions. In one scenario, statist socialists would seize power and create a type of “red bureaucracy” of unprecedented terror. Bolshevism was, of course, the realization of this prophecy. In the second scenario, the ruling classes would seek to pacify the masses and subjugate movements for working class self-determination by means of a paternalistic welfare state.(1) The embryo of the welfare state can be found in the works of the proto-progressive intellectuals Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. The military state of Otto von Bismarck was the first to institute full blown “social security” programs as a means of securing popular loyalty to the state. “Social Democracy” of the British Fabian variety was conceived of by the Webbs, Shaw, Wells and other early twentieth century intellectuals as a method of regulating and controlling the poor through the fostering of statist dependency.(2) The term “New Class” was coined by the former Yugoslavian vice president Milovan Djilas to describe the new aristocracy composed of the Party hierarchy that evolved in Communist countries.(3) But, as Kevin Carson aptly points out, such a term can be applied to the class of managerial bureaucrats and intellectuals that came into being in the Western welfare states during the twentieth century as well. This class consists of social service bureaucrats, public school teachers and university professors, journalists, technical experts, scientists, union bosses, corporate managers, lawyers, politicians, heads of government agencies, lobbyists, policy wonks and public relations experts.(4) The function of this class is to manage the state-corporate apparatus that rules over the broader society. While true power is concentrated into the hands of a small oligarchy of political, corporate, legal, educational, civic and cultural authorities (5), it is this managerial class, the “New Class”, that comprises the primary constituency groups whose support the state depends upon for its continued existence.

The primary common interest of those who comprise the New Class is the expansion of the power of the state that they are dependent upon for their power, income and prestige. Therefore, an ever expanding list of rationales must be developed to justify such statist expansionism. Hence, any and all problems to be found in the black community are declared to be the result of “racism” with the state being the universal solution thereby justifying the expansion of the civil rights bureaucracy, the welfare state and the greater empowerment of the bureaucrats, lawyers, clergy, subsidized businessmen and professionals who benefit from such policies. Similarly, the fact that the state’s educational prisons (“public schools”) consistently turn out functional illiterates is attributed to “lack of adequate funding” thereby justifying the provision of exorbitant salaries and state of the art architectural projects to education bureaucrats. The principal way that modern states expand their power is through the seeking of an increasingly larger body of constituent groups to be made dependent on the state. Therefore, the public is encouraged to seek assistance from the state in obtaining education, housing, health care, provision for old age, child support, day care, transportation and recreational facilities. Every group that has ever faced discrimination-racial minorites, women, homosexuals, the handicapped-is encouraged to seek relief via government regulation. Those with any number of social concerns-pollution, smoking, AIDS, homelessness, drug addiction, animal cruelty-demand a government agency to deal with their particular issues. Every self-serving agenda one can possibly have-protection from competition in business, increasing one’s property values through zoning and land use ordinances, traffic-free public streets, an aesthetically pleasing social environment-is regarded as a legitimate motivation for political activity and state action. To continually deal with all of these matters of “pressing public concern”, the state must be expanded to all-encompassing and, eventually, totalitarian levels with the primary beneficiaries of this statist expansionism being the New Class.

The classical anarchist movement was primarily composed of workers and peasants. No more. The typical “neo-anarchist” (the form of “anarchism” that emerged from the New Left and counterculture movements of the 1960s) (6) is an upper strata working class to upper middle class youth, often the progeny of New Class functionaries or leftist radicals of previous generations, with little formal or permanent experience as a working person. These youth have typically been educated by New Class bureaucrats in state schools. From there, they go on to the state or state-subsidized university systems where they are indoctrinated by their New Class professors with Marxism, postmodernism, nature worship, “gender feminism”, “multiculturalism”, Third Worldism and other irrationalist, pseudo-scientific, pseudo-historical, snake oil ideologies. Excited about encountering the world of ideas for the first time and looking to express their quite proper youthful idealism and rebelliousness, they fall prey to opportunistic political movements for which the campus environment is a recruiting ground. These well-meaning but misguided youth then serve as foot soldiers and cadre for a wide assortment of left-reactionary agendas advanced by New Class left-liberal middle class persons and Marxist charlatans. Consequently, it is not uncommon to see these youth marching in lockstep with hard-line Communists like the Workers World Party or sleazy Democratic Party operatives leading them, all the while professing fidelity to their “anarchist”, “socialist”, “liberatory”, “revolutionary”, “democratic” or “progressive” ideals.

The Real Fascist Threat

One of the most pathetic expressions of the New Class anarchism described above is the so-called “anti-fascist” hysteria exhibited by many in this milieu. George Orwell once remarked that “fascism” was a term so misused and abused by the left that it had been shorn of any real meaning except as a synonym for “something undesirable”.(7) “Fascism” is an epithet used by leftists to describe virtually anything they dislike or do not understand. Hence, Tim McVeigh, a staunch constitutionalist libertarian, was regarded as a “fascist” because of his support for the right to keep and bear arms. Lew Rockwell, an anarcho-capitalist and principled civil libertarian, is condemned as a “fascist” for his criticisms of Marxist theory.

Practically speaking, fascism is a system where private industrial monopolies are propped up by a totalitarian central state under a command economy combined with militaristic national chauvinism and a domestic police state. Fascism can assume any number of outward forms and need not be wrapped in the banner of the swastika or the fasces. Leftists and left-anarchists in the United States typically regard classical fascist and neo-nazi groups, such as the National Alliance or the World Church of the Creator, as the most imminent of dangers. When these groups hold public rallies, the standard scenario is a “demonstration” of a few dozen racists with a few thousand hysterical counter-demonstrators coming out in opposition. Tiny cult-like racist groups, comprised mostly of dysfunctional personalities and regarded as moral lepers by the rest of society, are treated as though they were on the verge of taking over the state. In this sense, the racist becomes a type of pharmakos, a ritual scapegoat, on whom the leftoid herd projects its collective wrathful neurosis and formulates its purification rite.

The current fascist threat in the United States comes not from Hitlerian cults but from the global empire state headquartered in Washington, D.C. Analogies to Nazi Germany are so overused and commonplace in contemporary political discourse that I am hesitant to pursue such a course myself. Yet I feel that the analogy is indeed an apt one. I have documented elsewhere the identical natures of the Nazi war on the Jews and the American war on drug users of the past twenty years. (8) Tragically, the American nation is beginning to mirror the Hitler regime, in its earliest stages, in a number of other ways as well. In the 1930s, the German government began plotting an ostensible war of revenge for a previous humilitation (Versailles) which was in reality a pretext for world conquest. They used a fabricated terrorist incident (the Reichstag Fire) as a justification for eradicating civil liberties and imposing a police state. The Nazi regime appealed to the nationalistic sentiments of the common people in order to procure loyalty to themselves and used public fears (crime, communism, economic uncertainty) to justify increased statist expansionism and directed public fury at approved scapegoats (Jews, Communists, gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc.). Similarly, the contemporary American regime is currently plotting an ostensible war of revenge for a previous humiliation ( the September 11 debacle) which is in reality a pretext for world domination under the New World Order. A fabricated terrorist incident (the Padilla case) has been used as part of the justification for eradicating civil liberties and imposing a police state. The regime is appealing to the nationalistic sentiments of the common people and using public fears (crime, drugs, guns, terrorism, economic uncertainty) to expand its power. Domestically, the regime makes war on approved scapegoats (drug users, Arabs, Muslims, gun owners, smokers, prostitutes, politically incorrect persons). There has been talk of concentration camps at some point in the future. As I said, the American regime now mirrors the Nazi regime in its earliest days. Just as the German government of the 1930s came into being through an alliance of corrupt corporate interests (Krupp, I. B. Farben) and a racial nationalist movement-the Nazis, so has the American government of 2002 come into being through an alliance of corrupt corporate interests (Haliburton, Carlyle Group) and a racial nationalist movement–Zionism.

The Dynamics of Racism and Zionism

For most of American history, the ruling class maintained a type of racial caste system ordered on the principle of “white supremacy”, sanctioned by religion, custom, tradition and law. Although there were both white and black slaves in the pre-Revolutionary period (9), eventually white slavery was phased out and the slavocracy was organized primarily, though not exclusively, on the basis of race. (10) Emancipation of the slaves was followed by a century of apartheid which was only overcome a few decades ago largely through the self-liberation efforts of the black community and its courageous organizers and leaders. In the decades since, a shift in racial power relations has occurred. The ruling class no longer appeals to “white supremacy” as a means of securing the loyalty of its majority white population as it once did. Indeed, “white supremacy” has now become socially unacceptable. The preferred ruling class strategy of today is one of a “divide and conquer” variety whereby different racial and ethnic, along with religious and cultural, groups are played off against one another. This type of strategy is, of course, nothing new, having been practiced by the European colonial masters of Africa and Asia for centuries and by the Communist rulers of multi-ethnic states in the twentieth century.

This “divide and conquer” strategy is played out in a myriad of ways. Malcolm X once remarked that the real enemy of black people is not white racists but government, without whom the racists would be impotent. Poor and working class black families and communities are disrupted, subjugated and destroyed by means of racist “development”, “urban planning”, “blight eradication” and “urban renewal” (i.e., black removal) programs. Entire black communities are then made wards of the state via the social welfare system and the urban reservations of “public housing” and rendered illiterate and unemployable by “public schools”. Black males, particularly youth, are then criminalized en masse via the wars on drugs, guns and crime and herded into the state’s massive slavocracy of the prison-industrial complex. Simultaneously, privileged class blacks- professionals, students, clergy, businessmen, phony “civil rights” leaders- are granted positions of state-imposed privilege by means of patronage appointments,”affirmative action”, “racial preferences”, “minority set asides”, etc. The function of these policies is to secure the loyalty of elite blacks who are then expected to rally their rank-and-file constituents on behalf of the factions of the state with whom the civil rights bureaucracy is aligned. Blacks are conditioned by New Class educators, social workers, clergy, lawyers and others to view “white people” rather than the state capitalist system as the enemy. Simultaneously, white people are conditioned by the “right wing” of the ruling class to view blacks as unjustly privileged favorites or as criminals and parasites. Traditional racial tensions not only continue but are expanded and made more complicated.

As the traditional American power structure of “white supremacy” has declined, the resultant partial racial power vacuum has been filled by a new group espousing racial supremacy-namely, the Zionist and philo-Semitic element among the Jews. Technically, the Jews are not a race but an ethnic subgrouping of the Caucasoid race. And the term “Semitic” is a linguistic adjective rather than an ethnic one and applies to Arabs and other Near Eastern ethnic groups in addition to Jews. Organized Jewish racial nationalism has become one of the most potent forces in American political life. The “Israeli lobby” is one of the most powerful in Washington. Zionism-the ideology of Jewish racial nationalism-is effectively in control of much of the foreign policy apparatus of the US, most of Congress, most of the media and much of the financial and academic world as well. Organized “white racist” groups function as tiny cults often unable to afford attorneys when sued in court while organized Zionist and Jewish racist groups are among the wealthiest “public interest” groups in the nation- the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Southern Poverty Law Center, Anti-Defamation League, American Jewish Congress, Zionist Organization of America and many others.

Organized Jewry has come full circle in the last half century. After being nearly exterminated during the Second World War, organized Jewry is now one of the dominant power groups in the most powerful state in history. Meanwhile, what Norman Finkelstein describes as a “Holocaust industry” has developed whereby the monstrosity of the Holocaust is repeatedly invoked to discourage discussion or even awareness of organized Jewish racism. The Holocaust, a genocide that occurred in nations thousands of miles away receives more attention and commemoration than the black African holocaust of the trans-Atlantic slave trade or the extermination of the indigenous peoples of North America, events that occurred right here in this country. And compare the enormity of the attention to the Jewish Holocaust in the media and academic world to the virtual silence regarding the hundreds of millions of victims of the Communist holocausts in Russia, China and Cambodia. The media and the organized left wax hysterical over fringe white racists like David Duke or the late William Pierce yet a Jewish racist like the “liberal” Alan Dershowitz can actually advocate granting courts the power to issue “torture warrants” and still be considered a “civil rights” attornery and the rabidly anti-black “neoconservative” Jewish racist David Horowitz can advocate the arrest of political dissidents and antiwar activists all the while being hailed as a champion of free speech against political correctness. In some countries, “Holocaust denial” is a felony criminal offense punishable by imprisonment yet there are no comparable laws criminalizing, say, the denial of the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia during the 1970s. Anyone who dares to criticize organized Jewish racist activity is condemned as an “anti-Semite”, a term whose meaning has shifted from someone who hates Jews to someone hated by Jews, as Joseph Sobran points out. (11) Bakunin warned:

“I begin by begging you to believe that I am in no way the enemy nor the detractor of the Jews. Although I may be considered a cannibal, I do not carry savagery to that point, and I assure you that in my eyes all nations have their worth. Each is, moreover, an ethnographically historic product, and is consequently responsible for neither its faults nor its merits….Their history…implanted in them an essentially…bourgeoise tendency…and they have a natural horror and fear of the popular masses, whom they despise, moreover, whether openly or in secret….I know that in expressing with this frankness my intimate opinion on the Jews I expose myself to enormous dangers. Many people share it, but very few dare publicly to express it, for the Jewish sect, very much more formidable than that of the Jesuits, Catholic or Protestant, constitutes today a veritable power in Europe. It reigns despotically in commerce, in the banks, and it has invaded three-quarters of German journalism and a very considerable portion of the journalism of other countries. Woe, then, to him who has the clumsiness to displease it!”

Deja vu!! In the past, anarchists have struggled heroically against the exploitation of workers, white racism and the mistreatment of women and homosexuals. We can now add Zionism, Jewish racism, Marxism and New Class leftism to our list of enemies.

Populism and Anarchism: A Means and an End

If leftism is not the way to anarchism, then what is? Like Lenin, Bakunin recognized that the masses are largely creatures of the herd rather than creatures of the initiative and that a leadership corps of committed revolutionaries is required to effectively incite the masses against the ruling class. Unlike Lenin, Bakunin recognized that leadership through example and inspiration rather than coercion and fraud is the proper means of achieving such aims. Bakunin conceived of a vanguard of “principled militants” who would comprise the cultural, intellectual and activist leadership of a popular revolutionary movement thereby setting the moral tone for the post-revolutionary society in the process. Hence, anarchism is the end to be achieved while populism is the means to that end.

The general public will never be “converted” to anarchism en masse. There will never be a day when the majority of Americans begin putting up black flags and placing “circle A” stickers on their vehicles. Intellectually committed anarchists will always be a handful of people compared to the general population. Rather than attempting to convert the masses to anarchism, anarchists should instead aspire to become a leadership corps of a much, much larger popular anti-state movement. As the Canadian anarchist writer Larry Gambone puts it: “This must be a single issue movement, uniting everyone with a grievance against the state into a movement for the decentralization of power. It must not be allowed to be bogged down by secondary and therefore divisive issues, these can be dealt with by other groups.”(12) The most successful anarchist movement in history-Spanish anarcho-syndicalism-was organized in this manner, with the hard-core anarchist revolutionaries of the FAI providing the leadership corps for the much larger CNT labor union federation.(13) Anarchists should endeavor to become the political, economic and military leaders of a much larger coalition of anti-state dissidents from across the cultural and ideological spectrum. The United States has strong populist traditions dating back to the Revolutionary War era. Figures from American history like Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, William Lloyd Garrison, Robert LaFollette, William Jennings Bryan, Eugene V. Debs, Charles Coughlin, Charles Lindbergh, Norman Thomas, Huey Long and Malcolm X form a historical lineage that can be drawn from.

The closest thing to a genuine expression of an indigenous American populism in recent times has been the militia/patriot/constitutionalist movement of the 1990s. This movement, remarkably diverse in its scope and content, emerged as an authentic grassroots resistance to elite class tyranny and exploitation. Like their counterparts to the south of the border, the Zapatistas, the militia movement uses the symbolism and mythology of the traditional culture of the common people as its reference point rather than the brain-crunching Marxobabble of what George Wallace used to call the “pointy headed intellectuals”. When watching popular militia leaders like Norm Olson, Ray Southwell, Mark Koernke, John Trochmann, Ron Cole, Bo Gritz and Richard Mack, mental images of Nechayev, Malatesta, Makhno, Durruti, Zapata, Villa and Sandino are evoked. I have written about the militia movement elsewhere and believe it to be a model for a grassroots popular revolt against the state. The ideas found among militia people on organization, strategy, tactics and infrastructure are among the best I have ever encountered.(14)

The role of the Bakuninist “principled militant” in modern America is to work to tie together the various threads that comprise popular resistance and the various exploited social groups. These include not only militias and related groups but minority ethnic nationalists, the non-Communist wing of the anti-globalization movement, regional or cultural separatists like the Republic of Texas or the Green Panthers, militant trade unionists and farmers, anti-drug war activists, home schoolers, cults, hate groups, religious fanatics, gangs, gun rights activists, persecuted smokers and drinkers and gamblers, the homeless, prison inmates, ex-convicts and the families of convicts, local secessionists, tax evaders, non-Zionist Jews, rebellious youth, hookers and transvestites, mental patients, construction workers, barflys, the homeless, trailer trash, McDonald’s burger flippers, UFO enthusiasts, soap opera addicts, manicurists, enlisted men and low-level officers from the ranks of the military, small business owners and all the other diverse population groups that collectively form that great mass so despised by ruling classes both now and forevermore, also known as “the people”.

The Wobblies used to say that the goal of working class revolution is to build the new society within the shell of the old. Massive disengagement from the state via the traditional American values of independence, self-help and initiative would be a fitting irony. The emergence of associations of enteprises operated by revolutionary organizations financing anti-state subversion, workers’ cooperatives of the Proudhonian/Mondragon model, guilds and mutual aid associations for the care of the elderly, the sick and the abandoned, a confederation of independent trade unions and wildcat strikers groups, tenants unions, a nationwide union of public school students organized on the classical syndicalist model, a taxpayers union engaged in a nationwide tax strike, defense organizations for the downtrodden (youth, runaways, psychiatric prisoners, jailbirds, drug users, the homeless, prostitutes, street vendors and peddlers), alternative media outlets, independent radio and television stations, common law courts and arbitration services, credit unions, mutual banks, private or local money backed up by a gold or silver standard. All these and more might help to finally collapse the hollowed out shell of the decayed Empire. A grassroots movement of this type, propelling to the center of the political stage revolutionary leaders the caliber of Leonard Peltier, Russell Means, Mumia Abu-Jamal, the late Tim McVeigh, the heroic Tom Alciere, Bill White, Ron Cole, John Trochmann and the late Gordon Kahl, would allow us to begin to claim control over our communities. Militias and guerrilla cells, utilizing Louis Beam’s “leaderless resistance” model of military organization, waging war against brutal cops and jackbooted federal agents, might expel from our communities the agents of state tyranny and terror. The cliched left-progressive slogan “act locally, think globally” is in fact a highly relevant one. From South Central L.A. to the Appalachian Mountains to the wheat farms of Kansas to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, from the villages of Palestine and Iraq to the caves of Afghanistan to the Saudi desert, from the pubs of Belfast to the jungles of Peru to the coca fields of Colombia, from the streets of Moscow to the Alps of Switzerland, from southern Mexico to northern Alaska, our ememies are one and the same-the New World Order and its international state capitalist managers, benefactors and beneficiaries.

Post-New World Order and Radical Decentralization

Attempting to predict the future is always going to be an erratic and potentially dangerous enterprise. Yet history, economics and the social sciences provide us with the means of constructing a fairly elaborate theoretical model, using empirical methodology, of where Western civilization is likely headed in the decades and generations to come. Professor Hans Hermann Hoppe’s path-breaking work, “Democracy: The God That Failed”, describes the political factors slowly but steadily leading the West towards economic meltdown and social disintegration. Just as the Communist regimes of the East plundered their respective nations to the point that economic collapse became inevitable, so are the welfare-warfare corporate-state systems of the West pursuing a course that is likely to produce similar results, perhaps more slowly, but just as certainly. Similarly, the Western nations deliberate pursuit of policies designed to further ethnic and cultural strife will most probably result in blowback of the type experienced by other nations who have followed a similar course. We have only to look to the former Yugoslavia and Central Africa for examples.(15)

The Western world has come full circle in the last fifteen hundred years. Just as the fall of Rome produced the decentralized, liberty-nurturing culture that eventually found its intellectual expression in the Enlightenment, a new global empire- the New World Order in which the American state capitalist regime is the senior partner-is headed for a collapse that opens up new and exciting possibilities for a new wave of radical decentralization and, in the long run, the breeding of a more mature, and perhaps unprecedented, liberty. Our principle opponents in this struggle for liberty are not the backward and discredited chauvinisms of earlier eras but the proponents of a new all-encompassing and more deceitful chauvinism- the chauvinsim of totalitarian monocultural universalism. For five hundred years Western civilization has been evolving towards ever more perfect forms of tyranny. First, theocracy, absolute monarchy and the nation-state system in the Renaissance period followed by the tyranny of the mob disguised as “The General Will” and “Democracy” that began with the French Revolution. Marxism and Bolshevism replaced the mob with the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat”. Fascism and National Socialism, best viewed as Marxist heresies(16), replaced the proletariat with the Race and Nation. Finally, the nihlism, counterculturalism (or anti-culturalism), neo-Marxism, misanthropic nature worship, irrationalism, postmodernism, anti-intellectual identity politics and Orwellian historical falsification that came into fruition in the 1960s converge to form a Kafkesque ideological maze and a doctrinaire totalitarianism wearing the mask of “human rights”, “liberation”, “democracy”, “equality”, “social justice”, “compassion” and other hypocritical pieties.

If our civilization is headed for collapse, and we wish to avoid deprivation, starvation, chaos and bloodshed, popular self-organization for constructive alternatives becomes a necessity. The failure of robber baron, early-style Western capitalism in the East, a scenario that has led many in that tragic region to yearn for the good old days of the Politburo, indicates we must do better when systemic conversion becomes essential in the West. Hoppe’s free market syndicalism (17), perhaps combined with Tuckerite mutualism, Proudhonian cooperativism, Jeffersonian/Bakuninist agrarianism, Rothbardian individualism and Bellocian distributism (18), may provide the needed economic direction. On the cultural front, while pluralism and heterogeneity can often be positive and fulfilling, a multi-cultural empire typically leads not to diversity and tolerance but to strife, conflict, statist opportunism and expansionism, violence and, eventually, civil war.

Typically, left-anarchists postulate “consensus-based decision making process”, “participatory democracy” and “collective democratic community self-management” as the antidote to statism, along with the usual rhetoric about tolerance, diversity, compassion, inclusiveness, equality and so forth. Anyone who has ever encountered left-anarchists in practice will, if intellectually honest, understand the futility of this approach. The typical left-anarchist group will be led by one or two popular individuals guiding a motley crew of assorted hangers-on, spend hours arguing about how to run a meeting before the actual meeting even begins, engage in feuds with four or five other anarchist groups or individuals simultaneously, allow their projects to be coopted by Marxist opportunists, shun those with even the tiniest dissension from the dogma of the month and implicitly assume that all of the decentralized, directly democratic, self-managed, self-determined communities of the future anarchist utopia will “determine” to manage themselves according to rigid, monastic left-anarchist orthodoxy. No community anywhere in the world will choose to practice, say, capitalism, theocracy, racism, sexism, homophobia, pollution, speciesism, hierarchy, ageism, ethnocentrism, xenophobia, patriarchy, monarchy or any other taboo “ism”, “archy” or “phobia”. The degree of homogeneity, conformity and unanimity required for such an arrangement would necessitate totalitarianism. This does not seem to be a particularly attractive way of life or a particularly beneficient means of conducting public affairs. Left-anarchists and the left in general seek not authentic cultural or ideological diversity or even diversity of race or sex. Whether they realize it or not, what they are really striving for is a global, monocultural, totalitarianian conformism that would likely generate unprecedented horrors.

The antidote to the modern state is not monoculturalism or anarcho-totalitarianism but authentic cultural diversity and sovereignty. As Minister Louis Farrakhan says, “If we can’t get along together, then we need to separate”.(19) The way to cultural diversity and sovereignty is not totalitarian statism, civil war, holy war, race war, ethnic cleansing and persecution, but decentralization, secession, localism, community, individualism, dispersion of power, mutual aid, confederation and voluntary association. As the British political philosopher Troy Southgate puts it:

“Within the New World Order, we must agitate for European autonomy; this must be succeeded by a campaign for an independent England; followed by the quest for regionalism and village communities.”(20)

This seems to be a model for all the various nations, regions and cultures of the earth. Left to their own devices and allowed to pursue their own ends, those with common interests tend to migrate towards one another and simultaneously separate themselves from those with whom they are in conflict. Groups of individuals with a common cultural identity then form alliances, institutions, enterprises, families, communities, traditions, habits, customs and norms. Standards of conduct develop that individual community members are expected to uphold with social pressure, ostracism, economic sanctions or expulsion being the penalty for deviation from established expectations. Likewise, those individuals and communities with differing or conflicting norms or expectations are regarded as the Other, and mutual self-segregation occurs. This is the way that a normal, functional, healthy, harmonious, peaceful, prosperous, free society evolves. To avoid misunderstanding, let me say that I am NOT talking about mere racial separation here although it is possible and probable that communities of black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish or indigenous separatists might develop in such a system. Common beliefs and world views tend to be a more binding factor in the weaving of a social fabric that skin pigmentation. Consequently, Christians go with Christians, Muslims with Muslims, drug addicts with drug addicts, Bloods with Bloods, Crips with Crips, bikers with bikers, Koresh-worshippers with Koresh-worshippers, homosexuals with homosexuals, homophobes with homophobes, bigots with bigots, jerks with jerks, idiots with idiots. Professor Hoppe predicts that secession and autonomy movements will be the political wave of the future with sovereign regions and free cities being the result, a vision remarkably similar to that of Bakunin and Kropotkin, who modeled their respective anarcho-collectivism and anarcho-communism on the guilds and free cities of the High Middle Ages.

A Final Word

If my critique of the left and left-anarchism seems harsh or arrogant, let me say that I am speaking to myself as much as anyone else. Life is a process of permanent psychological and intellectual as well as physical change. Just as I had to learn to crawl before I could play basketball, so I had to learn to read before I could study, for example, the implications of relativity physics for depth psychology. I had to sort through a lot of political and ideological weeds before I found any flowers or fruit. Recently, I came across an essay I wrote twenty-two years ago expressing the conservative Republican, evangelical Christian, Cold Warrior views I had at the time. Ten years later, I was a neo-Marxist and left-anarchist ideologue, a member of the ACLU and IWW, a supporter of Earth First! and marching with the Workers World against the Klan. Between the ages of, say, fifteen to thirty, I came to reject, in order of succession, religious fundamentalism first, then American imperialism and nationalism, capitalism, Marxism, liberalism, humanism, democracy, Zionism and monocultural universalism.

At the same time, I have kept those things that I have found throughout my intellectual journeys that I consider to be of substance. I can appreciate the wisdom literature of the Old Testament and the adages of the Gospels, while being repulsed by the theological, cultic side of Judaism and Christianity. I admire the ideals of the American Revolution without being a flag-waving patriot. I continue my adherence to the critique of the state and emphasis on class struggle found in traditional anarchism while criticizing the pseudo-Marxist, counterculture nihlism of neo-anarchism. I respect the individualism of the modern libertarians while maintaining my antipathy towards corporate power. I incorporate the practices of the patriot militias into my own approach while rejecting their frequent social conservatism. And I aknowledge the brilliance of the Third Positionist analysis of international Zionist power, globalism and the need for cross-cultural, cross-ideological alliances all the while deploring their frequent racism and xenophobia. Throughout all of my approaches my basic values of liberty and community have remained intact. The first step in the path to liberation is to liberate one’s own mind from dogma and superstition. The leftoids, Marxoids and anarchoids who mindlessly repeat slogans, rhetoric and cliched doctrines pulled out of the anarcho-catechism without reflection mirror the religious fanatics and racial ideologues of whom they are so critical. Can’t anarchists do better than that?



(1) Noam Chomsky, “Secrets, Lies and Democracy”

(2) Keith Preston, “Reply to Brian Oliver Shepard’s Anarchism Vs. Right-Wing Anti-Statism” at; Kevin A. Carson, “Liberalism and Social Control: The New Class’ Will to Power” at

(3) Milovan Djilas, The New Class. See the discussion of Djilas in “The Generation That Knew Not Josef” by Kenneth Lloyd Billingsley

(4) Carson, “New Class”

(5) Charley Reese, column, 6-10-02

(6) Larry Gambone,”Sane Anarchy”, pamphlet available from Red Lion Press

(7) Billingsley, “Generation”

(8) Keith Preston, “The Political Economy of the War on Drugs” at See also Richard Lawrence Miller, Drug Warriors and Their Prey and Nazi Justiz: Law of the Holocaust

(9) Michael Hoffman, “They Were White and They Were Slaves”

(10) The population of the Confederate states at the beginning of the Civil War was approximately ten million persons, four million of whom were black slaves. There were also roughly 130,000 free blacks, 5000 of whom held slaves of their own. One in five southern whites were slaveholders. Interestingly, the Confederacy formed a military alliance with five separate American Indian nations.

(11) Joseph Sobran, speech to Institute for Historical Review, 8-17-02

(12) Gambone, “Sane Anarchy”

(13) Murray Bookchin, “The Heroic Years”

(14) Keith Preston, “Left and Right: Prospects for a Revolutionary Alliance” at ;  James Murray, “Chiapas and Montana: Tierra y Libertad” at

(15) Thomas Chittum, “Civil War Two”

(16) Larry Gambone, “What Is Populism?”, pamphlet available from Red Lion Press; David Ramsay Steele, “The Mystery of Fascism”, Liberty, November 2001.

(17) Hans Hermann Hoppe, “Democracy: The God That Failed”

(18) Karl Jahn, “Distributism”

(19) Quoted by John Baumgardner, “Revolutionary Klansman”, at

(20) Troy Southgate interview, conducted by Dan Gheti, at

Copyright 2002. American Revolutionary Vanguard. All rights reserved.

1 reply »

  1. “Educational prisons”? You mean the free and universal schooling fought for by every major progressive in history? You don’t blush just a little at the garishness of your hyperbole? In school as in many other things in life, you usually get out of it what you’re willing to put in.

Leave a Reply to Zamo Purilian Cancel reply