Todd Lewis hosts the third Round-Table discussion. Keith Preston will represent the Anarchist position, Sean Gabb will represent Classical Liberalism, Curt Doolittle will represent the Propertarian perspective and Todd will represent traditionalism.
In episode 8, Keith and Tim discuss fascism, a term that many people throw around loosely, but hardly have any historical or intellectual understanding as to what it really means. Just like many on the right will label anyone on the left that they deem corrupt as a communist, the same logic applies to the left and how they label anyone on the right they deem corrupt to be a fascist. This misplaced hostility towards one another is at the heart of why the world can’t progress towards peace. How can society resolve its differences if it doesn’t understand the ideas of its past? Coming to terms with these movements and what they represented is at the core of what this podcast is all about.
Richard Spencer discusses the protests and street battles that occured in Berkeley, California, on April 15, 2017; in particular, he sees a return of political violence that is less like that of the 1960s and more like that of the 1920s and ’30s in Europe.
By Alexander Reid Ross
Does anti-fascism bear revolutionary potential? This question lingers in today’s tense climes — yet the precise meaning of “revolution” remains unclear. At the Conservative Political Action Conference in the United States this year, former UKIP leader Nigel Farage identified the successes of Brexit and Donald Trump as the beginnings of a “great global revolution.” Either Trump and Farage have joined the revolutionary left — or reality is far more complicated.
To understand the rise of Trump and Brexit, we would do well to return to the notion of the “national revolution,” which has over the years led many members of the working class to actively support, or at least passively acquiesce to, the gains of reactionary movements worldwide. Only by understanding the complex intersections between left and right can we begin to develop the analytical and tactical tools to prevent the creep of the working class towards fascist ideology, and to clarify the necessity of anti-fascist struggle against the very state-form as such.
The National Revolution
The antecedents of the fascist creep go back to the 1920s and 1930s. Before Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in 1933, his second in command, Gregor Strasser, led a powerful tendency in the Nazi Party that stressed affiliation neither with capitalism nor with communism, but with a “national revolution” favoring a United States of Europe — with workers’ syndicates functioning under a corporatist state within the ambit of national solidarity.
By Wes Enzinna
At lunchtime on May 19, 2012, 18 masked men and women shouldered through the front door of the Ashford House restaurant in Tinley Park, Illinois, a working-class suburb of Chicago. Some diners mistook the mob for armed robbers. Others thought they might be playing a practical joke. But Steven Speers, a stalactite-bearded 33-year-old who had just sat down for appetizers at a white nationalist meet and greet, had a hunch who they were. The gang filing in with baseball bats, police batons, hammers, and nunchucks were members of Anti-Racist Action (ARA) and the Hoosier Anti-Racist Movement (HARM), two groups dedicated to violently confronting white supremacists.
“Hey, bitches!” one of the anti-racists shouted before charging Speers’ table. “ARA is going to fuck this place up!”
Speers stood up and warned his seven companions to prepare to fight. His girlfriend, Beckie Williams, who had organized the lunchtime gathering on the white supremacist website Stormfront, grabbed a butter knife. Francis Gilroy, a homeless man who had driven up from Florida to find “work for whites,” as an online ad for the meeting promised, tried to pull the attackers off his companions. Williams was clubbed on the arm. Speers was hit on the head so hard he vomited.
Alt-right figure Richard Spencer delivered a speech at Auburn University in Alabama, Tuesday, despite its earlier cancellation due to security fears.
Maybe this will someday become one of those iconic photographs depicting the tenor of a particular time period, like the Vietcong guy getting shot in the head, the little Vietnamese girl with napalm burns running down the street, or the US flag being hoisted at Iwo Jima.
“Political discourse as it was in 2017 America.”
It’s Going Down. Listen here.
We’re several months into the Trump regime and we can now begin to make some relative critiques and analyses about our activity and how things have gone down. How have our predictions about Trump played out? Where has our analysis fallen flat? How have managers and bureaucrats from within the Left attempted to push revolt back into politics, and have we let them? But moreover, how have anarchist and anti-authoritarian rebels been successful in acting within the current situation? How have we not been? What do both our victories and our shortcomings tell us about what it would mean to go beyond the capacity and ability that we have now?
Wanting to find answers to these questions, we sought to link up with a participant from the CrimethInc. Ex-Workers Collective, a long running anarchist network. In the interview, we talk about these questions as well as the recent bombing of Syria by the US, conflicts within the administration itself, the recent ‘Week of Solidarity Against Repression,’ thoughts on continued far-Right activity, what Trump’s low popularity means for anarchists, and the tasks that lie before us.
By Andrew Doyle
any of us on the left are tired of playing a losing game. Too often we are unhorsed by the worst excesses of our own side, in particular the mindless peddling of identity politics as a substitute for rigorous debate. Each week brings with it a fresh litany of petitions, articles and social-media posts, all contributing to the impression that the left has turned into a coterie of preening killjoys, unschooled in the art of self-awareness.
Recent low points include calls for Doctor Who to regenerate as a black woman in an effort better to reflect the diversity of the Time Lord community; Caitlin Moran’s advice to young girls that they should avoid reading books by male authors; and Lincoln University Students’ Union’s banning its conservative society from using its social media account for the crime of highlighting restrictions on free speech. Irony, it seems, is not a strong point among these guardians of social rectitude.
More recently, a British artist has called for the destruction of a painting currently being displayed at the Whitney Biennial exhibition in New York because its theme – the murder of an African-American child in Mississippi in 1955 – is not appropriate material to be tackled by a white artist. Apparently, ‘white free speech and white creative freedom have been founded on the constraint of others, and are not natural rights’. Many of us find the destruction of artwork and the curtailing of free expression to be troubling phenomena. The historically illiterate have no such misgivings.
It’s unhelpful to describe this trend as ‘political correctness gone mad’. The phrase has become predictable right-wing boilerplate; one associates it with the screeds of Richard Littlejohn, or the reactionary paranoia of Jon Gaunt, who believes that it ‘will soon be a crime to be a heterosexual married parent’. In any case, ‘political correctness gone mad’ has become a cliché, and all writers worth their salt avoid clichés like the plague.
The sledgehammer tactics of contemporary identity politics have little to do with political correctness as traditionally understood. Tacit social contracts concerning polite forms of discourse in the workplace, schools or public spaces are hardly a controversial notion. We all adhere to such principles in one form or another, albeit with some inevitable sticking points and disagreements along the way. We are facing something far more sinister: a mutated form of political correctness that seeks to police language and thought alike. It’s an authoritarian movement spearheaded by well-intentioned activists who are seemingly blind to their own bigotry.
Bay Area Guy’s article Healthcare and The Donald about the demise of the Republican healthcare bill, and its implications for Trumpian nationalism
How America’s healthcare system is a vile abomination, and the passage of Ryancare/Trumpcare would have compounded the problem
Richard Spencer’s article Why Trump Must Champion National Healthcare
How Obamacare itself wasn’t really “socialism” but rather an insurance scheme
How like debt deflation, our current healthcare albatross renders Americans meek and servile
Donald Trump Praised Socialized Healthcare in the past
Why Trump owning universal healthcare would force both neoliberals and “cucks” into a corner
Why whoever passes single-payer will alter the political landscape for generations
Gaining ground by championing certain progressive causes(universal healthcare, a stronger safety net, and a higher minimum wage), ignored by the corporatized left
Corporate suppression of free speech, and how the threat of loss of healthcare shuts down political dissidents
Tony Soprano Versus the Health Insurance Mafia
Why insurance companies should be public utilities, and the need for price controls on prescriptions drugs
Bay Area Guy’s experience working at an insurance brokerage firm
Globalization and Designated Shitting Streets
UCSF’s decision to outsource 49 of its IT jobs to India
Steve Sailer’s article Malibu, America’s Least Welcoming Town, Declares Itself a Sanctuary City
Wahhabism and Globalism
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Introduces the Stop Arming Terrorists Act
Refugees and White South Africans
By Stephen Lemons
Hey, lefties with guns, that’s cool.
At least, that was my first impression upon seeing about 40 or so assorted anarchists, Brown Berets, and members of a group calling itself the Phoenix John Brown Gun Club across the street from the state Capitol, openly armed to the proverbial teeth.
Though to many they may seem to be revolutionaries, primed to take the fight against whatever variety of perceived fascism, the self-proclaimed anti-fascists of “Antifa” are a millstone around the neck of the political left and possibly a greater danger to progressive and liberal values than even Donald Trump himself.
Todd Lewis is joined by Keith Preston (anarchist), Sean Gabb (classical liberal) and Alex Fontana (altright) to discuss Race Realism.
In episode 6, Keith and Tim discuss classical liberalism and reform liberalism (often considered progressivism today), which is a philosophy that came out of the enlightenment that held the idea that citizens have inalienable rights against established systems of power, like the monarchy or the state. In fact, the American Revolution was one of the first classic liberal movements and most of the founding documents, on which the United States of America is based, such as the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, are a direct embodiment of the core principles presented in the ideology of classical liberalism.
Unfortunately today, many people, especially on the right of the political spectrum, hear the word liberalism and immediately get negative connotations in their mind when it comes to the meaning of the word, even though the slogan of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is rooted in classical liberalism. The misunderstanding derives from how classical liberalism split off in many directions, such as those in favor of a more negative approach when it comes to freedom (libertarians) and those with a more positive approach when it comes to freedom (reform liberalism/progressives). Over time, reform liberalism came to define the left, such as with past policies like the New Deal and new movements like those who follow Bernie Sanders.