John Stossel: More Anarchist Than Most Reply

http://www.takimag.com/article/john_stossel_more_anarchist_than_most/

By Gavin McInnes

The Anarchists in Vancouver are not happy about the Winter Olympics being held there and recently marched through town smashing windows, covering their faces, and yelling about everything from capitalism to the seal hunt to indigenous land. Some of their beefs are valid. The Olympics is a big waste of taxpayers’ money and in a city where one junkie dies every day, the local government could afford to be focusing on more serious problems. However, when reading the “manifestos” of today’s anarchists, one thing becomes abundantly clear, they hate capitalism more than they hate government.

I grew up going to anarchist conventions and don’t regret the various A’s I have tattooed up and down my arms in the slightest (in fact, I just got two more). We looked exactly like the 2010 Olympic protestors when we did things like protest outside the Chinese Embassy for China’s human rights violations in 1988. But back then, only a handful of anarchists would cover their faces. It drove us nuts because we were out there screaming about government ineptness and guys are acting like our adversary knows what he’s doing. “You realize your assumption that they are recording your face and putting you in some kind of massive database implies they know what they’re doing, right?” we’d ask them. This seemingly small detail is actually indicative of a much bigger split in the anarchist community: government aptitude.

 

“Politics is Hollywood for ugly people and the White House is just a big DMV with Greek columns out front.”
Anarchists with covered faces smashing the windows of retail stores are in fact, communists. Sure, the wage discrepancy between CEOs and factory workers is disgusting. I also hate the way big business ships in illegals and lowers the minimum wage to zero but if anyone has dealt with government at any level in their adult life they’d realize big business is the lesser of two evils by a long shot.

Today’s anarchists want money out of entrepreneur’s hands and into government hands where it can rot. They advocate unions like it was the 1930s and guys with tweed caps needed to get compensation for black lung. Nice sentiment but today’s teacher’s union is the most powerful political lobby in the world and has more cronies on both the Democratic and the Republican side than any other group in Washington. These unions are essentially mobsters who shake down anyone who dares pay electricians less than $50 an hour plus time-and-a-half for overtime plus double time-and-a-half for holidays. That’s more than architects and doctors make when they start out. Is $700 a day the fair wage the anti-capitalists want for the workingman? It’s more money than I ever made and I’m rich.

I often visit the anarchist squat Dial House where the founders of anarcho punk, Crass set up shop in the early 70s and are still there today. I had a seven-hour argument with the patriarch of the commune, Penny Rimbaud because I had the gall to point out it was ridiculous Mugabe was still alive and said if I was a Zimbabwean, he would have been blown up long ago. The Taliban did a seamless job of assassinating Massoud and all it took was a trick camera so why can’t the MDC do something similar? Like all anarchists, Rimbaud was stunned I didn’t know this wasn’t all part of the big government plan. “Zimbabwe is needed to cart diamonds out of South Africa,” he explained. “America needs him there the same way they need Iraq to get oil out.”

I don’t get it. If government is such a powerful monster, why do anarchists want to give it The Gap’s profits? They can’t seem to decide if the government is this elaborate network James Bond reports to or a quaint group of intellectuals who want to empower the poor. The truth is. It’s neither. They are not all-knowing they are know nothings. They are not a “secret society” (as Crass once said) they can’t even keep an infidelity secret. Since the president got caught using a cigar as a dildo, we’ve learned: John Edwards was screwing his biographer, governor Mark Sanford was boning his Argentinean mistress, senator Larry Craig was fishing for blowjobs in the bathroom, and Spitzer was fucking prostitutes with his socks on. Politics is Hollywood for ugly people and the White House is just a big DMV with Greek columns out front.

Danny Schechter’s new book Plunder! Investigating Our Economic Calamity and the Subprime Scandal, makes it crystal clear: the government is everything bad you can say about big business but without the “employing people and manufacturing stuff” part. This sentiment is what drew me to the anarchist movement in the first place—not Marx’s intellectual claptrap about his “dialectic.”

This is why, as an adult, I’m drawn to libertarians like John Stossel. Sure there’s flaws like a love of open borders which I see as a chance for big business to go on an exploitation bender (anarchists also want open borders which I never quite got), but Stossel’s show spends 90 percent of its time pointing out government incompetence and exposing the way they oppress the everyman. During each episode he holds up a tiny book that’s about half the size of the communist manifesto and explains this is the bill of rights and the constitution combined. Then he shows us the endless piles of documentation the government uses for even the most insignificant rule. “This is all we need,” he says holding up the small book. That’s the closest I’ve seen to a plausible anarchist goal in America—ever.

Then Stossel gets specific. We learn about swimming pools that have diving boards revoked because of impending danger and then cause more accidents because kids no longer know where the deep end is. We hear local governments in Texas are strangling restaurants with insanity like “No Outside Dancing” laws (a bizarre rule New York’s previous mayor used to close down clubs he didn’t like). Stossel is very vocal about big money firms like Goldman Sachs and how much they’ve benefited from Obama’s new big government plans. From daycare workers being muscled into joining unions to California being bankrupted by bureaucrats, John Stossel has done more to mobilize hatred for government than any punk kid in black sweatshirt could ever hope to.

If the fashionable punks in Vancouver really cared about personal freedom and really wanted to abolish as much of the government as possible, they would swallow their prejudice, tune into Fox, get over his moustache, and take notes from the most articulate and driven anarchist in America today. In short, it’s time for crusty punks to Get Stosselized!

(I’m trademarking that so don’t even think about stealing it.)

American Renaissance Conference Canceled Due to Threats of Violence 16

Read about it on David Yeagley’s blog.

Isn’t it ironic that leftoids who are always complaining about their opponents’ alleged efforts to “silence” the voices of their favorite groups (minorities, feminists, gays, transexuals, etc.) do not see any need to extend what they hypocritically demand for themselves to those who do not share their own ideological biases?

The American Renaissance conference was repeatedly relocated and then canceled due to threats of violence against the employees of the hotel hosting the conference. So much for these leftoids’ commitment to “workers’ rights.” We already know how much they value freedom of speech. Theirs is the standard Communist line of support for free speech only when out of power. Now that cultural leftism is becoming the mainstream social norm, they have no qualms about showing their true colors. It should also be remembered that violent intimidation of opponents was a tactic of the German Nazi movement  even before it took power and overthrew the Weimar regime. This kind of behavior by lefto-fascist “anti-racists” is even more common in Europe.

It should also be pointed out that American Renaissance is not a fascist nor neo-Nazi organization. Its founder and leader, Jared Taylor, has taken only two public positions on race: repeal of antidiscrimination laws which many libertarians view as an abridgement of private property rights and freedom of association, and a moratorium on Third World immigration, whose critics have included such prominent neo-Nazis as Ralph Nader, the late African-American politician Barbara Jordan, and the black writer Carol Swain, who has written critically but objectively on the white nationalist movement in the U.S. Past American Renaissance conferences have featured Jewish speakers like Paul Gottfried, Michael Hart, Michael Levin, Rabbi Mayer Schiller, and even anarchists like Joe Sobran. David Yeagley, an American Indian, was scheduled to appear at this year’s conference.

What the lefto-fascists object to is the mere fact that some people are holding a meeting to discuss or promote conservative views on racial issues.  Whatever one thinks about these questions, if the lefto-fascists are successful in these kinds of effort to silence opponents through violent and random threats, it is quite likely they will start using similar tactics against other ideological opponents as well. If they can deny freedom of speech and association to racial conservatives, why not pro-lifers, conservative Christians, opponents of gay marriage, Second Amendment advocates, critics of environmentalism, economic conservatives, men’s or fathers’ rights groups or anyone else who is outside the totalitarian humanist paradigm.

It is also likely that as totalitarian humanism/political correctness/Cultural Marxism becomes ever more deeply entrenched into institutions that “law enforcement,” law and order liberals like the SPLC, and extra-legal, lefto-fascist, Communist and anarcho-leftoid hoodlums will start bending towards one another and establish a more cooperative relationship. Be prepared.

Caste Systems, Forced Marriages, Book Burning, and Blasphemy Trials 6

Where? In Saudi Arabia? Iran? Afghanistan? Pakistan? No, in enlightened, progressive, tolerant and humane England, France, Finland, and Germany. Otherwise known as the agenda of Totalitarian Humanism.  As I have previously written:

The ultimate aim of multiculturalism is the creation of a totalitarian state ordered as a type of caste system where individual privilege is assigned on the basis of group identity and group privilege is assigned on the basis of the position of the group in the pantheon of the oppressed.

Here are some examples:

Thought Police Muscle Up in Britain 

In September 2006, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, Codie Stott, asked a teacher if she could sit with another group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu. The teacher’s first response, according to Stott, was to scream at her: “It’s racist, you’re going to get done by the police!”… According to her mother, she was placed in a bare cell for 3 1/2 hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence and then released without charge.

A 10-year-old child was arrested and brought before a judge, for having allegedly called an 11-year-old boya “Paki” and “bin Laden” during a playground argument at a primary school (the other boy had called him a skunk and a Teletubby). When it reached the court the case had cost taxpayers pound stg. 25,000.

So schoolgirls and children are being arrested for “crimes against the racial order”? Where have we seen that before?

A Book to be Burned 

Sarkozy Hints at Forced Interracial Marriages

Finnish Politician Prosecuted for Blasphemy 

German Court Convicts Man for Insulting Islam

Updated News Digest February 13-14, 2010 Reply

Why Read the Sunday Papers When You Can Read AttacktheSystem.Com!

Community Organizing and National-Anarchism presentation by Andrew Yeoman

Tribal Anarchism Video Series Parts One, Two, Three, Four

United Anarchism Vs United Nationism 

Fall of the New World Order

The Tyranny of “Tolerance”: Resist Politically Correct Fascism to the Death!!!

Quotes of the Week:

“Kirk called conservatism ‘the conservation of a particular people at a particular place at a particular time.’  While I don’t generally call myself a conservative, there’s a good deal of value here.  Yet I don’t share the paleos’ commitment to particularity to the point of denying abstraction outright.  Some principles are unconditionally valid.  Yet they apply differently to different peoples (and persons) at different places and different times.  For instance, one may be an anarchist (or socialist or small-d democrat, etc.) and take this to be an unconditional value, but only an idiot (though there are certainly plenty of these) would say we have to model anarchy in 21st century America strictly on the basis of Civil War era Spain.  I suppose this is largely the point of tribal anarchy, panarchy and “anarchism without adjectives.”

                                                                                     -Ruhollah James

“After almost ten years of Americans whining about 9/11 [something that happens in the rest of the world almost weekly, usually due to American or American-financed bombing], lately amplified by the shrill, effeminate shrieks of Bloomboig’s New Yoikers about the “terra-trial” [held quite successfully and safely in London and Madrid], how refreshing to hear the words of “The Hero of the XXth Century” [Yockey]: ” I owe my life to pure chance. What difference does it make if I sit or stand?

                                                                                              -James J. O’Meara

It Is Now Official: The U.S.A. Is a Police State by Paul Craig Roberts

Secession Is in the Air by Kirkpatrick Sale

Secessionist Sentiment Is Rising by Pat Buchanan

Wars Sending U.S. Into Ruin by Eric Margolis

Left Behind: Liberals Get a War President of Their Very Own by Murray Polner

The Hypocrisy of Politically Correct Vermont Neoliberals by Thomas Naylor

That Magical Water’s Edge by Kevin Carson

Nullification, Secession, and the Human Scale of Political Order by Josh Eboch

Nullification and Interposition by Clyde Wilson

What Has “The Union” Ever Done for Colorado? It’s Time for Secession! by Mark Crovelli

Secession: A Solution to the Washington, D.C. Debt Threat by Ron Holland

I Don’t Mean to Say I Told You So, But…. by Stephen Walt

The Orange Revolutions, Peeled by Justin Raimondo

The Bosnian Threat to the Empire by Nebojsa Malic

Destabilizing Pakistan: Echoes of Cambodia by Pratap Chatterjee and Tom Engelhardt

Obama Surge Driving Thousands From Their Homes by Chris Floyd

Obama, the War President by Helen Thomas

The Terror-Industrial Complex by Chris Hedges

Where Has the Antiwar Movement Gone? by Ryan Jaroncyk

Another Election Goes the Wrong Way for Uncle Sam by Neil Clark

Repeating Pentagon Lies Over Gitmo Recidivism by Andy Worthington

AP Article Fuels Iran War Hysteria by Jason Ditz

North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il Makes Denuclearization Pledge by Jon Hershkovitz and Ben Blanchard

The Media’s Tall Tales Over Iraq by Brendan O’Neill

Fear of Peace Will Be the Death of Israel by Bradley Burston

The Apartheid Will End When Israelis Have to Face Its Costs by Tony Karon

The Lessons of Iraq Have Been Ignored-The Target Is Now Iran by Seumas Milne

The Middle East No Longer Matters by Jay Hatheway

Why Does Sarah Palin Want More War? by Karen Kwiatkowski

Same Empire, Different Emperor by Laurence Vance

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Think Things Through by William Norman Grigg

Middle-Class Rage by Jack Douglas

The Financial Crisis Versus Students by Christian Eubank and Peter Schiff

You Have No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in the Police State of America by Declan McCullagh

Out of the Mouths of Our New World Order Masters by David Kramer

The Green Gestapo Is Here by William Norman Grigg

Global Depression: The Real Problems Will Start in Japan by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

The Role of the Organic Homo by James J. O’Meara (see related commentary by Alisdair Clarke and Keith Preston)

Remembering Plaxico by Manuel Lora

Guns, ID Cards, Weed: Nullification Is on the Rise by Michael Boldin

Obama, Hands Off China: Get Your Own House in Order by Chris Clancy

CIA Abets in the Murder of Christian Missionary by David Kramer

Cop Does a Good Deed by William Norman Grigg

Feds Attempt Espionage Into Internet Viewing Habits of Citizens by David Kramer

The Kid, the Pimp, and the Spineless Media by Kelley B. Vlahos

Some Thoughts for the Coming Year and Beyond by Kevin Carson

You Must Be This Tall to Overthrow the Government by Roderick Long

News Flash: “We No Longer Control Our Government” by Kevin Carson

Give the Commons Back to the People by Francois Tremblay

Tea Partiers Versus Ron Paul by Brian Doherty

The Bankrupt PIGS of Europe by Pat Buchanan

Anarchism and Voluntary Cooperation by Barefoot Bum

An Anarchist’s Strategy to Dismiss Every Foreclosure in Florida from Matt Weidner

Visiting a Modern Day Slave Plantation an interview with Nancy A. Heitzeg

Crime Pays: How NYC Bosses Rob the Working Poor by Michelle Chen

Property Is Theft?  from Infoshop.Org

Institutionalizing Howard Zinn by Ralph Nader

LaGuardia and the Truth About Marijuana by Fred Gardner

Sarah Palin’s Lapel Pin by Stonewall

The Secret to Long Life: “Right Tribe” by Christopher Donovan

The State Is a Deadly Virus by Butler Shaffer

Who Shows Up at Tea Partys? by James Ostrowski

Secession: The Ignorance of Chris Matthews by Thomas DiLorenzo

Sarah Palin Drinks the Neocon Kool-Aid by Lew Rockwell

PIG Jokes About Murdering Citizens Exercising Their Right to Bear Arms by William Norman Grigg

How to Beat the War Party by Justin Raimondo

Liberty Versus Patriotism by Ivan Eland

America’s Veterans: The Anatomy of Homelessness by Monica Nilsson

The Mythical Potency of Terrorism Fear-Mongering by Glenn Greenwald

Leon Wieseltier, Anti-Semitism, And Israel by Daniel Luban

Bombs Away: Conservatives Embrace War by Doug Bandow

Specks and Beams in U.S. Foreign Policy by Jacob Hornberger

 Lebanon Backs Hezbollah Against Israel by Jason Ditz

Obama Copying Bush-Era Detention Policies by Thomas Eddlem

The Cold War Is History by Doug Bandow

Obama’s Green Police by Norvell Rose

“Yes, I Can Break the Law: I’m a PIG, Damn It!!” by William Norman Grigg

Loyalty Test by Lew Rockwell

PIGS Steal Private Arms Collection by William Norman Grigg

Are First Amendment Rights Also Natural Rights? by James Leroy Wilson

The State As Absentee Owner  by Francois Tremblay

Can the Real Estate Predators Fight Off the Oil Company Predators? by Paul Craig Roberts

Books 2 Prisoners: Volunteer Program Connects Prisoners with Reading Materials from Infoshop.Org

The Battle for Marjah by Patrick Cockburn

The R.E.A.L. Ghost Busters from The Occidental Quarterly

The Weathervane as Metaphor by Justin Raimondo

Talking Our Way Out of Afghanistan by Jeff Huber

The Obama Disarmament Paradox by Greg Mello

Paul Goodman Essay Contest (hat tip to Joel Schlosberg)

Never Heard of the Pearcy Massacre? by Nicholas Stix

This Is What Muslim Children Are Taught in Britain 

Hispanic Gangs Ethnically Cleansing Black Neighborhoods in L.A. by Brenda Walker

Does Harvard Hate White People? by Paul Craig Roberts

Troops Randomly Patrol Streets in Pittsburgh, Respond to “Domestic Disputes” from PrisonPlanet.Com

Taxes an Unnecessary Compromise on Marijuana by Thomas Knapp

Obama: Enemy of the Working Class by Sheldon Richman

Indications of Open-Source Economy by John Robb

Obama Takes a Blue Pencil to the Bill of Rights by A. Barton Hinkle

The President’s Power to Kill Citizens by Philip Giraldi

Torture Is a Crime, Not a State Secret by Matthew Harwood

In the Land of the Stoner Cops by Nir Rosen

The Goat in the  Clearing  by Alexander Cockburn

The Economic Velociraptors by Andrew Cockburn

The Taliban Isolated Bin Laden by Gareth Porter

That Which Cannot Be Spoken by William Blum

I Cut My Hair, But I’m Not a Terrorist by Dave Lindorff

Obama’s Drug War Budget: Looking a Lot Like Bush’s by Bill Piper

The Erotic Theater of the Mind by Dr. Susan Block

Politics, Corruption, and El Salvador by Charles R. Larson

Kevin Carson and Richard Stallman Discuss Intellectual Property from Infoshop.Org

 Help Noam Chomsky Find His Inner Anarchist by Roderick Long

Pericles and the Athenian Ideal, Part One by Troy Southgate

The Persecution of Kevin MacDonald by Greg Johnson

Heidegger “The Nazi” Part One by Michael O’Meara

Heidegger “The Nazi” Part Two by Michael O’Meara

Heidegger “The Nazi” Part Three by Michael O’Meara

A Warning to the Tea Party Nation by Chuck Baldwin

“The Italians were called wops, the Jews were called hymies, I was of course a greaseball, and every Hispanic was a spic. Well, we all got along famously! It was rough, but it was fine.”

                                                                -Taki Theodoracopulos

American Third Position Party Chairman William D. Johnson interviewed by Dr. Tomislav Sunic

Modern Feudalism and the Persistent Threat of Totalitarianism Michael Kleen interviewed by Dr. Tomislav Sunic

Lock the Bush Team in Prison Francis Boyle interviewed by Scott Horton

Helping Iraqi Children Injured by U.S. Aggression Cole Miller interviewed by Scott Horton

We Who Dare Say No to War Murray Polner interviewed by Scott Horton

Free Speech Is Dead Brendan O’Neill interviewed by Scott Horton

On Agrarianism by Matthew Raphael Johnson

“The “clash of civilizations” is, in a very literal sense, a clash of God and Mammon. The Islamic revolutionaries are driven by a fanatical devotion to their god and the promises they believe he has made to them if only they take up arms on his behalf. The nations of the West are driven by an almost as fanatical devotion to Mammon, that is, to wealth, luxury, power, pleasure and privilege. Further, the culture of the West combines this unabashedly materialist ethos with rejection of strength and discipline in favor of a maternalistic emphasis on health, safety, “sensitivity”, “self-esteem”, “potential”, “personal growth”, “getting in touch with one’s inner child”, “feelings” and other concepts common to pop culture psychobabble. Of course, the socio-cultural ramifications of this is to create a society of weaklings, mediocrities and crybabies.”

                                                                                                   -Keith Preston

Fistful of Love by Black Oak Arkansas with Ruby Starr

Baby, I’m Amazed by Ruby Starr

Levity Ball by Alice Cooper (1968)

This Is the Day by Captain Beefheart

Big Eyed Beans From Venus by Captain Beefheart

This Ain’t the Summer of Love by Blue Oyster Cult

Junior’s Eyes by Black Sabbath (with Savoy Brown’s Dave Walker on vocals)

Man on the Silver Mountain by Ritchie Blackmore’s Rainbow (with Ronnie James Dio on vocals)

Oh No by Frank Zappa

Oh no
I don’t believe it
You say that you think you know
The meaning of love
You say love is all we need
You say
With your love you can change
All of the fools
All of the hate
I think you’re probably
Out to lunch

Oh no
I don’t believe it
You say that you think you know
The meaning of love
Do you really think it can be told?
You say that you really know
I think
You should check it again
How can you say
What you believe
Will be the key to a
World of love?

All your love –
Will it save me?
All your love –
Will it save the world
From what we can’t understand
Oh no
I don’t believe it

(Commentary from Maury2k)

Sarah Palin as Rock Star 

Overpopulation Is More Than Just a Third World Thing 

Billy Ayers Fraud Revisited

George W. Bush: Miss Me Yet? Hell, No!! 

When the Immigration Debate Gets Mean 

Once Upon a Time in Europe 

(hat tip to Chris Donnellan for the following links)

Life is war and conflict, struggle and strife, from conception till death…Never shall the lion lie down peacefully with the lamb…”

Why are those who espouse Univeral Love, Tolerance, and ‘Human Brotherhood,’ usually the most screwed up people you’ve ever met, socially and emotionally? Not to mention some of the nastiest and most self-centered narcissists around?”                                                                                   

                                                                                                  -Chris Donnellan

Japan: The Despised Ainu People

Eva Peron 

The Least Trusted Banks in America 

Futurism In Russia 

Ten False Flags That Changed the World 

How TV Frames the Working Class 

The American Ruling Class 

Supply Side Economics for the Wealthy 

The Myth of Free Markets 

Ralph Nader: How Corporations Gained Control of the U.S. 

Ralph Nader: The Negative Effects of “Free” Trade 

14 Percent of U.S. Adults are Illiterate 

 Man Attacks TVs in Wal-Mart 

New Research Rejects 80-Year-Theory of “Primordial Soup” As the Origin of Life 

The World Capital of Killing 

U.S. Budget Priorities 

Crowd Psychology and Manipulation 

An Enquiring Curmudgeon Wants to Know 

(hat tip to Andrew Yeoman for the following links)

“What You Believe is Not as Important as What You Do.”

                                                                                                  -Andrew Yeoman

Ten Most Incredible Abandoned Mental Asylums 

Police State in King, North Carolina ?

Tel Aviv Cult Leader Enslaves Women 

Democrats Are Dropping Like Flies 

John Mayer: Weenie 

Subversive Groups Must Now Register in South Carolina 

Sexist Vintage Ads 

Dumb Bitch Kills Kitten in Oven: Taunts Animal Rights Protestors 

Sex Statistics at Woman’s Day 

Hitler Toy Breaks German Law 

Military Men Take Part in Extreme Jungle Survival Training 

Comic Book Collector Jailed for Six Months 

Race and Gender of Judges Make Enormous Difference in Rulings 

A Nation of Sheep, Ruled by Wolves, Owned by Pigs

The Revolution Within Anarchism 

Forty Years in the Wilderness? 

Liberty and Populism: Building An Effective Resistance Movement for North America

Organizing the Urban Lumpenproletariat

National Anarchy and the American Idea

Don’t Talk to the Police

“The king is most wounded by ridicule.” -Thomas Hobbes

Improved Gadsden Flag - DONT TREAD ON ANYONE

Free Sex With Coupon 

AlternativeRight.Com to be Launched on March 1 4

AlternativeRight.Com (it’s not up yet) will be launched on March 1. Pass the word. And if anyone would like to donate or knows any potential donors, then email Keith Preston at kppgarv@mindspring.com and the information will be passed along to AltRight’s editor, Richard Spencer.

Other contributors to this project will be Patrick Ford, Alex Birch, Srdja Trifkovic, Paul Gottfried, Richard Hoste, Kevin De Anna, Dylan Hales, Derek Turner, Alex Kurtagic, Marcus Epstein, Mark Hackard, Jack Donovan, Nina Kouprianova, Scott Locklin, and hopefully many others. Quite a diverse (in the genuine sense) and impressive roster. Be there on March 1.

Ad Hominem Argument: A Classic Example 5

Carol Moore is someone who deserves credit for helping to publicize the secessionist cause. See her website here. Unfortunately, she has delivered a classic example of an ad hominem argument against Yours Truly in response to my suggestions that the radical Left should seriously consider the possibility of adopting a secessionist outlook. You can see Ms. Moore’s response here. Here it is in full:

While Preston’s article seems rational, if you look at the list of articles he’s published he also promotes “National Anarchism” which is against “miscengenation” and promotes (as opposed to merely accepting) separation of the races. He also promotes revolutionary violence, including by Tim McVeigh. FYI.

The ad hominem part of this is obvious. What Carol is saying amounts to is: “Yes, Keith Preston makes reasonable arguments as to why the radical Left should consider secession, but he’s also a bad guy, so this refutes or at least dimishes his arguments.”  A response to the charges is in order:

“…he also promotes “National Anarchism”…”

Guilty but proud. See my discussions of National-Anarchism and related views here, here, and here. National-Anarchism is a freshingly interesting and vibrant current when compared with the dull conformists and predictable lefto-losers associated with the mainstream anarchist movement.

“…which is against “miscengenation”…”

There’s no “n” in this term, but as something of a serial miscegenator myself I don’t really care what views National-Anarchists may or may not hold on “miscegenation.” See John Derbyshire on this one. I don’t really adhere to any of the Christian taboos about “adultery” or “fornication” either, but I’ve also promoted Christian secessionist or separatist groups in the past. I’ve even promoted Mormon polygamists. To demonstrate the absurdity of this kind argument against the National-Anarchists, imagine if a Muslim, an Orthodox Jew or a Seventh Day Adventist were to make an argument like this: “Yes, Preston makes reasonable arguments in favor of secession by Muslims, Jews, and Adventists, but he also promotes individuals and groups that eat pork, drink alcohol, and refrain from keeping the Sabbath…..”

Enough said on that point.

“…and promotes (as opposed to merely accepting) separation of the races…”

As an anarchist, what I actually advocate is a concept I call “separation of race and state” on the same model as the Jeffersonian idea of “separation of church and state.” If racial and ethnic integrationism of the kind favored by liberals and leftists can take place on its own without the coercive apparatus of the state to compel it, and without the economic pressures generated by state-capitalism and imperialism, then so be it. On the other hand, if the kind of racial separatism favored by “racial conservatives” (for lack of a better term) is indeed normal or natural, then that’s fine by me as well. My guess is that there would probably be some of both, with the degree of extremes on either end depending on other factors like local culture, institutional forms, ideological currents, economic factors, population size, geography, history, individual personalities and so forth. Imagine if Carol were to instead make an argument like: “Preston promotes (as to merely accepting) separation of the cultures and religions where hippies, Christian evangelicals, Catholics, goth-rockers and Jehovah’s Witnesses simply do their own thing-what a god-awful thing this is!”

What leftoids just can’t seem to accept is that some of us just flat out don’t give a damn if races are “separated” or not. Indeed, some the present-day “anti-racism” hysteria is starting to sound a lot like the anti-commie  panic of the 1950s or the “Satanic panic” of the 80s. If Joe McCarthy were alive today, no doubt he would be talking about the evil cabals of racists who’ve infiltrated American institutions. If Dana Carvey were just inventing his “Church Lady” character today, he’d have to make her a PC liberal: “Satan?…Racism!!!!!”

Enough said on that one.

He also promotes revolutionary violence,…”

It is quite unlikely that the existing regime, ruling class, and empire is going to let territories within the U.S.A simply walk away without a fight. So, on that great day of reckoning, it is indeed quite likely that secessionist movements will indeed need defense organizations of a “fourth generation” nature. See Hezbollah, Hamas, the FMLN, or the Peoples’ War Group. See 1776, 1861, or Spain 1936. Pacifism doesn’t interest me.

including by Tim McVeigh

McVeigh got an “A” for attitude but an “F” for tactics and good sense, in my book.

Enough said on that one.

Updated News Digest February 7, 2010 Reply

Why Read the Sunday Papers When You Can Read AttacktheSystem.Com!

Community Organizing and National-Anarchism presentation by Andrew Yeoman

Tribal Anarchism Video Series Parts One, Two, Three, Four

United Anarchism Vs United Nationism 

Quotes of the Week:

“To my utter despair I have discovered, and discover every day anew, that there is in the masses no revolutionary idea or hope or passion.”

“Where the state begins, individual liberty ceases, and vice versa.”

“From the naturalistic point of view, all men are equal. There are only two exceptions to this rule of naturalistic equality: geniuses and idiots.”

“Powerful states can maintain themselves only by crime, little states are virtuous only by weakness.”

                                                                   -Mikhail Bakunin

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” is an appalling policy, one that has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with the most primitive prejudice. But what else can one expect of an institution such as the military, particularly the US military in the Age of Empire?

Also, the idea that the concept of equality means that everyone should have the “right” to join an institution that is currently rampaging over the earth, invading countries hither and yon, and causing in incalculable amount of human suffering and material destruction would be laughable if Americans — particularly gay Americans — didn’t take it so seriously.

No one should join the military — not gay people, not straight people, not any people. In a free society, the military would be just another job — working to ensure the defense of the country. In today’s America, however, that is most definitely not the function of the military, which has been turned into an instrument of oppression and worse. To say, therefore, that everyone has the “right” to participate in, say, what went on at Abu Graib — in the name of “justice” — is self-evidently absurd.”                                                        

           -Justin Raimondo                                                             

The Secessionist Campaign for the Republic of Vermont by Christopher Ketcham

The Antiwar Secessionist Movement by Tom Barnes

The Political Economy of Monarchy, Democracy, Secession, and Anarchy by Hans Hermann Hoppe

Texas Nationalists Say Sovereignty or Secession by Mark Anderson

Is Secession Constitutional? by Brian Stanley

Softening the Transition to a Stateless Society by Darian Worden

Third Parties I’d Like to See by James Leroy Wilson

The Crisis Is Not Over by Paul Craig Roberts

Unintended Consquences: A Feature, Not a Bug by Kevin Carson

We Don’t Need a State to Protect Us From Foreign Aggression by Morris and Linda Tannehill

Reading List on Law Without the State by Walter Block

Statism Is Not Socialism, Pro-Market Is Not Pro-Business by Kevin Carson

Obama’s Budget: Record Spending, Record Deficits by Andrew Taylor

America’s Rudderless Ship of State by Chuck Baldwin

The U.S.A.: An Aggregation of Nincompoops by Alex Massie

Forget Global Warming, It’s the Economy Stupid! from Pew Research Center

The Tea Party by John Robb

The Left: Going Downhill Since 1960 by Alexander Cockburn

If You Were in a Secret Prison by Joanne Mariner

U.S. Agrees to Time Table for U.N. Gun Ban

Why Inflation Will Come? by Gary North

The U.S. Can No Longer Afford Its Empire by Ivan Eland

On the Claimed “War Exception” to the Constitution by Glenn Greenwald

When the Military Serves As Police by Jacob Hornberger

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell-Don’t Go! by Justin Raimondo

Will Obama Play the War Card? by Pat Buchanan

Will the Chinese Dragon Awake? by Justin Raimondo

Light at the End of the Afghan Tunnel? by Eric Margolis

The Dangers of State Surveillance by Henry Porter

Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan is Counterproductive by William R. Polk

Insulting China by Robert Dreyfuss

U.S. Sponsored Regime Change in Iran by Ardeshir Ommani

Terrorism in Any Color by Jack Hunter

The Defense Industry is Pleased with Obama by Laura Flanders

Lawyers Appeal Guantanamo Trial Convictions by Andy Worthington

World Isn’t Buying Israel’s Explanations Anymore by Aluf Benn

Why Does the U.S. Turn a Blind Eye to Israeli Bulldozers? by Robert Fisk

Zionism Laid Bare by Kathleen Christison

CIA Has Program to Assassinate U.S. Citizens by Thomas Eddlem

The New Pentagon Budget: Paying More, Getting Less by Winslow Wheeler

The Pentagon Goes Intellectually AWOL by Franklin Spinney

Surveillance Can’t Make Us Secure by Julian Sanchez

More Airport Security Won’t Do Much to Stop the Terrorists, Leaving the Middle East Would by Jeffrey A. Miron

The Inalienable Right to Secede by Scott Lazarowitz

Nullification: It’s Already Happening by Derek Sheriff

Thousands Protest U.S. Military Presence in Japan from The Daily Mail

WW2 Is Over: Bring Our Marines Home by Pat Buchanan

Federal Marijuana Supremacists by Manuel Lora

Ron Paul and the Pro-Life Movement by Christopher Manion

The Pro-Life Assault on Ron Paul and the Constitution by Laurence Vance

Astroturf  Verses The Tea Party Movement by James Ostrowski

Blair Lied, Thousands Died by Laurence Vance

Blair Regretted Nothing, Learned Nothing by Michael Glackin

Tony Blair and His Oh-So-Clean Conscience by Robert Fisk

Blair’s Monstrous Inconsistency by Daniel Larison

The Case Against Tony Blair by Patrick Cockburn

The Neoconservative Empire by Ron Paul

Israeli Female Soldiers Break the Silence by Ira Chernus

The CIA in Afghanistan by Doug Valentine

Obama, Military Growth, and Retirement by Bede

North Korea: The Last Racialists by Richard Hoste

The Road to Disunion: The Secessionists of 1854-1861 by Hunter Wallace

History Ain’t Bunk by James Jackson

Viewers Are Flocking to Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theories  by Daniel Perdomo

Growing Movement to Disband Police Departments by Mike Shedlock

The Left’s Double Standard on Race by Anonymous Attorney

This Is a Man: The Defiance of Omar Deghayes by William Norman Grigg

Neat, Painless Perpetual War by Mike Tennant

Patriot Act: Eight Years Later by William Fisher

Spinning the War on Terror  by Adam Serwer

Foreign Handouts: More Harm Than Good by William P. Hoar

Hollywood at War by John Payne

Playing Charades with Terrorists  by Fred Cate

No Defense for This Budget by Katrina Vanden Heuvel

Forgotten History: The Real Tobacco Wars by Dostoevsky

Roman Catholic Church to Split in America? by Weaver

Banning the Homeless in Colorado Springs by Kathy Kelly

War, Budgets, and Blind Ambition by Chris Floyd

Who’s Who in Mexico’s Narco-Wars? by John Ross

Israel is Criminalizing Dissent by Jonathan Cook

Copwatch: Guerrilla Video Primer 

The Hidden Inspiration of Vampire Weekend by Gavin McInnes

The Problem With Constitutionalism  by Thomas Knapp

Uber-PIG Joe Arpaio Interrupted by Students Singing Bohemian Rhapsody by David Neiwert

Waging War on the Environment by Darian Worden

Controlling the Growth of the State by Ian Bertram

Howard Zinn, R.I.P. by Roderick Long

Our Wise Leader and the Wise Pundits Who Comment Upon Him by Roderick Long

Rothbard and the Free Spirits by Gary Chartier

McCarthy on Belloc by Sheldon Richman

Onward Christian Soldiers, Again by Philip Giraldi

Sun Tzu and America’s Way of War by Jon Basil Utley

U.S. Out of Yemen by Ron Paul

Confessions of a Middle-Class Anarchist by Harry Mount

Top Ten Ways to Avoid a Tax Audit by Kelly Phillips Erb

The State Lives to Control and Humiliate Us by Anny Shaw

Weapon of Mass Destruction Found in NYC Elementary School by David Kramer

Time Flies When They’re Building a Fascist State by David Kramer

Sweden Has Been Neutral in Foreign Wars for 200 Years (Good for Them!) by Lew Rockwell

Mass Murder: The Key to a Successful Presidency by William Norman Grigg

Why Global Democratic Revolution and Mass Immigration Won’t Work by F. Roger Devlin

Markets and Regulation by Paul Craig Roberts

The Glitter, the Gays by Mandolyna Theodoracopulos

Master of Treachery: Kissinger on Iraq by Barry Lando

Philadelphia Community Rallies Against Murderous PIG by John Kalwaic

The Work of Porn in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Kristian Williams

Retirement Armageddon by Gary North

The Man Who Shouldn’t Be Alive by Bill Sardi

My $4000 Sneeze by Jeffrey Tucker

Financial Tsunami by Ambrose Evans Pritchard

“The Italians were called wops, the Jews were called hymies, I was of course a greaseball, and every Hispanic was a spic. Well, we all got along famously! It was rough, but it was fine.”

                                                                -Taki Theodoracopulos

The Accused Must Have Fair Trials  Glenn Greenwald interviewed by Scott Horton

Bring the Guard Home Michael Bolding interviewed by Scott Horton

Sanctions Against Iran Are a Bad Idea (Unless You Want a War)  Muhammad Sahimi interviewed by Scott Horton

“The “clash of civilizations” is, in a very literal sense, a clash of God and Mammon. The Islamic revolutionaries are driven by a fanatical devotion to their god and the promises they believe he has made to them if only they take up arms on his behalf. The nations of the West are driven by an almost as fanatical devotion to Mammon, that is, to wealth, luxury, power, pleasure and privilege. Further, the culture of the West combines this unabashedly materialist ethos with rejection of strength and discipline in favor of a maternalistic emphasis on health, safety, “sensitivity”, “self-esteem”, “potential”, “personal growth”, “getting in touch with one’s inner child”, “feelings” and other concepts common to pop culture psychobabble. Of course, the socio-cultural ramifications of this is to create a society of weaklings, mediocrities and crybabies.”

                                                                                                   -Keith Preston

Dirty Water by The Standells

Talk Talk by The Music Machine

Psychotic Reaction by The Count Five

Pushin’ Too Hard  by The Seeds

Dazed and Confused by The Yardbirds

Mary Mary (It’s To You I Belong) by The Birdwatchers

(Commentary from Maury2k)

The Cult of Political Correctness-It’s Real Uses

How Uncle Sam Almost Lost World War Two 

Howard Zinn and the Strategy of Self-Castration 

Racist Genie Out of the Bottle 

The Tactical Moxie of Kai Murros 

Batman as Bourgeois Wet Dream

(hat tip to Chris Donnellan for the following links)

Life is war and conflict, struggle and strife, from conception till death…Never shall the lion lie down peacefully with the lamb…”

Why are those who espouse Univeral Love, Tolerance, and ‘Human Brotherhood,’ usually the most screwed up people you’ve ever met, socially and emotionally? Not to mention some of the nastiest and most self-centered narcissists around?”                                                                                   

                                                                                                  -Chris Donnellan

British Author Calls for an Assisted Suicide Panel 

 Man Arrested for Peeing on Steaks at Wal-Mart 

Asian Girl Has Surgery to Look Like Jessica Alba for Boyfriend 

Fifth of Swedish Population Foreign 

The 6 Weirdest Things Women Do to Their Vaginas 

New Basis for U.S. Asylum Claims: Homeschooling

Earth Religions Get Worship Area at Air Force Academy 

 Argentine President: Eat Pork, Spice Your Sex Life 

New Zealand Virgin Auctions Herself Off for Tuition 

Turkish Girl Buried Alive for Talking to Boys 

What Makes Right-Wing Mobs Tick 

N.W.A.-Straight Outta Compton 

Smoking: Good or Bad? 

The Amish: A People of Preservation 

Justice Department Wishes to Hire Mentally Ill, Mentally Retarded Lawyers 

Western Race Hatred Laws 

Aliens Visiting Earth Will Be Just Like Humans, Scientist Claims 

Auschwitz Survivor: Israel Acts Like Nazis 

Last Mitford Girl Bemoans the Demise of the Stiff  Upper Lip 

Mexicans Fighting Blacks in L.A. Jail 

Black and Mexican Race Wars in L.A. 

Commanding Heights: American Empire 

The Grievance Table 

The Dystopia Conservatives Built 

(hat tip to Andrew Yeoman for the following links)

“What You Believe is Not as Important as What You Do.”

                                                                                    -Andrew Yeoman

Teen Hit Man Confesses to Murdering Class President’s Mom 

For American Indian Patriots 

Colorado Springs Cuts Basic Services 

Berlusconi Wants Israel in the EU 

Letter of Marque: Privateering and The Private Production of Naval Power 

Bay Area National-Anarchists: Communities Directory 

France Refuses Citizenship Over Full Islamic Veil 

 Children Prisoners of the U.S. War on Terror

A Nation of Sheep, Ruled by Wolves, Owned by Pigs

The Revolution Within Anarchism 

Forty Years in the Wilderness? 

Liberty and Populism: Building An Effective Resistance Movement for North America

Organizing the Urban Lumpenproletariat

National Anarchy and the American Idea

Don’t Talk to the Police

“The king is most wounded by ridicule.” -Thomas Hobbes

Improved Gadsden Flag - DONT TREAD ON ANYONE

Forget Global Warming, It's the Economy, Stupid! 1

So Says the Pew Research Center. So how can Alternative Anarchists and Pan-Secessionists use this to our advantage? Is Carson’s “Political Program for Anarchists” the way to go? If so, how do we get these ideas out there? If not, what? This is what I have previously written on this question:

Our main focus should be on the working class itself, the kinds of folks who work in the vast array of service industries that comprise the bulk of the US economy.

This is the “center” part of our strategy. I am not advocating a return to old-fashioned labor unionism of the type championed by the classical anarcho-syndicalists. I believe the decline of unions is permanent in nature and while traditional labor unions might still have a role in play in a twenty first century class struggle, it will only be on the margins. Instead, the economic foundation of class struggle in the future will be alternative economic enterprises and service delivery arrangements operating independently of state and corporate structures. Foremost among them will be worker-owned and operated enterprises and non-state social or health services originating from what is called the “independent sector”. This is an essay on political strategy and not economics so I will not go into a great deal of detail here except to say that the main political implication of this is that organizations formed for the defense of such economic institutions against state repression or state-imposed monopolies will be vital part of any future radical coalition.

As for the broader question of the relationship between the state and the economy, we need a populist economic program that favors elimination of state intervention into the economy on behalf of privileged interests and the reduction of taxes starting from the bottom up. This is an issue that dissidents from across the spectrum ought to be able agree on, from socialists to libertarians to paleoconservatives to Greens. Kevin Carson’s “Political Program for Anarchists” provides a good overview of how to approach this. As anti-state radicals, we should take a position of rejecting the welfare state as a means to poverty relief, while at the same time rejecting the scapegoating of the poor common to the talk-radio right-wing. We should instead be quite outspoken about the damage to done to poor communities (particularly rural farmers and inner-city minorities) by state interventions such as agricultural policy and urban renewal. As an intermediate stage to full abolition of the welfare state, we might consider the “negative income tax” suggested by Milton Friedman back during the Nixon era, whereby the costs of welfare management could be cut back drastically by distributing cash payments or vouchers directly to the poor and eliminating the bureaucratic middle-men that absord most of the welfare budget. With this approach, it might even be possible to increase subsistence payments to the poor while simultaneously cutting back significantly on both bureaucracy and taxes. The writings of Murray Rothbard, Karl Hess, Hans Hoppe, Kevin Carson and Larry Gambone also contain some interesting ideas on how to go about “de-statizing” those industries and services presently operated by the state.

It is of the utmost importance that the working masses view us as the champions of their economic interests. Nothing less will be sufficient. Our populist coalition must include rank and file blue collar workers, working class taxpayers, union members, small businessmen, farmers, the self-employed, the urban poor, single moms and the homeless. We do this not by promising entitlement rights to all, but by eliminating state-imposed obstacles to economic self-determination and self-sufficiency, placing state or state-corporate industries and services directly into the hands of the workers and consumers, developing alternative economic arrangements independently of the state, eliminating taxes from the bottom up and gradually phasing out archaic state-assistance programs, with poverty relief and social security programs being the last to go once the corporate state has been fully dismantled. This is precisely the opposite of the “cut taxes and regulations at the top, eliminate subsidies to the bottom” approach favored by the right-wing corporatists. Our approach should be “cut taxes and regulations at the bottom, eliminate subsidies to the top”. On these matters, authentic fiscal conservatives and authentic class war militants should be able to agree. We should describe our economic program as neither “conservative” nor “socialist” but as simple “economic justice”.

I might add to this that the antiwar movement, the anti-police state movement, the anti-drug war movement, the anti-prison industry movement, the anti-globalization movement, the anti-immigration movement, and the pan-secessionist movement are all necessary parts of an economic resistance movement. The various international and domestic wars, the police state and prison industry, mass immigration and so forth are serious drains on the economy. Secession from the political, corporate and international institutions that perpetrate these things is a necessary corrective step.

Why the Tea Partiers Will Fail 10

The Populist Insurgency and Foreign Policy: Why Are Non-Interventionists Marginalized? by Leon T. Hadar

Obama Retreats by Maury2K

Maury sums it up pretty well:

While Democrats sit on their hands and Republicans play their waiting game, the Tea Party Movement has built up a head of steam. They denounce the status quo, talk “revolution,” demand the dismantling of the Federal Reserve and other radical sounding solutions.

The Tea Party folks display energy, enthusiasm and will power to reach their goal. However, their movement is starting to come unglued because of their own ideological short-comings. For example, they continually bash Obama’s alleged “socialism” when, in fact, he is as dedicated as Bush to corporate rule.

The Tea Party Movement ignores the myriad wars though they are wrecking the economy. Partly, this is out of a sense of faux-patriotism. But what is patriotic about sacrificing our brave men & women for something other than defense of the country?

We could go on but you know the drill.

We need street politics whereas I fear the Tea Party will end up as electoral cannon fodder for a bankrupt GOP.

Any supposed “radical” movement in North American that does not have a firm rejection of the Empire as one of its foremost principles is out of the game before it even starts. To those readers who are interested in working with these movements, my advice would be that you can probably be most effective by serving as a voice that can educate some of these people (at least the more reasonable and intelligent ones) as to the true nature of the Empire. My suggestion would be to avoid referring them to leftist, “anti-American” writers like Chomksy and Zinn and instead attempt  to turn them on to neo-isolationists and the antiwar Right like Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Andrew Bacevich, Claes Ryn, Lew Rockwell, Eric Margolis, Justin Raimondo, and others. I have found from experience that the arguments made by Michael Scheuer are among the most effective when dealing run of the mill center-right types.

Britain's Emerging Police State Reply

http://vdare.com/gabb/100127_police_state.htm

by Dr. Sean Gabb

[Peter Brimelow writes: Nearly forty years ago, I was immensely impressed with The New Totalitarians a brilliant study of Swedish political culture by Roland Huntford, making the point that totalitarianism, in the sense of complete political control of society, can be brought about by bureaucracy as well as brute force. (To my amazement, this book’s influence on my own book on Canada, The Patriot Game, is cited—currently—in its Wikipedia entry.) Sean Gabb reports here that it’s coming soon to another common law country near you—Britain. Indeed, the British government’s current drive to force the anti-immigration British National Party to admit immigrant minorities to membership is the very essence of totalitarianism: no private sphere can be allowed; in Mussolini’s words Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state”. This is why the passage of the so called Hate Crimes legislation, lauded by President Obama in his recent State of the Union address, was such a disaster—yet almost unopposed by the Beltway Right. It’s happening there. It can happen here.]

By Sean Gabb

At the moment in Britain, the Labor Government’s Equality Bill is completing its progress through Parliament. The purpose of the Bill is to bring all the various “equality” laws and rulings made since 1965—race, sex, sexual preference, age-based, religious, etc—within a single statute, and to enable a single scheme of enforcement, the quasi-judicial Human Rights Commission. It also tightens these laws so that such “discrimination” as has continued to exist will be made illegal.

The exact meaning of any proposed law is hard to judge in advance. We need to see the final Act of Parliament. We need to see the hundreds of pages of regulations that it enables through its delegated legislation sections. We need to see how it will be enforced by the authorities, and how the courts will rule on its interpretation.

But outlines of the law are already reasonably clear. It is, for example, illegal for a Jewish school not to accept gentile children. It is illegal for a Christian hotelier to refuse to let two homosexuals share a bed together. It is illegal for an employer to exclude job candidates who belong to a group of which he might—for whatever reason—disapprove, or to confine recruitment within those groups of which he does approve. The same applies to landlords.

It is also illegal for the British National Party to confine its membership to those it regards as indigenous to the British Isles—an unmistakeably totalitarian violation of the principle of freedom of association.

After a recent rare defeat in the House of Lords, the Government will not be able to force religious schools to employ teachers who are outside of or hostile to their religious values. But this defeat may be reversed when the Bill returns to the Commons in the next few weeks. Or it may be reversed by separate legislation. As said, a law cannot be exactly understood until it is in force.

Even so, the Equalities Bill must be regarded as one of the most important measures in the consolidation of what can only be described as the British police state, which has been emerging since the election of Tony Blair and his “New Labor” allies in 1997. (For more details, see my monograph Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, downloadable for free here).

The problem with opposing this sort of law is that opponents can be smeared as opposed to equality in general, or even as bigots. This has completely cowed the opposition Conservative Party, which has offered only token resistance. (My own Libertarian Alliance’s opposition statement is here).

Needless to say, this is an illegitimate tactic. As with freedom, everyone nowadays believes in equality. The real question: what is meant by “equality”?

According to the liberal tradition, as it runs through Locke, Hume, Mill and Hayek, everyone has—or should be regarded as having—an equal right to his life, liberty and property.

This means that everyone should be equal before the law. A married woman should not lose the right to own property, unless she agrees in advance. A Roman Catholic should not be prohibited from inheriting under his father’s will. An atheist or Jew should not be denied justice because he will not swear as a witness on the New Testament. Everyone should have the same right of access to the courts. Everyone should have the same rights to freedom of thought and speech and faith, and to freedom of association, and to freedom from arbitrary fine or imprisonment.

And that is it. The liberal tradition does not insist that everyone should have the same right to a job, or residential letting, or service in a restaurant or hotel. No one should have the right to be loved or accepted by others.

If the owner of a business puts a note in his window advertising that he will not deal with Jews or homosexuals, or the disabled, that is his right. As a libertarian, I would regard this kind of announcement with distaste, and I might refuse, because of it, to deal with that business. But that is the limit of proper disapproval. It is not a matter for interference by the authorities.

Now, I have argued so far as if I assumed that the projectors of the Equalities Bill were people of good intentions but limited understanding. But I do not assume this for a moment. The people who rule my country are best described as evil. They have not been led astray by bad ideas. Rather, they are bad people who choose ideologies to justify their behaviour.

There are ideologies of the left mutualism, for example, or Georgism, or syndicalism—that may often be silly or impracticable, but that are perfectly consistent with the dignity and independence of ordinary people.

These are not ideologies, however, of which those who now rule us in Britain have ever taken the smallest notice.

These people began as state socialists. When this became electorally embarrassing, they switched to Politically Correct multiculturalism. To the extent that this is becoming an embarrassment, they are experimenting with totalitarian environmentalism. But whether in local or in national government, their proclaimed ideologies have never prevented them from working smoothly with multinational big business, or with unaccountable multinational governing bodies.

It is reasonable to assume that, with these people, ideas are nothing more than a series of justifications for building a social and economic and political order within which they and theirs can have great wealth and unchallengeable power. Their object has been to deactivate all the mechanisms that once existed in Britain for holding its rulers accountable to the ruled.

And that is what they have been doing since the Labour Party won the 1997 election. To a degree that foreigners do not often realise, Britain has, during the past 13 years, been through a revolution. This has been brought about by the Labor Government and by its collaborators in the MainStream Media, in the civil service and judiciary, and in big business.

They have swept away the constitutional settlement of the 17th century. Our Ancient Constitution may have struck outsiders as a gigantic fancy dress ball. But it covered a serious and very important fact. This was an imperfect acceptance of the claim by Colonel Rainsborough, leader of the radical Leveller faction in the English Civil War, that “the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live as the greatest he”. It allowed this country to be at once highly conservative in its institutions and, at the same time, free.

All this has gone. Since 1997, we have had a bewildering 4,000 new criminal offences created—many dealing with censorship of speech and publication. They are usually enforced by a summary—and often arbitrary and even corrupt—process.

The traditional courts and their procedure have also been transformed, so that no one whose legal education ended before 1997 has the faintest idea of how to enforce his rights. We have been made formally subject to the European Union. The country has been deliberately flooded with immigrants, as former Blair speechwriter Andrew Neather recently boasted. And the purpose of mass immigration has been to break up the solidarity of the ruled.

I was born in a free country. People could speak as they pleased and live without constant supervision. If a policeman knocked on my parents’ front door, their only worry was that he might have bad news.

I now live in a police state. Recent legal reforms have completely displaced common law protections and all offenses are now arrestable. If I am accused of so much as dropping a sweet [VDARE.COM: U.S. = candy] wrapping on the ground, I can be arrested and taken to a police station. There, I shall have my fingerprints and a DNA sample taken. Even if I am released without charge, these records will be kept indefinitely. They will also be shared with several dozen foreign governments, who will often regard presence on a DNA database as evidence of a criminal record.

The natural response is that sensible men do all that is needed to avoid any police attention. That means prompt obedience to commands that may have no legal basis. And what is that but a police state?

I now live in a country where I have to be aware that private meetings and even private conversations are subject to paid informers and can lead to prosecution and professional ruin.

The Equality Bill is simply another step in the consolidation of this new order of things. It is a bribe to those groups—Muslims, Gays, racial minorities—whose electoral support is needed to keep Labor in power. It is one more excuse for making victims of known dissidents.

Above all, it is another message sent out to all of who is boss.

The only “equality” the rulers of Britain are working towards is equal fear of them—and of what they can do to us.

Dr. Sean Gabb [Email him] is a writer, academic, broadcaster and Director of the Libertarian Alliance in England. His monograph Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back is downloadable here. For his account of the Property and Freedom Society’s 2008 conference in Bodrum, Turkey, click here. For his address to the 2009 PFS conference, “What is the Ruling Class?”, click here; for videos of the other presentations, click here.

Updated News Digest January 31, 2010 Reply

Why Read the Sunday Papers When You Can Read AttacktheSystem.Com!

Community Organizing and National-Anarchism presentation by Andrew Yeoman

Tribal Anarchism Video Series Parts One, Two, Three, Four

United Anarchism Vs United Nationism 

Quotes of the Week:

“Eric Foner notes that Paine had been struck during the years of 1775 and 1776 in America ‘that despite ‘the suspension of the old governments … everything was conducted’ with‘order and decorum.’ He consequently became convinced ‘that far less government was necessary than men were used to. Republican government, according to Paine, should be ‘nothing more than a national association acting on the principles of society.’”

                                      -David Heleniak, “Rousseau and the Real Culture War

“In trying to explain how things might work in a stateless society, anarchists usually point out that opposition to the state does not mean opposition to cooperation or organization.  In trying to explain  anarchism to non-anarchists, anarchists describe the ways that people can cooperate voluntarily to defend themselves against aggression and achieve positive common goals.

The non-anarchist’s first response, in most cases, is “But aren’t you just reinventing the wheel?  If lots of people organize themselves into a cooperative organization to restrain aggressors and carry out social projects, isn’t that just government by another name?”

Well, no, it really isn’t.  The main principle that distinguishes voluntary organization under anarchy from the state is that anarchists regard cooperative groupings, including groupings of a majority of people in a community, as being bound by the same moral principles that govern individuals.  An individual has the right to defend himself against aggression, and to use what rightfully belongs to him in service to his goals.  Groups of more than one person have the right to associate voluntarily to defend one another against violence, when their neighbors request it, and to associate voluntarily to use their resources to promote common ends.”

                                                               Kevin Carson, “Society Versus the State

The State of the Empire by Justin Raimondo

It’s Happening There: Britain’s Emerging Police State by Sean Gabb

Howard Zinn, R.I.P. by Anthony Gregory

Howard Zinn, R.I.P. by Kevin Carson

Fire to the Prisons: An Insurrectionary Quarterly

Israel and Islamic Terrorism: A Study in Symbiosis by Justin Raimondo

The Price of Our Middle East Policy by Glenn Greenwald

Obama Spending Freeze to Exclude Military by Ed Henry

The Sanctity of Military Spending by Glenn Greenwald

September 11 and the Downward Arc of American Thought by Joseph Margulies

Nothing More Dangerous Than a “Recovering Realist”? by Stephen M. Walt

Political Assassinations of U.S. Citizens by Glenn Greenwald

The Populist Insurgency and Foreign Policy: Why Are the Non-Interventionists Marginalized? by Leon T. Hadar

Obama’s War for Oil in Colombia by Daniel Kovalik

Rule by the Rich by Paul Craig Roberts

Mr. Antiwar Republican by Justin Raimondo

We’ve Been Neoconned! by Ron Paul

Crisis of the Government Party by Pat Buchanan

The County-by-County Strategy by Gary North

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE-WINNER BARACK OBAMA UPS SPENDING ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO EVEN MORE THAN GEORGE BUSH by David Kramer

Tax-Feeder Brutality: Not Just for U.S. Citizens by Wilton Alston

Remember the Illegal Destruction of Iraq? by Glenn Greenwald

Spending Freeze Must Include “Defense” by Lawrence Korb

Sentiment Growing for a New Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy by David Carlson

Boxed In: The Constraints of U.S. Foreign Policy by Geoffrey Wheatcroft

India’s Controversial New War Doctrine by Harsh V. Pant

The Oldest Game in Washington by Alexander Cockburn

A Memory of Howard Zinn by Daniel Ellsberg

The Ordeal of Cameron Douglas by Anthony Papa

Embrace Prejudice by James Jackson

Time for George Mitchell to Resign by Stephen M. Walt

War No Way to Afghan Women’s Rights by Doug Bandow

The Iranian Elephant in the Iraqi Room by Sreeram Chaulia

The Truth About Guantanamo by Moazzam Begg

The Antiwar Movement Needs a Restart by Kevin Zeese

Turning the Constitution On/Off by Nat Hentoff

Afghanistan: This War Won’t Work by Phyllis Bennis

Ending the War: A Manifesto by Robert Dreyfuss

Two Algerian Torture Victims Are Freed from Guantanamo by Andy Worthington

L.A. Book Fair Draws an Array of Anarchists by Kate Linthicum

Abu Ghraib, U.S.A. by William Norman Grigg

The PIGS Privilege to Kill, Our Duty to Die by William Norman Grigg

Another PIG Murder in Massachusetts by William Norman Grigg

PIGS Assault Pittsburgh Teenager by William Norman Grigg

The Never Ending Big Government/Big Business Scam by David Kramer

Do You Believe in Freedom? by Lew Rockwell

After the Old Fogies Leave interview with Neil Howe from The Casey Report

Uncommon Sense  by Becky Akers

The Coming National School Curriculum by Derek Sheriff

The Film Minority Report Becomes a Minnesota Reality by David Kramer

Will Christianity Soon Be a Non-Western Religion? by Philip Jenkins

Darknet Economies by John Robb

Obama’s Secret Prisons by Anand Gopal and Tom Engelhardt

Baffle Them with Bull Feathers by Jeff Huber

The PIGS Were Lying by Radley Balko

The PIG Occupational Army by Rad Geek

Malcolm X and Anarchism by Wayne Price

The American Conservative Attacked by Vandals by Bede

Et Tu, ACLU? by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman

The Hanging of the Henchman  by Patrick Cockburn

The Supremes Bow to King Corporation by Ralph Nader

Pro-Life Hypocrisy (War Involves Taking Life, You Know) by Laurence Vance

Obama Is a Disappointment in the Middle East by Eric Margolis

Prohibiting Drunk Driving Is Not Self-Defense by Mark Crovelli

Surgery in 5000 B.C. 

Colorado, South Dakota Firearms Freedom Act Introduced by Michael Boldin

The Horrific Social Effects of the Smoking Ban by Jeremy Clarkson

Legalize Competing Currencies  by Ron Paul

Obama Moves Missiles and Troops to the Russian Border by Rick Rozoff

The Federal Reserve Sucks: Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders Agree by Nina Easton

From Neocon to Anarcho-Capitalist by Steve Klein

The Latest Insanity in the War on Discrimination by David Kramer

Pro-Lifers for Baby-Killing by Lew Rockwell

I Am Not a Liberal by Laurence Vance

Rape Rampant Among U.S. Military and Private Defense Contractors by David Kramer

PIGS Kill Man During a Domestic Argument by William Norman Grigg

Whose Life Is It Anyway? by David Kramer

 Old War Bloggers Never Die…They’re Just Born Again as Obama Shills byJustin Raimondo

What Do Anarchists Read? by Ivan Fernandez

Populism by Ezra

The Evolution of Civilizations by John Robb

Mutual Aid: A Factor in Haiti by Jesse Walker

How Many Innocents Have Died at the Hands of the U.S. Military by Laurence Vance

Nice Shooting

The Diversity-Industrial Complex by Walter Williams

Is Obama a Conservative? by Anthony Gregory

Are You an Oppressed Smoker? by John Ostrowski

Just in Time Work by John Robb

“The Italians were called wops, the Jews were called hymies, I was of course a greaseball, and every Hispanic was a spic. Well, we all got along famously! It was rough, but it was fine.”

                                                                -Taki Theodoracopulos

Interview with Alain De Benoist, Part 2 by Tomislav Sunic

Nicolae Ceaucescu of Romania by M. Raphael Johnson

Against the New World Order by M. Raphael Johnson

Military Recruiters Lie Jonathan Williams interviewed by Scott Horton

The FBI Crime Wave James Bovard interviewed by Scott Horton

Obama Continues Unlawful Imprisonment Daphne Eviatar interviewed by Scott Horton

“The “clash of civilizations” is, in a very literal sense, a clash of God and Mammon. The Islamic revolutionaries are driven by a fanatical devotion to their god and the promises they believe he has made to them if only they take up arms on his behalf. The nations of the West are driven by an almost as fanatical devotion to Mammon, that is, to wealth, luxury, power, pleasure and privilege. Further, the culture of the West combines this unabashedly materialist ethos with rejection of strength and discipline in favor of a maternalistic emphasis on health, safety, “sensitivity”, “self-esteem”, “potential”, “personal growth”, “getting in touch with one’s inner child”, “feelings” and other concepts common to pop culture psychobabble. Of course, the socio-cultural ramifications of this is to create a society of weaklings, mediocrities and crybabies.”

                                                                                                   -Keith Preston

Back Street Luv by Curved Air

The Witch by The Rattles

I Don’t Need No Doctor by Humble Pie

Inside Looking Out by Grand Funk Railroad

Black Night by Deep Purple

Whiskey in the Jar by Thin Lizzy

Black Swan  by Coven with Tommy Bolin

In My Darkest Hour by Ursa Major

Defrosted/Black Lace by the Frigid Pink

Everybody’s Clown  by Lucifer’s Friend

(Commentary from Maury2k)

Mass Immigration: The American Difference 

Prostitutes and Politicians: The Perfect Pairing 

The Republicans and Us

Zombie Culture Means Zombie Politics 

Tea Party Movement Getting Hosed

Obama’s State of the Cliches Address

(hat tip to Chris Donnellan for the following links)

Life is war and conflict, struggle and strife, from conception till death…Never shall the lion lie down peacefully with the lamb…”

                                                                                    -Chris Donnellan

Amazing Speech by War Veteran 

IQ by Country 

Bushido: A Way of Life 

The Gods of Shinto 

What Is Shinto? 

Romanian Mythology 

1913 Massacre 

Ludlow Massacre of 1914 

Father Coughlin 1939 

Father Coughlin Speaks Against the Federal Reserve 

Research Sheds New Light on Ancient Greeks 

Chicago School Economists After the Financial Meltdown 

In Arizona, A Stream of Illegal Immigrants from China 

Walk, Damn It! Is the Car an Enemy of Civilization? 

John Paul II Used a Belt to Whip Himself 

Welcome to the Plutocracy by John Medaille

The U.S. Economy Is Not Going to Recover 

UK: Jail Time for Revving Engine in a Racist Manner 

Gays Have Political Power 

Making Mars the New Earth 

The Polygamists

Genocide of Black Americans Via Illegal Immigration 

(hat tip to Andrew Yeoman for the following links)

Pseudo-Operations and Counterinsurgencies: Lessons from Other Countries

New Jersey Cops Arrest Man with Weapons Stash, Map of Military Base 

Man Accused of Selling Daughter for Cash, Beer 

Judge Tosses NSA Spy Cases 

Teen Commits Suicide After Onslaught of Cyberbullying 

One Third of Women in U.S. Military Raped 

Immigrants More Likely to Have Jobs Than the Native Born

A Nation of Sheep, Ruled by Wolves, Owned by Pigs

The Revolution Within Anarchism 

Forty Years in the Wilderness? 

Liberty and Populism: Building An Effective Resistance Movement for North America

Organizing the Urban Lumpenproletariat

National Anarchy and the American Idea

Don’t Talk to the Police

“The king is most wounded by ridicule.” -Thomas Hobbes

Improved Gadsden Flag - DONT TREAD ON ANYONE

Sunic interviews De Benoist: Part 2 15

Here it is.

In Part 2, Tom and Alain discuss Third World immigration into European countries, Islam’s current expansion, Alain’s critique of Capitalism and the “Americanization” of the world. The show includes:

  • Forced multiculturalism as the primary element of discord in European countries.
  • Capitalism as a bourgeois value system that prioritizes the accumulation of money above all else.
  • Alain’s thoughts on the future of America and Europe.
  • America’s Puritanical foundation and its quest for ethnic, social, economic and cultural Universalization

About Alain de Benoist

Alain de Benoist.jpg

Alain de Benoist was born on 11 December 1943. He is married and has two children. He has studied law, philosophy, sociology, and the history of religions in Paris, France. A journalist and a writer, he is the editor of two journals: Nouvelle Ecole (since 1968) and Krisis (since 1988). His main fields of interest include the history of ideas, political philosophy, classical philosophy, and archaeology. He has published more than fifty books and three thousand articles. He is also a regular contributor to many French and European publications, journals, and papers (including Valeurs Actuelles, Le Spectacle du Monde, Magazine-Hebdo, Le Figaro-Magazine, in France, Telos in the United States, and Junge Freiheit in Germany). In 1978 he received the Grand Prix de l’Essai from the Academie Francaise for his book Vu de droite: Anthologie critique des idees contemporaines (Copernic, 1977). He has also been a regular contributor to the radio program France-Culture and has appeared in numerous television debates.

To learn more about Alain de Benoist, read his insightful articles at his personal website and at The Alain De Benoist Collection.

R.I.P., Howard Zinn 1

Historian Howard Zinn, for decades a leading critic of the American Empire, has died at age 87. See his obit from the Boston paper here.

I first heard of Zinn twenty-two years ago when my anarchist punk-rocker roommate loaned me a copy of “A People’s History of the United States“. A short time later I discovered Noam Chomksy’s “The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism“. This was really the beginning of my ongoing critique of American imperialism and opposition to the same. Over the years, I would come to disagree with Chomsky and Zinn on many domestic issues, but on the question of the empire, these two have been among its foremost critics. R.I.P., Howard.

Freak Friendly 2

http://www.takimag.com/article/freak_friendly/

by Gavin McInnes

“You know, despite it all, it’s still really a miracle America elected a black man as president,” my 60-something neighbor said to me over beers recently. You get this a lot from people born before 1965. Apparently, America is a racist hellhole and the fact that they overcame this deep-seated hatred for blacks to allow one into the White House is physics defied. Um, as far as I can tell, a seemingly smart and in-control Democrat proceeded the most hated Republican president of all time. That’s not a “miracle.” It’s a “normal.”

I get insulted when Boomers tell me how racist my country is. I understand where they’re coming from, I guess. They grew up with survivors of the Great Depression: Grumpy old traditionalists that worked their fingers to the bone in isolation and never tried anything weird. That was then however, so please shut up about it. There is not a gigantic ogre of racism controlling our brains that took time off during the election but rears its ugly head every time we have a problem with, say, unprecedented taxation.

“When someone under 40 hears boomer anthems like, “There’s a land where the children are free,” we go, “What the hell is this song about? Where are the children NOT free?”’
Now, I’m sure you can dig up some redneck who still says nigger or half a dozen skinheads in the middle of nowhere but hate crimes are a miniscule percentage of total crimes in America and if you get into per capita, all races get it about equally. I heard some horrible stories about drinking fountains from forever ago and I saw a video where dogs were attacking some dude but that was a different universe than my generation’s America. We don’t care if people aren’t like us anymore. We don’t even get what you’re talking about.

When someone under 40 hears boomer anthems like, “There’s a land where the children are free,” we go, “What the hell is this song about? Where are the children NOT free?” Old people grew up in a climate where nuns gave the strap if you wrote with your left hand and young boys were verboten from going near dolls. Our generation yawns at such superstitious claptrap. If my son turns out to be gay, I will go into a deep depression for about seven minutes and then I’ll get over it. The boomers grew up in a world where their parents dry-heaved at the thought of a black man breathing the same air as them. Even the boomers, I’m told, were occasionally mocked for not being exactly like the majority. My American Indian mother-in-law was nicknamed jungle bunny in college. Not only do we find that hard to comprehend. We think it’s funny. As Harmony Korine said, “I crack up at the race riots.”

We never would have made fun of this guy.

It seems like every children’s book I’m forced to read to my kid is about some freak that everyone learned isn’t a freak after all. We never thought he was a freak in the first place you ancient babies. If Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer were born today, the other reindeers would high-five him and ask him what reindeer games they think he should play. In my school, the kid with Down Syndrome was the school hero and the football team adopted him as their favorite fan without a trace of irony. The pre-1970 people are unable to grasp this. They created movies like Mask where a boy with craniodiaphyseal dysplasia, is mocked for his circus-like disfigurements. Or the show Square Pegs where the quirky, unusual kids were relegated to the bottom rung of the high school hierarchy. In my Secondary Education, all these people would have been rock stars.

The same goes with sexism. Why Men Earn More pointed out the obvious error with assuming women get paid less for the same work. Namely: Why wouldn’t corporations hire them in droves? They’re cheap labor, right? Turns out they earn less because they tend to be more committed to family events than staying up all night preparing proposals. In other words, they choose to earn less. After waves of famine, a great depression, and a free-for-all orgy of whining, we’ve figured a lot of it out and the old wive’s tales no longer make any sense to us.

We are the information generation. We know you’re born gay and there’s nothing you can do about it. We googled it. We know women can be just as capable at any job and we hire accordingly. We know freaks are not cursed by the almighty but just statistical inevitablilites. We are way too well-adjusted to push someone out of our life just because they don’t meet some strange parameters someone else invented so please stop doing a spit take when we don’t behave exactly like our grandfathers.

Anarchism is not absolution Reply

The Apostasy of the Anarchist Vote

by Jeremy Weiland

“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal,” declared Emma Goldman in a ringing indictment of the feeble mechanism by which the state claims to be restrained and directed. Of course, in invoking this quote anarchists argue against counting upon elections to change the status quo. We aren’t going to bring about the voluntary society by listening to politicians, casting votes for them, and pressuring them to abolish their own offices. The statist means and the anarchist ends are clearly opposed.

But there’s another argument against voting: that by casting a ballot, one registers endorsement of the state and its violence. Advocates of this argument do not hold that you must have chosen the politician who wields power. They disregard personal intent, interests, and any issues at hand. The argument is quite simple: by participating in the election, one is bound to its results. Given the anarchist view of those results – violence, fraud, and lies – one can only conclude that voting makes one an accessory to the crime.

This constitutes a body blow for those who define themselves by their rejection of the authoritarianism so intrinsic in the state. It’s one thing for voting to be a silly ritual. But a decidedly different attitude must be adopted if pulling the voting lever leaves one with blood-stained hands. Faced with such an awful truth, the task becomes one of avoiding complicity with the system. An absolute break with the state is the only path of conscience.

In theory, this break seems reasonable to achieve: one simply ceases to cooperate with its agents and directives. But the state reaches far into the world we live in. It doesn’t just direct the police, military, teachers, judges, and other bureaucrats that intervenes in obvious ways. The very civil society we seek to unleash through the spirit of voluntarism, mutual aid, freedom, and solidarity seems hopelessly bound up in the state.

Anarchism is not absolution

The biggest statist distortion lies in the minds of people – the very people so foundational to our dream of a voluntary society. They are conditioned to behave in ways congruent with governance, to think of themselves in terms that reinforce the primacy of governance, and therefore too often to mistake their largely voluntary lives as a gift from authority. Allegiance to the state and allegiance to one’s country, locality, and neighbors are seen as not merely connected but rather the same idea.

It is the behavior of these people that provides the underlying legitimacy to the state. After all, were it not for the people, there could be no power to rule. It is the people who elect the politicians, pay the taxes, enforce the laws, fight the wars, and more. As Étienne de la Boétie argued centuries ago in the Discourse on Voluntary Servitude, inciting the masses to organized resistance is totally unnecessary. Rather, all that is required is for the people to stop obeying. So to address the problem of the state, we must address the people’s obedience. Sociologically, psychologically, spiritually – why do they obey?

This leads one to wonder whether mere withdrawal of consent is even sufficient. Symbolic micro-secession by an individual does little to address the behaviors inherent in statist society. Where does the state end and civil society begin? For that matter, what’s so fundamental about the individual that its removal from the equation affects the problem of authoritarian society? How does one isolate oneself from the crimes and violence of the state when its institutions pervade our society – especially when it is in that very society the seeds of voluntary association must be planted? A break is impossible without at least an implicit answer to these questions.

This is not to say that personal reflection and a critical review of one’s choices is not necessary. The example of one’s own life and actions is likely more effective persuasion than the most articulate thesis. What I object to is a pseudo-christian guilt that demands an absolute purge of statist sin. To focus on distinguishing oneself from statist society can only detract from the task of engaging with that statist society. We must resist adopting an anarchist identity so foolishly consistent and exacting that it destroys our connection to the people in whom we hope to realize a free society.

Our goal cannot be simply to free our persons of perceived statist taint. Anarchism is not some sort of political puritanism. We are not seeking some form of absolution for the “sin” of being born in a statist society. To view the state as this intelligent, malignant entity out there influencing people to initiate force and fraud is to invoke the Christian’s concept of war with a malevolent Satan. This conception of the state is also an unfounded superstition, since we understand that it is people’s actions that reinforce its perceived legitimacy.

The state is an abstraction; an institution formed out of ancient patterns of behavior. But it doesn’t exist as an independent thing, so rejecting it qua the state avoids understanding what one is rejecting. There is no state per se: there are only people – people enforcing laws, people obeying laws, people paying taxes, people going to schools, people believing that the guy sitting in the oval office is special. The question is surely not how to isolate oneself from these people, but how to influence them to change their mindset and thereby their behavior. The only “state” we will ever apprehend is an apparition formed from the inertia of people’s habits of thinking and acting.

From this point of view, one can hardly ascribe to voting the degree of evil anarchists often do. It’s just another abstraction. Pulling a lever, writing words on a piece of paper, or pushing buttons on a screen do not in and of themselves do anything. In fact, even if you accept the significance of an electoral outcome, it’s hard to assign responsibility when the odds of an individual affecting it are so astronomical.

A double standard

So what does the vote mean in real, concrete terms, divorced from the popular myths of state legitimacy? It merely influences the way other people will behave. That behavior will influence the way yet other people will behave, just as we all have an effect on everybody else in small but indeterminate ways. Some of these people will assign a title to one person instead of the other. They will treat the one person’s words as “official”, unlike the other’s. They will do what the one person says, but not the other. Who can fathom the will of government employees and other interested affiliates?

After all, it is those people materially prosecuting the agenda resulting from the election of a public figure who inflict the real damage. The President doesn’t do anything; it is those agents of the state who arrest, tax, jail, and kill. The behavior of legions of bureaucrats define the agenda, the interests, the nature of what we lament as “the state”. We should worry less about whose orders they’re following and worry more about what they’re actually choosing to do.

If this seems like splitting hairs, consider that one of the best anarchist arguments against the state lies in the behavior of its agents. A robber is a clear menace, and yet we let these state actors confiscate our wealth with hardly a peep. Nobody would gladly accept the help of a mafia-style protection racket, and yet we allow state racketeers into our neighborhoods constantly simply because they sport a badge. We look down on those who indiscriminately kill in our society, and yet we fund state bureaucrats with rifles to go out and commit these crimes against humans – so long as they’re “our troops” and not “theirs”. Our society has internalized a blind spot far more systemic and significant than the election cycle, and it crucially underwrites the state agenda.

Anarchists point out the inconsistency between how we regard normal crime and how we regard state crime to illustrate a core value: what people actually do, not their institutional affiliation or authority, is what matters. Murder is murder, theft is theft, and kidnapping is kidnapping. Only a double standard prevents people from judging such actions as less objectionable merely because they are performed in an “official” capacity. The anarchist proposes a radical consistency: people are responsible for their own actions, regardless of their position in some organizational hierarchy, governmental or otherwise.

And yet, many anarchists themselves apply this maddening double standard to those who do nothing more than write words on a piece of paper. They call them enablers of the state, as if they were responsible for the crimes of the state’s actors. This ascribes to the state precisely the mythical legitimacy we claim to reject – as if there could exist a magical transfer of permission from one person to another making crime acceptable. We can combat this double standard only by maintaining a consistent position on it.

Understanding civil society

At the same time, anarchists must acknowledge how integral the political order, including elections, are perceived to be to the majority of the social body. Because people conflate the state with civil society, they often view its institutions as portals to engagement with their neighbors. As anarchists, we can either secede from this engagement on puritan grounds, or we can risk the taint of the state by meeting them in the world we jointly occupy, warts and all.

It is a sad fact that the social deliberative functions necessary for true community occur within the trappings of government; yet to reject interaction because the state is involved divorces us from important opportunities to influence others. And it is in convincing our brothers and sisters to change their mindset and behavior – not in breathless denunciations of formless institutions – that we genuinely oppose “the state”.

Remember that voting for politicians has about the same direct physical effect as an online survey: it has no power or authority but what people attribute to it. An election may convince certain individuals to commit (or abstain from committing) violations of rights, but since we hold that those individuals are solely responsible for their own actions, and nothing can absolve them of that responsibility, are the results of that election relevant? In the end, it is the behavior, not the myths and abstractions, that matter. So if by voting, you can engage with your neighbors to influence them within this mixed society, or possibly influence state actors to behave more peaceably, why would you insist on abstaining?

None of this is to say an obligation exists to participate in every election; only that we should not blow these rituals out of proportion and turn them into boogeymen. Every situation is unique, and every election is a singular moment in the social body. Only an individual can decide the right course of action in a given scenario; indeed, it is highly authoritarian to dictate rules to the individual. The danger is not in voting or not voting, but in tilting at windmills out of ideological self-importance or moralistic high-handedness.

Blaming voters for state-sponsored crime is only meaningful in the sense that the voters stand by while the crimes are committed – not in the sense that we somehow sanction it via some mystical bestowing of power. The problem lies not in the ballot, but in our patterns of thinking and behavior that lead us to treat the vote’s outcome as anything more substantive than an internet poll. We allow state actors to engage in activities we all know are deeply wrong; it is that habit of complacency towards authority which we must address in ourselves and others.

Voting may be many things, but it is not abject complacency. In fact, most people see it as a form of civic engagement. Given that, should we not start from where they are, rather than washing our hands and demanding they make the long and difficult mental transitions we’ve already achieved? Whether or not we vote, we must engage these enabling attitudes where they are, whether in political parties, city council meetings, the lines at the polls, or at family dinner tables. To abandon this society because it doesn’t meet our standards is to surrender the anarchist project totally. Anarchism as a movement is concerned with this society, like it or not.

If we fear accusations of hypocrisy by participating in institutions tied to the state, perhaps we should take a harder look at our agenda. What are we in this struggle to accomplish? To be seen rejecting the state loudly and publicly? To have an impeccably consistent argument that no debater can assail? To shield ourselves from any chance of statist entanglement? To maintain a black and white moral superiority that makes it easy to judge the world?

Or does our project transcend the immediate political realities by posing a deeper question about human relationships and individual responsibility? Are we comfortable enough with ourselves and our principles to entertain doubt, to risk making mistakes, to remain vulnerable to misunderstanding and grey areas – all for a chance at reaching our brothers and sisters within institutional statism? Can the message of mutual liberation be heard if it is not taken into the mire of authoritarian culture in which most people find themselves, on terms they can grasp?

It has never been enough for anarchists to win debates; we must win the hearts of our fellow man, wherever they are found. We do this by engaging with them where they are, not where we’d have them be. The vote is a meaningless, superstitious ritual that masks deeper social issues and sanctions nothing. It does not bolster our argument to agree with statists that elections matter. Instead, we should treat them as what they are: the trivial rites of a false religion.

Written by Jeremy Weiland on Sunday, January 24, 2010 for Social Memory Complex

It's Not About Free Speech 2

[Keith: A timely essay on a major issue. Questions of this type are an illustration of why the critique of state-capitalism as a system of big business/big government alliance is essential, and why we need Carson’s critique of “vulgar libertarianism.”]

by Jeremy Weiland

On Thursday, the Supreme Court struck down several key restrictions on corporate campaign contributions. While many lament the expected influx of yet more corporate cash into an already compliant political system, does anybody really think McCain-Feingold had accomplished much of an improvement? These regulations only affect those who cannot afford the lawyers, accountants, and other professionals who spend their careers finding ways to circumvent the spirit of the laws.

There are two key elements to the court’s conclusion: the constitutional prohibition of free speech restrictions and the status of the corporation as a person. Libertarians should not complain about the court’s conclusions with respect to the first element. The government must abstain from interfering with any person’s political contributions, monetary or polemical.

In the past the court has seen fit to abridge first amendment rights in cases where the government has a compelling interest. Campaign finance laws have usually rested on this basis, relying on the court’s acknowledgement of the need for balancing a variety of interests. In throwing out McCain-Feingold, the Supreme Court can be seen as effectively reining in these deviations from the letter of the law. A strictly defined freedom of speech should certainly be defended.

But as Glenn Greenwald notes in his excellent commentary on the issue, the justices approached the case solely from the perspective of first amendment applicability and scope. No justice, dissenting or otherwise, objected to the premise that corporations are persons with constitutional protections. The focus remained fixed on narrow questions of money as a form of free speech as well as the proper applicability of free speech to the corporate campaign contributions. The nature of the activity was examined; the nature of the actor, neglected.

The real issue here is not whether corporations should be involved in the political process. It’s also not whether they should have first amendment protections. Regarding monetary contributions from anybody to any candidate for public office as free speech is entirely beside the point. The most important and pressing matter is whether these artificial persons called corporations can speak; whether legal fictions can spend money. It’s whether the Constitution protects what doesn’t actually exist.

The court simply let stand the fantastic notion that an abstraction composed of contracts and assets, a figment that can do or say nothing without human beings doing for it, can engage in anything qua a corporation. As such, an opportunity to overturn a century of erroneous precedent was squandered. Once again, in spite of an improvement in the consistency of its approach to the narrow free speech issue, the court preserved a much more fundamental complexity. The ruling and dissent reflect a labored reasoning stemming from unquestioned premises.

What do we mean when we say a corporation can donate money to campaigns freely? Do we mean that its officers do so on behalf of the shareholders or partners? If so, can’t we talk about free speech in terms of those individuals’ rights and responsibilities? Do we mean that this agreement between stakeholders has some sort of capacity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that justifies every other limit on governmental power? All these questions and more beg for a real legal analysis. They were ignored precisely because they expose an inconsistency, the underbelly of the elite consensus.

Corporate personhood necessitates muddled, sloppy balancing acts by the court. And in complicated rulings, the rich and powerful have the same legal upper hand they had when McCain-Feingold stood: they can afford the expenses required to make sense of the precedent and twist it in their own favor. To ask whether corporations even have free speech rights would be too profound and simple a question to preserve the advantage of the powers that be. We little folk might recognize what is at stake were the matter made so plain.

Of course we should not water down the first amendment just to punish corporations. What we should do is challenge the status of the corporation as a person. The majority’s impulse to streamline the interpretation of the first amendment is fine, but they passed on the real case.

Written by Jeremy Weiland on Saturday, January 23, 2010 for Social Memory Complex

Ten Reasons Why I Am an Anarchist 10

1. I agree with the Augustinian view of the state as a robber band writ large.
2. I agree with the Stirnerite view of political obligation. Why should I obey this guy just because he’s the president, king, mayor, etc.?
3. I agree that democracy is a system where five wolves and sheep vote on what to have for lunch.
4. I agree that the death and destruction perpetrated by states make that of individual criminals look trivial by comparison.
5. I agree with George Bernard Shaw that democracy replaces the rule of the corrupt few with the rule of the incompetent many.
6. I agree that the state exists to monopolize territory and resources, protect an artificially privileged ruling class, expand its own power and subjugate and exploit subjects.
7. I agree with Hayek that the worst gets to the top.
8. I agree that the insights of social psychology show that most people are creatures of the herd.
9. I agree that the herd is the permanent enemy of the superior individual.
10. I agree that values are subjective, that life is ultimately a war of each against all, and that survival of the fittest and the will to power are the only true laws.