Friday, 30 December 2011

"National Anarchism - A Reply to a Leftist" - courtesy of "Lefty" Hooligan & Archonis

"National Anarchism - A Reply to a Leftist" - courtesy of "Lefty" Hooligan & Archonis

"Lefty" Hooligan Wrote:

The 1960's witnessed the rise not only of the New Left, but also of a new right that included a neo-fascist resurgence. And it's fascism's oddly syncretistic capacity that's proving most troublesome this time around. There's been a revival of left-wing Nazism based on the National Bolsheviks and the Strasser brothers. Leftist icons like Che Guevara and Subcommander Marcos have entered the pantheon of neo-fascists who fancy themselves national revolutionaries, and there's been a serious attempt to propagate a nazi maoism based on the "fascist dictatorship of the proletariat." There's support among modern day fascists for the Irish Republican Army, the Red Army Fraction, Qathafi's Libya and "the Palestinian peoples struggle against Zionism." This fascist solidarity with Third World national liberation struggles-in particular if they're racially, ethnically or religiously based-is counterpointed by fascist support for domestic racial separatists like Farrakan's Nation of Islam in terms of "self-determination for all people," including white folk of course. Even the economic distributism of fascist Third Positionists is borrowed lock-stock-and-barrel from guild socialism. Then, there's national anarchism, perhaps the strangest oxymoron so far. National anarchism draws its fascism from the right in Stirner's individualist anarchism, Nietzche's aristocratic radicalism, Junger's revolutionary conservatism and Evola's elitist traditionalism; from the left in Bakunin's clandestine insurrectionism, Kropotkin's propaganda by the deed, Sorel's mythic violence and Proudhon's syndical mutualism; and from the terrorist fringe in Nechayev's conspiratorial nihilism and Kaczynski's anti-industrial Luddism.
Archonis Answers:

I must state as a "National Anarchist," that I disagree with the author's views [above]. He has fallen exactly into the trap that we laid for him. Our purpose in our ideological dissimulations that he describes [above] are purely Discordian and Absurdist. The truth is we are not radicals, but pranksters who like confusing the hell out of people who define political movements through the rigidity of ideology. We enjoy watching Liberal and Conservative Statist panty-waists cringe before the onrush of the total insanity of our syncretic doctrines and seeming militancy; which is devoid of any factor upon which they can "hang the hat" of ideological logic or political consistency. We cannot be blamed for enjoying the sight of fools slipping on the banana-peels of their own assumptions. All you Statists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Commies, and all other Communo-Corporate Totalitarians listen up!! You "politically correct" anarchist dead****s listen up too! Do not try to understand us. When you get close we will just confuse you more! We reject multi-culturalism, because it commodifies and negates culture while denying the cultural autonomy of all people. We believe in racial seperatism for those who want it, and racial integration for those who don't. People can do what they want in their own Nation, and we will do what we want in ours. Do we reject the unity and equality of all people? Yes, people are not the same and they are not equal. They are differentiated and diverse, and should be free to live with those most like them. I have more respect for the Black gang-banger who would slit my throat because I am White, than I do for the "Uncle Tom" who would sell-out his own race to be a second-rate "adopted" White. The gang-banger is at least a man with some pride in who he is, not a worm! This is not racism, it is just common sense, that all peoples should be supported in their nationalistic struggles, for their own people, on their own land. I support Black Power, La Raza, Asian Autonomy, and White Identity. All cultural-ethnic groups are unique and should have their autonomy respected.

Where would African Art, Tibetan Mandalas, Gothic Cathedrals be, if all the races were just one trademarked, mongrelized group of consumerist/worker-drudges since the beginning of time? None of the wonders that make up the world in terms of cultural contributions would even exist, where it not for the different and unique cultures that created them. Racial autonomy and separation protects the diversity of races and cultures as well as their contributions. What has the melting-pot given us? A culture of racial conflict and corporate mediocrity. I am not a racist, I just believe that all races and cultures should be free to be who and what they are, and not be forced to become each other. That is freedom! Multi-culturalism is just "grease for the wheels" of the further commodification of Man and the hegemonic destruction of all unique human cultures and their identities. Who needs it? This is not racism, it is realism. The Ashkanazim want to make all races one race, so their race alone can dominate the whole of mankind with their Communo-Corporate Totalitarian Plutocracy. Multi-culturalism is the tool of their plan of racial homogeny and control. Different races and cultures are harder to control, except by "divide-and-conquer." Each group having their own nation makes more sense. Give the Native Americans back their land, give Mexico back its land, and give the American Colonies back to the British Empire, and give the British Empire back to the Royals and Nobility and divest the "House Of Commons" and the "Third Estate" of all power. Here is a new term to confuse the already confused: "Anarcho-Monarchism." The best of centralized dominion in the form of Monarchy and decentralized life in the form of village and community. What could be wrong with this?

No comments:

Post a Comment