Monday, 2 February 2015

Whet the bright steel!

Whet the bright steel, Sons of the White Dragon, kindle the torch, Daughter of Hengist!

Introducing my newly acquired white dragon flag of the English. This flag, it has to be said, has its critics from within English nationalist circles. For the bigger picture I suggest you use Google, but to cut a long story short, there are questions over the flag's authenticity. Keen advocates claim it to be the prime Anglo-Saxon standard of pre-conquest England, but primary sources are few and arguably flakey. However, if Celtic identity can be reinvented and romanticised, then why not an English one?

As several different versions of the flag exist, I was planning on arguing here for a campaign of standardisation for the white dragon - in order to gain official recognition from Whitehall, the Flag Institute and Flag Registry. Gain this and public buildings could have their arms twisted to fly it (or possible unwelcome publicity if they decline). But I've now concluded we don't need the say so of petty officialdom to make the white dragon a banner for English patriots to rally to. A quick look on ebay alone where sales are in the hundreds, show the dragon's undisputed momentum - it is proving as popular, if not more so than many officially recognised flags.  The White Dragon, in it's present form, has been around since the 90s and it doesn't look like a flash in the pan. However, I am calling on white dragon advocates to favour and fly the design above. It's the best design in my opinion and here's why:

This one on the left, I believe, despite being the most ubiquitous design, isn't actually that good.

This one on the right is just a little to canine for my liking and, rather like the one below left, a little too reminiscent of the red dragon of the Wealas - the Welsh.

The design here on the right is better, but maybe a little too oriental perhaps?

The design, left, is of course the most accurate because the white dragon is really the Anglo-Saxon wyrm. A wyvern or viper, lacking hind legs. However the Wyvern has already been claimed by Wessex, so this won't do. To be fair, as far as I know this is the only design not currently commercially available. The design to the right here is probably nearest the mark in terms of historical accuracy, but lacks the x-factor in my book.

Of course, the red field is the one common denominator - it is striking, and can represent our common  English blood, and in the 21st century - defiance against a liberal elite. While green would obviously also be appropriate, every current design agrees on red, so I won't rock the boat further.

I don't wish to dictate - but this is a call to all defenders of the white dragon, lets choose one design and stick to it (that being the one favoured by me...)

Tuesday, 30 December 2014

We are where we are

National Anarchists, it has been claimed from some quarters, are guilty of 'giving up' and even of surrendering to cultural Marxism. These conclusions are based on false assumptions.

National Anarchists are not 'giving up' on anything because a) we reject the nation state, b) we recognise that populations, nations and tribes have been throughout history - and still are in a state of flux - organic movement with homelands and territories subject to glacial shift c) Many National Anarchists do not base their 'nationhood' on primordial ethnic origin (although many indeed do) so the first group have nothing to 'give up' - they are starting afresh.

What about those National Anarchists with identities based on ethnic heritage? Are they betraying their forefathers, abandoning the Motherland? Look at the forces that control the world: Multinational corporations dictate a global financial system and market which means that this era of mass migration is inevitable. What can nationalists do to combat this massive reality? They can vote for nationalist political parties to the extent where the powerful liberal political elites begin to get a bit panicky and talk tough. But still engineered immigration continues. What can nationalists do? They can organise and agitate for national revolution, but how many listen? Even if, by some miracle, one, two or five nations of Europe undergo a national revolution - What do you think NATO and the IMF will do?

National Anarchists are realists. We agitate for the establishment of tribal village communities, networks and redoubts because we think they have a better chance of success. Don't get me wrong (and I don't assume to speak for all who identify with National Anarchism) I'd love to see the establishment of national homelands based on collective history and heritage. But the clock can't be put back. National Anarchists do not seek to send 'em back because a) we can't and b) we believe in justice - other peoples have settled in Europe rapidly in recent decades because they have been guided there by the global elites as socially engineered economic migrants. The powers that be should not have herded them about but that's the reality and migrants to all first world countries have built lives for themselves. If they are able and wish to return to their own Motherlands to help build them up (which is of course what they should have been able to do anyway) then great - but they are not the enemy of the indigenous. The National Anarchist answer to where we are at (to those who care) is to build up autonomous tribalism, socially, economically, culturally and territorially.

Are National Anarchists cultural Marxists? No. We are for true diversity - cultural Marxists are for multiculturalism, which is the opposite. We are for tribal autonomy, they are for mixing society up into a confused, rudderless melting pot. This isn't diversity - it's a recipe for nothingness. National Anarchists respect and defend all identities and their right to flourish without interference from social liberals adhering to a PC agenda and ideology based on some misguided notion of equality.

National Anarchists are also dismissed for our supposed inaction. I don't know if any National Anarchist autonomous zones exist - they may. But either way, those who criticise do so because they can't see the example in practise - but not the idea itself. What alternative? I go with the National Anarchist slogan There is no way back, there is no way out - but there is a way through!

Friday, 28 November 2014

For maximum radical unity

National Anarchism is a school of thought which goes above and beyond all hitherto dogmas. It transcends the pigeonholes that strangle political discourse to such an extent that many have ceased thinking of them as such. National Anarchists allow the individual to define concepts of nationhood as they see fit. National Anarchism is the new vanguard of anti-imperialisms - political and cultural. We celebrate and defend all ways of life and do not seek to deny anyone of their right to live according to their chosen ideals and identities - whether they be ethno/racial, national, religious, ideological, cultural or subcultural.

My own tribalism is based on that of the ethno-English and their collective national identity (I reject the leftist argument that this is an artificial con and a ruse, and maintain that this identity is born of an innate human desire to belong). My tribalism is based on my own peoples' common origin, traditions, culture, customs, language and history. That said, as a National Anarchist I don't seek to impose my values on others and certainly won't defend a nation state.

So I am a nationalist of sorts - a radical nationalist. I have my own definition of nationalism, but I accept that it is not the only legitimate definition. In the past I have posted missives here which have criticised civic nationalism - I still stand by these, but that doesn't mean that there can be no common ground between civic nationalists and ethno-nationalists. We have common enemies. Take for example the newly formed Patriotic Socialist Party - some of it's policies: economic autarky, animal welfare, localism - could appeal to National Anarchists. The National Liberal Party - with its emphasis on national self-determination, is another group that has parallels with National Anarchist arguments.

Personally I am most impressed with the Socialist Workers Party England (no, not the placard distributing, megaphone wielding, shouty shouty lot!) and consider their Policy Outline as an excellent example of contemporary radical nationalism. Of course, the SWPE are statist in their outlook (as are the PSP and NLP) but National Anarchists shouldn't sneer at this. Read up on them, learn from them. Differences of principle should not stop us from finding friends and fellow travellers - we have enough enemies. We need allies.

The National Anarchist current is growing - of that I'm certain. We are holding our ground and winning arguments with our detractors. But we must not become arrogant. Let's not let National Anarchism become just another dogma itself!

Monday, 24 November 2014

Raising standards

It's brilliant to see that Exmoor now has her own flag. Congratulations to Jenny Stevens, its designer. You can read about the flag's evolution here. It's encouraging to see that, in this age of mass junk consumerist culture, local identity is shining through in England. People are still proud of their patch, their home, their tribe, their vibe...County flags have taken off in a big way, and the flags of England's historic regions are beginning to catch up. Following on the heels of the Wessex Wyvern, the St. Alban's Cross - the flag of Mercia - has just been registered with the flag institute, thus freeing it from Whitehall red tape. What is significant about the Exmoor flag, however, is that it represents a bioregion -  and if Exmoor can have a flag, then why not Dartmoor, the Cotswolds, the Weald, the Dales et al. Unofficial cultural regions too, the world over, can (and many probably do!) have their flags. In England a recent example of such would be the Black Country. Now whether you choose to proudly hang them from your castle wall, or simply wear them on your lapel - just do it. The globalisers and centralisers won't like it, but they need to be told - OFTEN!

Saturday, 27 September 2014

The campaign for the real regions begins now!

The unionists have had their way, but one of the postive fallouts of the Scottish Independence referendum is that devolution is back on the agenda. As I'm a National Anarchist I want to see my autonomous villages - you can't get more devolved than that! But ideals aside, it's important for radical tribalists to see opportunities everywhere. Regionalists of all hues are our natural allies. I'm a National Anarchist, but not sectarian and I'm delighted to align myself with other radicals - this is not a luxury, it's essential. I want to see maximum co-operation between all decentralists as we're more likely to succeed that way. And one step toward a decentralised British state is a step closer to meaningful autonomy.

In the wake of the Scottish vote greater regional autonomy for England is now being seriously debated. This presents English regionalists (and their Welsh and Scottish counterparts) with a real chance of progress. They have to seize this chance and manage it properly.

Two criticisms of regionalism put about by centrists are 1) It's an arbitrary
carve-up into souless, bureaucratic zones - we all remember the Prescott fiasco! and 2) It will destroy Englishness and national unity. Real English regionalism is of course, based in English history and its peoples' organic, tribal roots. It's based on our parishes, hundreds, shires and Kingdoms of the Heptarchy. Regionalists need to shout this loud: "We're not 'South West', we're Wessex. We're not 'Midlands', we're Mercia. Culturally and spiritually their concepts are increasingly popular, living in the hearts of many. As a schoolkid I was enthralled by the heptarchy and the fact that Cornwall had it's own flag! These little worlds and little platoons made sense to me, and if presented in the right way today they make sense to Joe Public, not least because they provide them with a romantic sense of place, connected to their own histories.

Our elites have been talking about City States, I don't object to these. I conceed that if cities adopt radical measures they can go a long way to toward feeding themselves (yes, really!) and of course cities should run their own domestic affairs to the max and come to mutual arrangements with their periferies. We're stuck with cities! However, regionalists need to provide a radical agrarian vision as one in which people can gain real control over their lives. By shedding the trappings of technology in agrarian redoubts our regions can prove central government as an increasing irrelevance.

As to the claim that Englishness will fade - I don't buy it. Autonomy, independence, freedom - these are mainstays of the English psyche. England will still exist on the cultural, social and spiritual levels.

Now on to more practical considerations: One constant criticism of regionalism is the view that all it leads to is the creation of another layer of expensive government with more fiddling, greedy politicians. Regionalists can refute this with the following argument: The House of Commons and the Lords can be abolished. The regions could elect sovereign parliaments with full executive powers. The existing parliamentary constituencies can remain in place (no extra expense there) Elected MPs from the Cornish, Wessex, Mercian parliaments et al can then send delegates to a Council of the Isles (or a national federal body for England, Wales, Scotland, Ulster)that will meet as an when to decide issues of national and international importance, such as mutual defence. Of course, most domestic decision making could remain, rightly, at parish, district and county levels - with wider co-ordination being decided by regional parliaments. County pride is currently sky-high and rightly so. But federating the shires into our historic regions can entrench that tribal pride further. To borrow the Wessex Regionalists' maxim Big enough to cope, small enough to care. One exception to the rule is probably Yorkshire: a shire with an immense sense of self (I'm envious!), it's own growing devolution movement and big enough to stand alone. Will Yorkshire folk be happy to be part of a Greater North? That's an issue for them.

Now, on to the (big) elephant in the room: the European Union. Regionalists, in my view must unequivocally oppose the EU and advocate UK withdrawal, not to do so will make a mockery of their case. There is no way around this.

Sunday, 14 September 2014

Lead us! We will follow!

An open letter to the Scottish people

Dear cousins,

The British peoples are intertwined by the centuries. Bound together by history, culture and by blood. We are an extended family and nothing, including what happens this Thursday, will change that.

Like all families, we haven't always got along. Sometimes family members need to spread their wings and grow, choose their own paths in life. You now have that opportunity.

The union was a cynical deal by both our countries' social elites of the day in order to pursue joint imperialist ambition. This had nothing to do with the great mass of the Scottish people and her cousins the English, Welsh, Ulster-Scot and Irish.

As an Englishman with a good dose of Ulster-Scot, I know that being British is about blood, not some cobbled together state. Just as the union was the first step on the road to empire, a 'Yes' vote will mean that empire begin to come to an end. A 'yes' vote will encourage the people of Wales, Cornwall, Ulster and England (and all their regions therein) to demand greater autonomy. It will kick-start a call for devolution that our masters will not be able to ignore. Help start a process whereby power begins to return to our localities by voting 'Yes'.

Of course, a 'Yes' vote will not mean a free Scotland in charge of her own destiny yet - the EU, which your political leaders embrace - will do for that! But a 'Yes' vote will symbolise the first stirrings of a nation reborn. A Scotland free from the UK will invigorate you further to take on Brussels, break free and wrestle power from Edinburgh to your regions and localities. That's when a devolved Scotland can really forge its own destiny. Think what a Transition Scotland could achieve.

A 'yes' vote will send shock waves around the world and inspire other nations, not least across Europe where national autonomy movements are growing. Take this historic opportunity and don't believe the fear mongers, talking their money talk. You have always been a radical people, you can build a new Scotland which won't be shackled to their globalist criteria, you won't starve in your new found autonomy - you can begin to live radically different lives to what our global masters want you as - ready made consumers. You can begin to make your beautiful country richer (in the real sense) greener, simpler, happier - and the first step is by voting yes. Rise against Westminster and then turn your energy on Brussels. Lead us! We will follow!

Be strong - vote 'wrong'!

Dogma dictates that anarchists, including National Anarchists, don't vote. "If you vote you are not an anarchist - by voting you are accepting the system which enslaves you." Noble words...and complete hogwash. I'm an anarchist - maybe an unorthodox one. I'm an anarchist because I advocate communities without the state as my ideal. These communities will have to be small to work. Mass society composed of millions cannot work without the state, so anarchist communities won't work unless they are small - no more than 500 individuals.

I vote and that doesn't change the fact that I'm an anarchist. The fact that I vote doesn't change my ideals or actions to bring them nearer to fruition. We radicals and tribalists need to promote real alternative debate throughout society and one free and easy way is to vote for the 'wrong' candidates. We need big votes for the 'wrong' candidates, so that the chattering classes, media elites, left liberals and the political establishment have no choice but to accept them as mainstream ideas. Large votes for UKIP and the BNP in Britain in recent years has forced taboos onto the political agenda and weakened the 'acceptable' consensus. The 'wrong' candidates could be nationalists, protectionists, regionalists, greens, radicals and nutcases, anti-PC merchants. Troublemakers that make people laugh and listen, shake things up. I don't agree with George Galloway on much, but at least he's makes platforms more spicy! Any candidates which will irritate the elites and force our rulers on the back foot is worth our vote in my book. Be strong, vote 'wrong'!

Sunday, 27 July 2014

Get in the Zone

The concept of Pioneer Little Europes (PLEs)* - tribal intentional communities - has been gaining currency within radical national circles for some time. Now the newer idea of 'Local Resistance Zones' is being talked about. Yours Truly, being the old hippy he is, believes this moniker to be a tad confrontational, but I still see merit in the idea. LRZs are about nationalists (or anyone for that matter) fostering an identity within a given area (either one they occupy already or one they decide to move to to). Establishing such an identity could begin to be achieved through setting up civic organisations and sustained activity with a nationalist/tribalist ethos. Possibly this would involve nationalist/tribalist cultural, sporting activities and clubs, the arts, music and drama, maybe with an educational slant. Flag flying and murals could add to the feeling of separateness and independence, belonging and pride. Of course, in time, influence could be felt in existing political structures. Nurturing nationalist businesses and farms, working with others of likemind, and developing nationalist networks to reduce dependency on global trade and consumerism are also possible medium-to-long term projects.

LRZs, their supporters argue, would become unattractive to those outside the tribe in question and eventually the LRZ will develop into a homeland. Of course, National Anarchists would support this idea if it were applied to all 'tribes', however defined, and would further argue that the notion of re-establishing some kind of indigenous English state is pure fantasy. Better for radical nationalists to work toward tribal hegemony in given areas and consolidating them into cohesive cultural/tribal units. Any ambition to have LRZs as some launchpad to some ethno takeover, is, frankly, imperialism. Call me defeatist, but even if it could be argued that England could somehow be 'reclaimed' for the indigenous and that LRZs are legitimate vessels for national liberation - it ain't gonna happen. The stakes are too high and a protracted period of misery and fear would likely result. As a National Anarchist I want no part of that. Real national liberation involves working on new strategies that can work. PLEs and LRZs could be just the examples we need to salvage a tribal way of life free from cosmopolitanism, neo-liberalism, modernity, consumerism and One Worldism. Each to their own.

LRZs could adopt the tactics of, or even merge with the Transition Town movements as this would help move toward economic autarky, which is essential.

I welcome the fact that a radical idea like LRZs are being seriously considered by radical nationalist cadre. If LRZs become a major aim of radical nationalists then exciting times lie ahead.

*Or Africas and Asias obviously.