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.

 The National Liberal Party - with its emphasis on national self-determination, is one group that has parallels with National Anarchist arguments.  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.

Sunday, 13 July 2014

A riot of regions

Being the cynic I am I don't think that the Scots will vote yes in the Scottish independence referendum in a couple of months. But I DO think a large minority will - maybe 40 to 45%. Of course, London will then, duty bound, bestow Devo Max (more powers to Edinburgh). Whatever the result, the 18th September could well deliver up strengthened calls for devolution and autonomy right across these islands. In Scotland itself Auld Reekie will become the new London and we could see Shetland and Orkney pulling at the leash along with the Islands, Highlands and the Borders with the Lallands finding a stronger voice still.

Logically, Devo Max, and certainly full independence for Scotland, will furnish a serious boost for Wales and Kernow. The latter, especially, surely emboldened by the recent official recognition of its nationhood from the powers that be (good of them, that!) could edge closer to autonomy. There's more to Welsh nationalism than Plaid Cymru, with a large spectrum of national voices, including regional ones in the north. Greater Welsh autonomy could open up a new politics in Wales, nurtured by wider British devolution. In England too there are new emerging calls for greater regional autonomy right across the political spectrum from the Wessex Regionalists to the Socialist Workers Party England. It's encouraging also, that de-urbanisation and pro-rural bias are to the fore. Yorkshire devolution is really on a roll, and wider northern voices are picking up steam from the Free North Campaign to the Hannah Mitchell Foundation. What's with the ghastly named North East Party? Where's that? Northumberland and Durham, I would have thought would suffice.

The Mercian Party exist and other Mercian movements are active, so there's much potential in the midlands. The Wessex Regionalists appear reinvigorated in recent times and could well stand its largest number of candidates at next year's General Election since 1983. However, areas where autonomy movements appear lacking where they shouldn't include Kent (that proud shire with a great culture and dialect), East Anglia and Sussex. Hopefully the Scottish impact will kick start something in these regions. Obviously county pride has never been higher, so let's hope that plays a part in a new England.

Of course, regional identity can overlap. If Dumnonia rises, those in West Wessex who feel drawn can rally to it. I see no reason for conflict. Devolution means enough room for a myriad of identities in increasing autonomous areas. A National Anarchist vision could see a Devon made up of Wessex villages with settlements down the road with allegiance to Dumnonia or just Devon.The regions have had enough imperialism from London so they don't need any home grown varieties! All ways are real. Although the 18th September presents regionalists with an opportunity, the real lesson of the Scottish independence referendum is that the regions don't need to wait for state directives. The public mood is shifting their way - so regionalists should just get on with things and increasingly they are...And we National Anarchists can help. The real tragedy, however, for the Scots, is that even if they do break from London they will still be shackled to Brussels. Where's the logic in that?

Monday, 21 April 2014

The subtle revolution

Some within UK nationalist circles have been hailing the the Right Sector as leaders of some Ukrainian national revolution but whatever the truth behind the murderous acts in Sloviansk yesterday, national revolution had nothing to do with it.

The Workers' Revolutionary Party used to (and probably still do) end many an article in its daily newspaper by stating the solution to this or that strike or crisis was to build the 4th International (or whatever it was). The Socialist Party of Great Britain say that only their brand of socialism can alleviate the world's ills. I won't argue about that. Although I am a National Anarchist I would never claim it is perfect and the one true path. However I do believe that its methods and application can indeed offer something in bringing about a solution to the Ukrainian crisis. National Anarchism's core tenets of maximum autonomy, self-determination and secession are essential to a political settlement in Ukraine. A national dialogue needs to begin involving autonomy for all nationalities including the minority Tatars and others. If ethnic Russians in the east want to declare independence or autonomy Kiev must let them. If they want to join Mother Russia - let them. Minority Ukrainians in Russian areas (and vice versa) need guaranteed rights - possibly involving the idea of National Personal Autonomy. I share the Right Sector's opposition to the EU and in an imperfect world I wish for an independent Ukraine with national values - free of EU or Moscow's dominance.

There is a lot of merit to the assertion that revolutions can be bought about by a small determined elite. Some nationalists may be tempted to think that the Right Sector fit this role. I don't think, however, that their apparent chauvinistic and imperialistic actions can ever be supported by true radical nationalists. Besides, I believe the current neo-liberal regime in Kiev are too powerful, backed as they are by the EU and NATO - to be toppled or let Right Sector get their way. Right Sector operate in a statist mindset. The empires will never allow them to seize control of Ukrainian civic society. Maybe they can eventually control the streets of every city, but as long as the NWO controls the corridors of power, this would amount to nothing. Real national revolution in the 21st century globalist order needs to be subtle and peaceful. National dialogue in Ukraine has the potential to sow the seeds of the process toward maximum devolution and to the National Anarchist vision of federations of autonomous regions, localities and villages - and that is national revolution to its logical conclusion.

Saturday, 1 February 2014

More fun with flags

Introducing my very simple design for an English National Anarchist flag. Flags are very important symbols and much emotion and tribal loyalty is invoked through them. We can never have enough flags. This design sees the Cross of St. George subordinated to the green symbolising the green fields and woodlands of England. The green also symbolises the tendency of National Anarchism to lean toward nature and ruralism and against modernity. For those of you who don't like Norman impositions or perceived civic identity, the Cross of St. George can be replaced with the White dragon of course. The green could be replaced with gold symbolising wheat or cornfields - or a combination of both. Other ideas I have are for gold and/or green backgrounds with an Odal rune (which denotes heritage and family) in the centre or upper left canton, or the same colours again with an oakleaf design. A further design idea I have is for the Cross of St. George design but with a green background and a gold cross. I don't wish to replace England's historic national, regional and county flags, nor do I wish to rival the established National-Anarchist Movement flag - but I present these ideas to other English National Anarchists as possible banners to rally to.

For maximun tribal autonomy

The last two weeks has seen renewed inter-tribal clashes in Fezzan, Southern Libya. This is what happens when the old order disappears suddenly. The conflict has meant Gaddafi loyalists, the so-called 'Green Resistance', have increased operations in the area around Sabha, and reports of pro-Jamahirya activity in Sirte and even Bengazi have been filtering in. Obviously, those who would see the restoration of the Jamahirya are only interested in a unified Libya, but surely the peaceful solution lies in a decentralised, federal Libya that can lead onto maximum tribal autonomy and ultimately free tribal areas - somrthing resembling the National Anarchist vision. Natural resources will probably also be squabbled over, but we need to look for ways when some resources just won't be needed or wanted. But we need to accept the fact that a tribal world will not be without it's problems. But this is the direction we need to go if we are to move toward national freedom and social justice. It's not just Libya - right now the same goes for South Sudan and the Ukraine: the break up of states into smaller tribal entities. this is the logical alternative to globalisation. And there's another country with ongoing conflict that could benefit from radical tribal solutions - Syria. Cards on the table here: as a National Anarchist I want a military victory for Assad's government and armed forces. I'm not one for ideological purity and sectarianism ("THIS is all good - THAT is all bad") sometimes life is about compremises and going with what you have. Just as radical nationalists MAY have some common cause with aspects of Gaddafi's Third Universal Theory (forget about Gaddafi the man for now) then they MAY have some common cause with Ba'athism - nothing wrong with a national/cultural renaissance to my eyes. Obviously National Anarchists have VERY BIG differences with both these ideologies, but we cannot ignore geopolitical reality. A victory for Assad over religious fascism and Western imperialism, followed by genuine national dialogue involving Syrians of all shades including Druze, Assyrians and Kurds leading to a federal Syria along tribal lines is what all genuine nationalists should be calling for.