TraditionAndRevolution.freeforums.org :: View topic - From Third Position to National-Anarchism

As someone who is new to the concept of National Anarchism, I am immediately struck by the vulnerability of any people organised in organic communities without any national state infrastructure with which to provide for their physical security.

Imagine the vulnerability of say the German people, if organised into a miriad number of autonomous organic communities, to the threat of military invasion by say a Polish state, able to mobilise a massive army that could easily 'pick off' the autonomous organic communities of the Germans one at a time.

It was because of this weakness that men such as Garibaldi and Bismark brought about the unification of their fragmented peoples and in our modern world with motorised transport, it would appear that peoples organised into units that are below a critical mass would be doubly vulnerable.

The Palestinians, Vietnamese, Somalis, Afghanis and the rest have all proven that a determined populace can take on and convincingly cripple and defeat an invading military. There is no reason why a National-Anarchist community or a confederation of such couldn't band together and defeat an imperialist nation-state.

How decentralised a National-Anarchist community becomes depends on the community, some communes may choose an entirely agrarian lifestyle (like the Amish), while others may choose to control and make use of the factories and infrastructure of the withering State and organise under a syndicalist type method. National-Anarchism is not intrinsically primitivist, how much technology a community maintains depends on their own identity and their means to maintain it.

Every N-A community will look different and it's existence will depend on the peoples ability to adapt to their situation, much the same as the tribes of old.

This however only holds so long as the invading imperialist nation is restrained by world public opinion and does not feel free to act ruthlessly. The fact that the world is currently dominated by nation states and that small autonomous communities do not exist is perhaps a lesson from history that to be secure, autonomous communities need to achieve a critical mass wherein they effectively become a sovereign nation state.

Small scale industry such as would exist within a decentralised a National-Anarchist community would not enjoy the economies of scale that are available to larger national industries. All other things being equal, a National-Anarchist community, without intending to become 'primitavist', would eventually become surpassed technologically by the industrial capability of a nation state.

My point however is that the 'tribes of old' no longer live as autonomous communities, they have been absorbed into nation states that have the critical mass necessary to provide security and economies of scale.

Author:	Troy Southgate [ Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:43 am ]
Post subject:	From Third Position to National-Anarchism
From Third Position to National-Anarchism http://www.rosenoire.org/articles/transcending.php

Author:	Larry Nunn [ Sat May 02, 2009 1:46 am ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
As someone who is new to the concept of National Anarchism, I am immediately struck by the vulnerability of any people organised in organic communities without any national state infrastructure with which to provide for their physical security. Imagine the vulnerability of say the German people, if organised into a miriad number of autonomous organic communities, to the threat of military invasion by say a Polish state, able to mobilise a massive army that could easily 'pick off' the autonomous organic communities of the Germans one at a time. It was because of this weakness that men such as Garibaldi and Bismark brought about the unification of their fragmented peoples and in our modern world with motorised transport, it would appear that peoples organised into units that are below a critical mass would be doubly vulnerable.

Author:	Scott Anarchist [ Sat May 02, 2009 2:57 am ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Larry Nunn wrote: As someone who is new to the concept of National Anarchism, I am immediately struck by the vulnerability of any people organised in organic communities without any national state infrastructure with which to provide for their physical security. Imagine the vulnerability of say the German people, if organised into a miriad number of autonomous organic communities, to the threat of military invasion by say a Polish state, able to mobilise a massive army that could easily 'pick off' the autonomous organic communities of the Germans one at a time. It was because of this weakness that men such as Garibaldi and Bismark brought about the unification of their fragmented peoples and in our modern world with motorised transport, it would appear that peoples organised into units that are below a critical mass would be doubly vulnerable. The amount of decentralisation and mode of organisation will differ between different National-Anarchists communities, needless to say a National-Anarchist community in Philadelphia is going to have different defence mechanisms than a Palestinian N-A community in Gaza. The Palestinians, Vietnamese, Somalis, Afghanis and the rest have all proven that a determined populace can take on and convincingly cripple and defeat an invading military. There is no reason why a National-Anarchist community or a confederation of such couldn't band together and defeat an imperialist nation-state. How decentralised a National-Anarchist community becomes depends on the community, some communes may choose an entirely agrarian lifestyle (like the Amish), while others may choose to control and make use of the factories and infrastructure of the withering State and organise under a syndicalist type method. National-Anarchism is not intrinsically primitivist, how much technology a community maintains depends on their own identity and their means to maintain it. Every N-A community will look different and it's existence will depend on the peoples ability to adapt to their situation, much the same as the tribes of old.

Author:	Larry Nunn [ Sun May 03, 2009 5:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Scott Anarchist wrote: The Palestinians, Vietnamese, Somalis, Afghanis and the rest have all proven that a determined populace can take on and convincingly cripple and defeat an invading military. There is no reason why a National-Anarchist community or a confederation of such couldn't band together and defeat an imperialist nation-state. This however only holds so long as the invading imperialist nation is restrained by world public opinion and does not feel free to act ruthlessly. The fact that the world is currently dominated by nation states and that small autonomous communities do not exist is perhaps a lesson from history that to be secure, autonomous communities need to achieve a critical mass wherein they effectively become a sovereign nation state. Scott Anarchist wrote: How decentralised a National-Anarchist community becomes depends on the community, some communes may choose an entirely agrarian lifestyle (like the Amish), while others may choose to control and make use of the factories and infrastructure of the withering State and organise under a syndicalist type method. National-Anarchism is not intrinsically primitivist, how much technology a community maintains depends on their own identity and their means to maintain it. Small scale industry such as would exist within a decentralised a National-Anarchist community would not enjoy the economies of scale that are available to larger national industries. All other things being equal, a National-Anarchist community, without intending to become 'primitavist', would eventually become surpassed technologically by the industrial capability of a nation state. Scott Anarchist wrote: Every N-A community will look different and it's existence will depend on the peoples ability to adapt to their situation, much the same as the tribes of old. My point however is that the 'tribes of old' no longer live as autonomous communities, they have been absorbed into nation states that have the critical mass necessary to provide security and economies of scale.

Author:	canuckistani [ Tue May 05, 2009 2:09 am ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Decentralization has always been a strength of the European peoples. This has lead to an emphasis on quality, innovativeness, nimble adaptability, and creative redundancy (not putting all your eggs in one basket, i.e. multiple nations vs. a super-state). Just look at how the Greek city-states, crazy-quilt medieval Europe, and the compact nations of early modern Europe have defeated and even conquered numerically superior foes. Even the Roman Empire, when you look at the nut & bolts of it, was quite decentralized and non-monolithic internally. The Roman administration was a remarkably ad hoc and informal affair as compared to modern nation-states. But this could be a moot point in the end. The West, I believe, is headed for a civilization-wide collapse which will ultimately lead to global technological regression. Even countries like China and Japan, which have aped the West successfully, cannot maintain any kind of scientific-military edge without Western innovation to draw upon. Autonomous communities/tribes/enclaves, in my humble opinion, will be the norm.

TraditionAndRevolution.freeforums.org http://traditionandrevolution.freeforums.org/

From Third Position to National-Anarchism http://traditionandrevolution.freeforums.org/from-third-position-to-national-anarchism-t21.html	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Scott Anarchist [ Tue May 05, 2009 10:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Larry Nunn wrote: This however only holds so long as the invading imperialist nation is restrained by world public opinion and does not feel free to act ruthlessly. The fact that the world is currently dominated by nation states and that small autonomous communities do not exist is perhaps a lesson from history that to be secure, autonomous communities need to achieve a critical mass wherein they effectively become a sovereign nation state. If the imperialist nation-state did decide to ruthlessly exterminate the populace they are invading, what good would this do for the nation-state? By utterly exterminating the populace, they have no opportunity to make use of the "human resources" of the population which is usually one of the key reasons behind a military invasion of a less powerful population. Though, perhaps the nation-state was solely after the land or natural resources available in the communities land, wouldn't trade be more beneficial than launching a genocidal war? Even if the nation-state didn't have to worry about world diplomacy or international laws, the opinions of their own population would surely object to large scale genocidal extermination programs? I feel that a nation-state would be better off allowing a National-Anarchist community to exist and trading with it than the state would be invading and destroying the community. Larry Nunn wrote: Small scale industry such as would exist within a decentralised a National-Anarchist community would not enjoy the economies of scale that are available to larger national industries. All other things being equal, a National-Anarchist community, without intending to become 'primitavist', would eventually become surpassed technologically by the industrial capability of a nation state. Is technological progress a suitable reason for widespread industrial slavery? We can talk about the modern conveniences and amazing inventions of the post-industrial world but watching the 9-5ers and the factory workers heading home each day really makes me wonder if it has been worth it. Anyway, the current economic system is doomed to fall apart and I can see that happening in a very dramatic way. I believe there will be a natural step back to a semi-agrarian lifestyle, or at least one where industry is scaled back to a "by need only" basis rather than the materialist excess of today. In example, I was shocked to hear of a method of heating ones home that has been around since Roman times costs $6-8000 (Australian) to have installed... I'm sure such could as simply be constructed in a backyard shed at minimal cost. As Mr. Canuck has said, a more decentralised lifestyle will also mean a revival of innovativeness and creativity amongst our folk. The decentralised and rural Australia of the earlier 20th Century was responsible for amazing innovation and invention (clothesline, carburettor etc.) but such has changed significantly as the demographics of Australia and the urbanisation of the population has increased. Larry Nunn wrote: My point however is that the 'tribes of old' no longer live as autonomous communities, they have been absorbed into nation states that have the critical mass necessary to provide security and economies of scale. With the security, efficiency and comfort of a nation-state comes incredible sacrifices. These are sacrifices of political, cultural, economic and social freedoms that I am no longer willing to accept and do not wish to subject my descendants to. We have the ability of establishing a more sustainable, humane and free way of life - I say we should go for it!

Author:	Larry Nunn [ Fri May 08, 2009 4:44 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Hi Scott, You ask "If the imperialist nation-state did decide to ruthlessly exterminate the populace they are invading, what good would this do for the nation-state?", and then you go and answer your own question with, "By utterly exterminating the populace ... the nation-state [would gain] the land or natural resources available in the communities land". You then ask, " ... wouldn't trade be more beneficial than launching a genocidal war?", and the answer is "not necessarily", lots of imperial states have waged genocidal wars in the past, why assume it will never happen again? If a nation state wants land and resources for it's own people, is ruthless and does not have any common interests with the adjacent 'autonomous community', then genocidal ethnic cleansing might be the route they would choose. Scott, you state, "With the security, efficiency and comfort of a nation-state comes incredible sacrifices", but conversely, the freedom and simplicity of a "semi-agrarian lifestyle" also brings with it lots of sacrifices, and using your own words, a loss of security, a loss of comfort and a loss of efficiency. As a young man, you might be able to eschew these benefits of nationalism, but there will be millions of women with their children and old folks who will choose security, comfort and efficiency above some airy, fairy notion of personal freedom any day, especially if the nation state in question affords them a considerable degree of personal freedom, despite any impositions it may make upon them. This is why history is full of ardent young men who band together and go off to forge a 'free society', only to discover that they have created a 'boys only club' with few if any women involved and a generation later they have died out as a result of an incapacity to reproduce. If isolated and independent autonomous communities were the most successful recipe for a human society, they would already exist and they would be dominating the world, but they don't. Instead, we find that the nation state is the most successful human social structure, history proves this because the world is full of them. The way forward for National Anarchism is not through rubbishing the concept of the nation state, but by creating a variant of the nation state that embodies the best aspects of anarchism without sacrificing the advantages afforded by the nation state. Scott, you state, "the current economic system is doomed to fall apart and I can see that happening in a very dramatic way". I agree with you that there will be massive turbulence in the years ahead and we will have the opportunity to restructure much of our world, but we will face ruthless enemies and we should be wary of making ourselves vulnerable during such a dangerous time of crisis by pursuing overly utopian ideals.

Author:	Troy Southgate [ Fri May 08, 2009 5:06 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Thanks for all your thoughts, Larry, and for joining the forum. I think the crucial point here is the inevitability of it all. People often ask me if I support Primitivism or want to abolish all forms of technology, but under the circumstances I don't really believe this is a relevant question because when it really comes down to it the "massive turbulence" that you mention above will put many people in the hands of the gods, so to speak. This is why it is necessary to create an elite that has the ability to endure and survive the troubles that lay ahead. Forming anarchistic communities now is a bit of a luxury, in many ways, because we do still have a little time to play with, but unless we begin to familiarise ourselves with alternative forms of technology, energy and various other skills immediately, we will - like the vast majority of people living in the fragile towns and cities - go down with the sinking ship. Alternative communities exist all over the world and many are extremely successful, but we are not proposing that we all go off and live a cosy existence somewhere with our Utopian heads lodged up our proverbial backsides. On the contrary, unless we can defend ourselves better than the villainous mafiosi that will inevitably spring up in the wake of the collapsing system then we may as well hand over our women, our children and our possessions right away. Our people's dependence on the State is extremely worrying. We need to re-establish the spirit of community and encourage people to start doing things for themselves. Once we turn our backs on the State - which only survives through taxation and force of arms, at least whilst the former is there to pay for the latter - it will ultimately wither and die. Power must return to the grassroots.

Author:	Larry Nunn [ Sun May 10, 2009 1:18 am ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
Hi Troy, Should the turbulence that I foresee cause nation states to collapse, then there will be a need for people to organise along community lines and it could be that some autonomous communities will persist for many years. You are right therefore that we should be prepared for such an eventuality, however, there will inevitably be a subsequent move towards the reformation, by merger and or the absorbtion of smaller autonomous communities into ever larger entities or groupings that will be comparable to the current nation states. My argument is that such a movement should not be rejected per se, especially if the re-emergent nation state is organised administeratively on the basis of 'subsidiarity' such that decicion making is made at the lowest practical level and commercially in accord with distributist principles. History has shown us that autonomous communities have the greatest longevity once they have achieved the critical mass whereby they effectively become sovereign nation states. As I have previously stated, "The way forward for National Anarchism is not through rubbishing the concept of the nation state, but by creating a variant of the nation state that embodies the best aspects of anarchism without sacrificing the advantages afforded by the nation state". Why else would we refer to National Anarchism as 'national' unless it related in some way to the nation and the nation state?

Author:	Troy Southgate [ Sun May 10, 2009 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: From Third Position to National-Anarchism
You're right, Larry, there will always be a tendency for some people to begin the process of centralisation and bureaucracy all over over again. It's human nature. This is why we are not trying to advocate some kind of utopian fantasy in which everyone will live happily ever after. However, the collapse of civilisation will mean that it could be hundreds of years before we reach the point where the nation-state rears its ugly head once again. But we won't have a great deal of say in the matter, either, because the nation-states of Europe are ultimately doomed and cannot be reformed in the way that you suggest because they are inevitably tied in with the internationalist system. The only realistic form of decentralisation that will take place with regard to the nation-state, therefore, will be one that leads to their complete eradication. Many people will find themselves in an extremely vulnerable position, of course, but at least it will be a level playing field and this is why we need to ensure that National-Anarchists have a better chance of survival than their rivals. I should also point out that the 'national' in National-Anarchism relates, not to nationalism or any kind of nation-state, but to ethnicity. National-Anarchism, then, is simply a form of racial or tribal anarchism.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/