(a) The lone-wolf approach to politics. The idea that, because groups are easily targeted by state and other enemy agencies, individuals should be encouraged to engage in activity on their own as far as possible.
(b) An awareness of the psychological importance of racial, ethnic, national and religious factors in politics. Although, as I have argued above, this is by no means confined to the ‘far right’, those movements that attract the ‘far right’ label are nevertheless adept at upholding sectional interests -- a valuable skill when confronting a neoliberal globalizing empire that seeks to replace sectional interests with financial interests. This is all about preserving the small , intimate community against a harsh and uncaring global regime; about preserving cultures, ways of life, standards, identities against a regime for which global finance is everything.
(c) A rejection of many Establishment attempts at semantic infiltration. A classic tactic used by the Establishment is to encourage the people to worship words, which are then appropriated by the Establishment. The people might not be able to agree what ‘democracy’ or ‘freedom’ actually are, and even the learned philosophers and statesmen of the world do not speak in one voice on these matters, nevertheless all are agreed that ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ are good and should be upheld, even at great cost. True, the people might be a little hazy as to why these virtues should be upheld . . . but so long as teachers, newspaper editors, lecturers and television producers continue to assure the people that these words really do represent great goods and that they really must be upheld then the people will, on the whole, duly regard those who set themselves up as the defenders of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ (i.e. those with access to the Establishment media) as the forces of goodness and those who are denounced (by the Establishment media) as enemies of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ as the forces of evil. The ‘far right’ is often, but not always, refreshingly cynical about the Establishment’s use of words for psychological purposes. Adolf Hitler, for instance, wrote the following in Mein Kampf:
(d) A rejection of many of the more dubious concepts associated with ‘left-wing’ radicalism. To be ‘left-wing’ nowadays usually entails, for example, ‘anti-racism’. But ‘anti-racism’ is merely one means by which the Establishment polices dissent against the authoritarian multiculturalism that it uses to break down loyalty to existing nations, homelands, communities and groups, replacing them instead with loyalty to a globalized regime in which the movement of capital is far easier. This is not to argue for bestial behaviour towards other races. Rather, it is to accept that a globalized world is ultimately not in the interests of any race and that the ‘anti-racist’ movement, in breaking down resistance to such a world, is therefore pernicious in its effects, if not in its intentions. Similarly, concepts such as ‘class’ seem unnecessarily divisive. What is of importance is not a man’s ‘social class’ but rather whether he is for the Establishment or against it. These points are well taken by the ‘far right’ but are resisted passionately by most of the other political tendencies (with some exceptions).
5.2.2 Successes and failures
Just as we can learn from elements of far-right
‘theory’, so we can learn from the successes and failures of ‘far-right’
political action.
First, we can learn from
their successes.
(a) They are particularly effective at influencing local politics in areas where they have a great deal of popular support due to local alienation from mainstream politics. However, a word of caution is necessary here. Such victories at the local level might indeed be good for morale and for publicizing one’s existence, and perhaps even for gaining a few recruits here and there, but it is doubtful whether they are useful for much else. They have little long-term value. There is a danger that much time, money and effort could be spent in pursuing these small-scale successes when the same resources could be deployed far more profitably in striving for longer term goals.
(b) They have proven capable of influencing mainstream politicians into modifying unpopular policies. In Britain we see how the National Front, for all its irrelevance to the electoral process, nevertheless managed to pressurize the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher into toughening legislation on immigration in the 1980s. However, once again, this was merely a short-term victory. If the long-term aim was to prevent massive non-white immigration into Britain, it failed miserably: once Margaret Thatcher departed from the scene such immigration rose relentlessly. Similarly, the BNP has, at the time of writing, forced the current Labour government into making several concessions on asylum and immigration policy. Nevertheless, these concessions are merely a drop in the ocean and, in the long term, are quite insufficient to make much difference to the general direction in which Britain is heading.
(c) They are adept at provoking an hysterical over-reaction. This can be useful when it is necessary to create a general atmosphere of chaos and panic, perhaps as a smokescreen for more serious political activities.
Second, we can learn from their failures.
Their repeated failure to make much headway in national politics, either
by using electoral systems or by armed coups and revolutionary violence,
contains some sobering lessons for those who would advocate such strategies.
The ease with which their organizations have been infiltrated, subverted
and rendered ineffective is also most instructional. The tendency of their
leaders to sell out on matters of principle, their incessant squabbling
among themselves, their lack of any unifying body of theory -- all of these
things can be noted and can serve as stark warnings to those contemplating
taking the ‘far right’ path.
Third, we can learn from
the Establishment’s responses to these people. We can look at its techniques
of repression and we can observe which are successful and which are not.
Then we can evolve strategies to counter the more successful techniques
and apply them in our own struggles with the Establishment.
5.3 There are areas where national-anarchists can make common cause with the ‘far right’
We can identify several areas where national-anarchists and those on the ‘far right’ are likely to be able to make common cause to a greater or lesser extent.
(a) Anti-globalization work. Much of the ‘far right’ is opposed to globalization, as are the national-anarchists.
(b) Anti-Establishment work. ‘Far right’ individuals and organizations are frequently opposed to the Establishment, not least because of its neoliberal, multicultural, internationalist perspective.
(c) Anti-repression work. As the natural allies of all who are oppressed by the Establishment, whether such oppression takes the form simply of denial of access to the media and hence to the electoral system or whether it involves persecution, imprisonment, terror and murder, both national-anarchists and the ‘far right’ (who are frequently victims of such tactics) have an interest in cooperating to publicize and combat the ‘dirty tricks’ of the Establishment.
(d) Cultural work. Joint actions to support the cultures of peoples that are threatened by the New World Order and to attack and subvert pro-Establishment cultural activity.
(e) Community-building work. The idea of community building certainly appears to be gaining ground among groups labelled ‘far right’ by the Establishment. Where this happens then it certainly provides room for cooperation.
5.4 In conclusion
Hitherto, politics has been a struggle between
individuals and groups for the control of nation states, and a struggle
of nation states to gain resources, influence and dominance. In the decades
and centuries that are to come, however, we might anticipate a radical
change in the nature of political activity. We might anticipate that with
the decline of the nation state there will arise a monumental struggle
between two great social forces. On the one hand there will be the great
globalized neoliberal Establishment -- the New World Order -- a world imperial
power with vast resources, invincible armies, massive intelligence and
propaganda organs reaching deep into every home and into every corner of
the Earth. On the other hand, and against this, there will be ranged all
who oppose the global Establishment: the poor, the downtrodden, the oppressed,
the exploited, the marginalized, the despised, the inconvenient, those
who will not swallow the official line, those who know too much,
those who will not shut up, those whose values or faiths or beliefs
conflict with the neoliberal dogmas of our age, those who want to be
independent. There is no reason to conceive of either of these two
great adversarial groups as homogeneous monoliths. On the contrary -- both
will consist of ever shifting alliances, some of which will doubtless break
away from time to time and join the other camp. Nevertheless, a crucial
factor determining the feasibility of any alliance is likely to be not
the position of an individual or group on some outmoded ‘left-right political
spectrum’ but rather whether that individual or group is pro-Establishment
or anti-Establishment.
Those groups, whether
they term themselves ‘far right’, ‘far left’ or anything else, which fall
into the anti-Establishment camp are inevitably on the same side as the
national-anarchists, who by definition are anti-Establishment. Insofar
as the ‘far right’ falls into the anti-Establishment camp -- which is by
no means always the case -- then it is on the same side as the national-anarchists.
Nevertheless, there are compelling reasons, both practical and theoretical,
to draw a clear distinction between national-anarchist politics and those
of the ‘far right’.
The history of national-anarchism,
as well as some of the language, symbolism (such as the use of the sunwheel),
and rhetoric of some national-anarchists have led to a perception
that the national-anarchists are really ‘just fascists in disguise’. This
is not true. It must never be permitted to become true. Our relationship
with the ‘far right’ must be entirely pragmatic, as should be our relationships
with all potential allies.
Notes
1 Rokeach M (1968) Beliefs, Attitudes and Values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc (‘beliefs are organized along a dimension of centrality or importance. Centrality is simply defined in terms of interconnectedness . . . the more a belief is functionally connected or in communication with other beliefs, the more implication s and consequences it has for other beliefs, and therefore, the more central the belief’); Barbour IG (1997) Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues. San Francisco: Harper; Brownlee J, Boulton-Lewis G, Purdie N (2002) Core beliefs about knowing and peripheral beliefs about learning: developing an holistic conceptualisation of epistemological beliefs. Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology 2: 1--16. Indeed, the distinction is hinted at in WVO Quine (1951) Two dogmas of empiricism, The Philosophical Review 60: 20-43: ‘The totality of our so-called knowledge or beliefs, from the most casual matters of geography and history to the profoundest laws of atomic physics or even of pure mathematics and logic, is a man-made fabric which impinges on experience only along the edges. Or, to change the figure, total science is like a field of force whose boundary conditions are experience. A conflict with experience at the periphery occasions readjustments in the interior of the field. Truth values have to be redistributed over some of our statements. Re-evaluation of some statements entails re-evaluation of others, because of their logical interconnections -- the logical laws being in turn simply certain further statements of the system, certain further elements of the field. Having re-evaluated one statement we must re-evaluate some others, whether they be statements logically connected with the first or whether they be the statements of logical connections themselves. But the total field is so undetermined by its boundary conditions, experience, that there is much latitude of choice as to what statements to re-evaluate in the light of any single contrary experience. No particular experiences are linked with any particular statements in the interior of the field, except indirectly through considerations of equilibrium affecting the field as a whole.’)
2 Barbour IG (1997) op. cit.
3 Michael D (2002) Unity in diversity. Voice of the Resistance 1, p. 15.
4 Mussolini B (1932) La dottrina del Fascismo. Enciclopedia Italiana. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana.
5 Michael D (2003) A new land, a new life, a new hope. Voice of the Resistance 2, pp. 17--24.
6 Adolf Hitler (1924/2000) Mein Kampf, Boring OR: CPA Books.
7 Adolf Hitler (1937) ‘On National Socialism and world relations’, speech delivered in the German Reichstag on 30 January.
8 Klassen B (1973/1992) Nature’s Eternal Religion. East Peoria: Creativity Publishing, Ch. 10.
9 Even the apartheid rulers did not envisage conquest and imperial domination from Pretoria. From 1959 the vision was of a ‘commonwealth’ of separate black and white states. Subsequently this changed into talk of a ‘constellation’ of independent states (Vorster in 1975 and Botha in 1979), although the South Africans never had the determination to follow through on this vision.
10 Pitigliani F (1934) The Italian Corporative State. New York: Macmillan. Thyssen F (1941) I Paid Hitler. Translated by Cesar Saerchinger. New York: Kennikat Press. Hallgarten GWF (1952) Adolf Hitler and German Heavy Industry, 1931--3. Journal of Economic History 12: 222--46. Corner P (1979) Fascist agrarian policy and the Italian economy in the interwar years. In Davis JA (ed.) Gramsci and Italy’s Passive Revolution. London: Croon Helm. Schweitzer A (1964) Big Business in the Third Reich. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Hayes P (1987) Industry and Ideology: IG Farben in the Nazi Era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Adler FH (1996) Italian Industrialists from Liberalism to Fascism. The Political Development of the Industrial Bourgeoisie, 1906--34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Guernin D (2000) Fascism and Big Business. New York: Pathfinder Press. Bosworth RJB (2002) Mussolini. New York: Oxford University Press.
11 Payne SG (1987) The Franco Regime. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Leitz C (1997) Economic Relations between Nazi Germany and Franco's Spain, 1936--1945. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellwood SM (2000) Franco: Profiles in Power. Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson Education.
12 Gianfranco Fini eschews his fascist salutes, Guardian, 24 January 2002.
13 Reuters report, 6 November 1995.
14 Reported in Ha aretz, 2 May 2002.
15 Associated Press report, 18 July 2002.
16 Millions rally worldwide for peace, Guardian 17 February 2003.
17 EU delegates debate constitution articles, Guardian, 28 February 2002.
18 Melman Y (2003) Zhirinovsky: Saddam won't attack Israel. Ha’aretz, 20 January 2003.
19 Letter from Vladimir Zhirinovsky to Rabbi Berel Lazar of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, 22 June 2001.
20 Hooper J, Fossgard J (2000) Haider race to power was helped by Reebok, Guardian, 10 February.
21 Haider J (2000) Blair and me versus the forces of conservatism. Daily Telegraph 22 February, p. 22.
22 The man and his message, Time Europe, 14 February 2000.
23 Primor A (2002) Le Pen ultimate. Ha’aretz 18 April.
24 Sadeh S (2002) The British Le Pen is Euphoric. Ha’aretz 30 April.
25 Morris A (2003) With local elections approaching, British Jews warn of far-right threat. Jewish Telegraphic Agency report, 14 April.
26 Michael, D. (2002) Unity in diversity. Voice of the Resistance 1, p. 15.
27 ibid.
28 Klassen B (1973/1992) op cit.
29 Britain’s National Union of Journalists (NUJ) is uncompromising in its advocacy of bias against the ‘far right’.Its guidelines on ‘reporting racist organizations’, as in force in early 2003, state:
-- Do not sensationalise by reports, photographs, film or presentation the activities of racist organisations.
-- Seek to publish or broadcast material exposing the myths and lies of racist organisations and their anti-social behaviour.
-- Do not allow the letters column or 'phone-in' programmes to be used to spread racial hatred in whatever guise.
2 The NUJ believes that its members cannot avoid a measure of responsibility in fighting the evil of racism as expressed through the mass media.
3 The NUJ reaffirms its total opposition to censorship but equally reaffirms the belief that press freedom must be conditioned by responsibility and an acknowledgement by all media workers of the need not to allow press freedom to be abused to slander a section of the community or to promote the evil of racism.
4 The NUJ believes that the methods and the lies of the racists should be publicly and vigorously exposed.
5 The NUJ believes that newspapers and magazines should not originate material which encourages discrimination on grounds of race or colour as expressed in the NUJ's Rule Book and Code of Conduct.
6 The NUJ recognises the right of members to withhold their labour on grounds of conscience where employers are providing a platform for racist propaganda.
30 An example of this is the British Broadcasting Corporation’s use of its ‘taste and decency policy’ to, apparently unlawfully, prevent the supporters of ‘far right’ parties from being permitted the right of free expression, even where such a right is extended to smaller and far more violent parties. During elections held in 1997 and 1999, the BBC’s online Web site refused point blank to link to the BNP’s Web site, although it did link to the sites of other parties including smaller and more violent ones. When challenged to state precisely what violated this policy, it failed repeatedly to do so. The same happened again prior to the 2001 elections. On that occasion, the BNP threatened legal action and the BBC did create such a link. However, after the election the BBC continued its previous approach and, at the time of writing (April 2003) there is no sign of a ‘thaw’ (much less the much claimed but utterly mythical BBC ‘impartiality’). The BNP, meanwhile, has (at the time of writing) been far too muddled and disorganized to pursue the matter further.
31 Hooper J (2003) German court rejects attempt to ban neo-Nazi party, Guardian, 19 March.
32 [Gramsci A] Hoare Q and Nowell Smith G (trans. and ed.) (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks. New York: International Publishers.
33 Spengler O (1926) The Decline of the West. Translation with notes by Charles Francis Atkinson. Allen & Unwin: London
34 Gramsci A (1921) Elections and freedom. L'Ordine Nuovo, 21 April.
35 Gramsci A, Togliatti P (1926) The Italian situation and the tasks of the PCI. In Hoare Q (1978) Antonio Gramsci: Selections from Political Writings (1921-1926). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
36 Gramsci A (1921) Referendum. L'Ordine Nuovo, 29 June.
37 Gramsci A, Togliatti P (1926) op. cit.
38 Gramsci A (1920) Questions of culture. Avanti, 14 June.
39 Gramsci A (1925) Introduction to the first course of the party school. In Hoare Q (1978) Antonio Gramsci: Selections from Political Writings (1921-1926). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
40 Gramsci A (1985) Prison writings. In Forgacs D (ed.) An Antonio Gramsci Reader: Selected Writings. New York: Schocken Books.
41 ibid.
42 Gramsci A (1926) Some aspects of the Southern question. In Hoare Q (1978) Antonio Gramsci: Selections from Political Writings (1921-1926). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
43 Gramsci A. (1985) Prison writings. In Forgacs D (ed.) An Antonio Gramsci Reader: Selected Writings. New York: Schocken Books.
44 ibid.
45 Althusser L (ed.) (1971) Ideology and ideological state apparatuses: some notes towards an investigation. In Althusser L (1971) Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. London: New Left Books, pp. 127--86.
46 Hoxha E (1978) Imperialism and the Revolution. Tirana: 8 Nentori.
47 Hoxha E (1986) The Superpowers. Tirana: 8 Nentori.
48 ibid.
49 Hoxha E (1960) Reject the Revisionist Theses of the XX Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Anti-Marxist Stand of Krushchev's Group! Uphold Marxism-Leninism! In Hoxha E (1972) The Party of Labor of Albania in Battle with Modern Revisionism. Tirana: Naim Frasheri.
50 Hoxha E (1978) Imperialism and the Revolution. Tirana: 8 Nentori.
51 Hoxha E (1977) Report on the Activity of the Central Committee of the Party of Labour of Albania. Tirana: 8 Nentori.
52 Hoxha E (1979) Imperialism and the Revolution. Tirana: 8 Nentori.
53 ibid.
54 ibid.
55 ibid.
56 Hoxha E (1980) Eurocommunism is Anticommunism. Tirana: 8 Nentori.
57 ibid.
58 ibid.
59 ibid.
60 Kim Jong Il (1990) On some problems of the ideological foundation of socialism. Speech delivered to the senior officials of the Central Committee of the Worker’s Party of Korea, 30 May.
61 Kim Jong Il (1996) The Juche philosophy is an original revolutionary philosophy. Kulloja 26 July.
62 Kim Jong Il (1982) On the Juche Idea. Study sent to the National Seminar on the Juche Idea to mark the 70th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il Sung.
63 Kim Il Sung (1955) About driving away dogmatism and formalism from ideological activities and establishing a Juche. Speech to ideological workers, 28 December.
64 Independent economy of Korea. KCNA report dated 12 March 2003, cited in Independence Star, publication of the Juche Idea Study Group of England (unnumbered).
65 Self-reliance, Korea’s mode of struggle. KCNA report dated 17 March 2003, cited in Independence Star, publication of the Juche Idea Study Group of England (unnumbered).
66 Bakunin M (1869) Where I stand. In Aldred GA (1972) Bakunin's Writings. New York: Kraus.
67 Bakunin M (1871) Politics and the state. In Aldred GA (1972) Bakunin's Writings. New York: Kraus.
68 Bakunin M (1871) The Paris Commune and the Idea of the State. New York: Knopf.
69 Bakunin M (1869) On education. L’Egalité, 31 July.
70 Bakunin, M (1866) Revolutionary catechism. In Dolgoff S (1972) Bakunin On Anarchy: Selected Works by the Activist Father of World Anarchism. New York: Knopf.
71 Bakunin M (1870) On representative government and universal suffrage. In Dolgoff S (1972) Bakunin on Anarchy: Selected Works by the Activist Father of World Anarchism. New York, AA Knopf.
72 Kropotkin P (1897/1946) The State: Its Historic Role. London: Freedom Press.
73 Kropotkin P (1906) The Conquest of Bread. GP Putnam's Sons: New York and London.
74 ibid.
75 ibid.
76 ibid.
77 Malatesta E (n.d.) Towards anarchism. In Graham M (ed.) (1974) Man! London: Cienfuegos Press, pp. 73--8.
78 Bakunin M (1873) Statism and anarchy. In Dolgoff S (1972). Bakunin On Anarchy: Selected works by the activist father of world anarchism. New York: Knopf.
79 Bakunin M (1872) On the International Workingmen's Association and Karl Marx. In Dolgoff S (1972). Bakunin On Anarchy: Selected works by the activist father of world anarchism. New York: Knopf.
80 Goldman E (1911) Socialism: caught in the political trap. In Shulman AK (1972) Red Emma Speaks: An Emma Goldman Reader. New York: Vintage Books.
81 Peter Kropotkin (1895) ‘Proposed communist settlement: a new colony for Tyneside or Wearside’, The Newcastle Daily Chronicle (20 February), p. 4.
82 Michael D (2003) A new land, a new life, a new hope. Voice of the Resistance 2, pp. 17--24.
83 Malatesta E (n.d.) Towards Anarchism. In Graham M (ed.) (1974) Man! London: Cienfuegos Press, London, pp. 73--8.
84 Adolf Hitler (1924/2000, op. cit.)