Oh dear. (I know that's short, but it sums it up quite well.)
P.S. Can we get a translation of that Indymedia article?
Anarchists, national anarchists, third positionists and revolutionary conservatives
The better word would be reactionary (how can you have a conservative 'revolution'?). More to the point, anyone who calls themselves a "politically incorrect anarchist" is a knob, and should be treated and exposed as such.
Either way, I'm sad to hear that this is the state of affairs in Poland, and I hope you continue in your efforts to brave this kind of idiocy. Thankfully, if nothing else, there is an absolute detesting and antipathy towards anything even smacking of neo-nazism in America's anarchist milieu.
Following on from a quite bold analysis of the situation in Tibet, Laure Akai has produced the goods again with an intelligent examination of the pseudo-anarchist New Right.
The points raised here need to be promptly addressed in a serious manner by both Anarchist Communists and the likes of Antifa. I would also suggest that, from now on, perhaps these matters should be discussed off-forum.
It would seem that some people just can’t see the wood for the trees. For instance, despite protestations to the contrary, the fascist-roaders of the so-called Social Reconstruction (in reality, probably one man and his pet flea) appear to have hoodwinked a few gullible individuals and then used them as camouflage. However, the types highlighted by laureakai’s contribution are far more worthy of close scrutiny.
The only thing that these insects have in common with Anarchy is a fetish for black bloc-style garb. Sadly for them, the despicable racism that is their only raison d’etre no longer cuts it with mainstream youth. Hence the radical posturing (or should that be masturbation;) hence la mode des vêtements noirs. But never fear, we can always rely on them to regularly show their true colours. After all, once a Jew-baiting Nazi inadequate – always a Jew-baiting Nazi inadequate.
“40 Nationalists/3000 Commies, Fucking Bring It On!” shrilled a recent New Right ‘National Anarchists’ poster from ‘down under’. That’s more like it guys. Authentic semantics coupled with the mindless, pro-capitalist violence of a 1930s piss-stained Berlin gasse.
For some reason, elements of the right are trying to appropriate the anarchist name for their reactionary politics. America has the "anarcho"-capitalists and "national anarchists", althought clearly the latter has spread.
Anyone who thinks anarchism has anything to do with nationalism, fascism or capitalism is obviously an idiot. All we can do is to have nothing to do with them, denounce them and move on.
I agree "reactionary" may be a more appopriate word, but I'm using their terminology, which I think is important to do since it helps people identify which ideas and terms are used by whom.
8-10 years ago there were two lists devoted to this (an American and a European one) but now there is none. A new list may be worth considering.
Unfortunately, I have to disagree with Anarcho on this on, and I hope you can follow my argument here. First, not all places look like the UK which has had a long, uninterrupted history of the A-movement, which is rather on the winning side of the global capitalist hierarchy (on average), which is multicultural but whose cultural heritage (ie language) is again rather at the top of the global hierarchy. Although you have your nationalists, fascists and eccentric esoteric freaks, the particular background of the movement where you are, based also on a certain cultural background, looks different than in some other countries where national-based movements are more closely linked in the psyche with some kind of freedom against foreign oppressors. Issues like anti-globalization, anti-occupation movements and anti-consumerism are used to draw people into further contact with increasingly pernicious ideas. Granted, this is more of a localized problem then. But one more argument.
It does look to me that there is an organized effort made between these groups to create a little havoc. Troy Southgate long ago proposed deep entrism into the anarchist movement. It is also known that part of the Third Positionists were linked to the secret services and the Italian branch had some connection with those responsible for things like the Strategy of Tension. (Stuart Christie wrote well on this - if you haven't read his book, please do. Some think it's too "conspiracy theory like" but when one carefully looks at some recent events in Italy, it makes you wonder.) This is perhaps again a localized problem. More common types of havoc could be seen at the antifascist demo in Prague recently when fascists showed up with black and red flags and thus there is a potential for "anarchists beat up homeless guy" type reports. The using of @ symbols was also widely reported in Germany and sporadically in Eastern Europe, for example in Ukraine.
I think this is quite serious indeed - a little more than the Norweigan nut who is the office of every anarchist international and gives brown cards out.
I wouldn't want to dedicate too much time to this issue, but do think that some time should be spent in places where such sorts may pop up in numbers to know who they are, what kinds of tricks they're using and to be able to counter their more subtle efforts (because that's where unwitting young people might get sucked in). As with just about anything though, the more international the effort is, the more likely it is to have resonance.
I don't know if anybody reading this has encountered such problems, but if you have and you need to do something about it, please contact me off-list.
Since there was the topic of AnarchyNet and national anarchists here, maybe this is a good forum for this. Increasingly the nationalists are using the term anarchism or even showing up with red and black flags to neonazi demos.
Good to see that national anarchist infiltration is being successfully exposed in some parts of the world. Unfortunately here in Poland a small but stubborn part of anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists are unwittingly helping them with their plans.
The most recent exposure of nacent attempts to create an anarcho-nationalist-conservative alliance occured as a result of a small blog entry I made the other day about the left-right synthetic magazine Obywatel, the Citizen (OB). OB's editor is known for drifting through the right-wing and ecological movements, but also has had his paws in anarchist publications. The idea of OB is to join various strains of anti-systemic thought through populism, ecology, anti-Americanism, anti-consumptionism, etc. - in short, all the areas where conservative radicals tend to meet up with elements of the left or anarchist movements.
The early issues of the magazine included a score of far-right authors mixed in with left-wing ones. According to the proponents of this approach, this makes the magazine "balanced", to present all political options - an explanation which some anarchists vehemently defend. Although there was some criticism of the publication from early on, only when members of ATTAC from other countries saw some of the authors and texts being published there did anything start to happen. Members of ATTAC had been involved in the publication. As a result of this, members of ATTAC left the publication. This scandal is well-documented. In the response to this, OB (the editor of which still tries to justify his publication of Horst Mahler's rants about resurrecting the Third Reich) mentions that the allegations are false. Among the reasons he gives is that he had cooperated with anarchists. (This supposedly makes publishing racists, neofascists and the like OK.)
Given this context, it is clear that legitimate anarchists are being used for a number of reasons. First, there is some overlap in ideas, so these right radicals are glad to use what is interesting for them. More importantly, as long as a number of anarchists accept that cooperation between the radical right and anarchists is some sort of anti-politically correct common cause, the more these right wing people can draw anarchists into their projects and create large scale ideological confusion, with the aid of the old song about left-right divisions being "out of date".
My blog entry concerned an advertisement for LACH. One needs no Polish to get a sense of what this is. http://www.tworcownia.pl/lach.html The creator of LACH is involved in the revolutionary conservative movement and is often to be found on extreme-right forums such as the monarchist forum. Right now, these right-wing people are pushing for a new "conservative revolutionary" movement. Of course there is nothing "new" in this, except that they through in some Evola and newer types to Spengler and Junger. The creators of LACH also were trying to make a new right / neofascist concert in Warsaw last week starring Von Thronstahl, fans of Evola and Codreanu. The concert was entitled "Neuropa", W.E.B. Dubois's reference to Hitler's New World Order and a term used in the context of new right infiltration in social movements. Although the question of martial industrial music can be complcated, Von Thronstahl has made its connection to the Right perfectly clear and the concert was advertised on neonazi and far-right portals.
The concert got cancelled. Unfortunately, some anarcho-syndicalists were very quick to get on the anarchist forum and denounce the antifascists who they blamed for the shutting down of the concert, crying about politically correct types who "think everybody is a fascist". After publication of my small blog comment, the far-right trolls, commonly thought to be from OB, started an offensive. During this, it came out that LACH is involved in a blog called "Anarcha". Somebody published a text from Anarcha on IMC, with a LACH graphic. http://www.poland.indymedia.org/pl/2008/04/35816.shtml
Anarcha calls itself a project of politically incorrect anarchists, Christians, fascists, conservatives and homophobes. The right wing trolls responded to criticism of it by saying that anarchists should have no problem, because anarchists take part in it.
In the text published on IMC, (Revolutionary Traditionalism) they make reference to Primo de Rivera, Junger, Schmidt and Evola and espouse monarchism, hierarchy and authority. This text seems to have woken up a few people, and I have received quite a number of mails from leftists and antifascists supporting by decision to criticize LACH. Unfortunately a few anarchists have also written that I am somehow "unfair" to this fascist bunch and even that I am negatively effecting the whole anarchist movement.