Is “Conspiracy Populism” the Way Beyond Left and Right?

 

Some reflection is needed on what the proper relationship should be between the pan-anarchist movement and the movement(s) commonly labeled as “conspiracy theorists,” “truthers,” and the like. Technically, the “anti-conspiracy” milieu is not a movement as much as it is a collection of ideas pertaining to a wide variety of themes regarding alleged nefarious plots by shadowy, secretive elites. These theories are highly varied and diverse in nature and include concerns related to such topics as the assassination of John F. Kennedy, UFO sightings, the alleged influence of Satanic cults in elite circles, alternative medicine, fluoride, the alleged death of Paul McCartney, Elvis sightings, the alleged murder of Princess Diana, FDR’s alleged foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack, chemtrails, an endless array of supposed “false flags,” AIDS, climate change, peak oil, Zionist bankers, subliminal advertising, the alleged moon landing hoax, Area 51, and, of course, the alleged 9-11 cover up. There are many, many other such theories.

However, by far the most important and relevant “conspiracy theory” involves alleged efforts by global elites to create a one-world oligarchical dictatorship under the guise of a “New World Order.” The resemblance of this theory to the claims of the left-wing anti-globalization movement are striking. The principle difference is that adherents of the New World Order theory insist that secret societies and shadowy cabals are the primary players among the global power elite, while leftists tend to hold to a more Marxist-like analysis involving multinational corporations, international trade organizations, and the world banking system. However, on the ground level these would seem to be purely abstract, theoretical differences. It is clear enough that both sets of analysis are virulently opposed to the global super class of plutocratic elites whose existence is beyond dispute. Among the ideological factions, leftists prefer to criticize transnational capitalism, libertarians and conservative populists express concern about one-world government, and “conspiracists” are more concerned about secret societies. However, these various interests converge on many issues of practical concern, i.e. the ongoing concentration of power on an international level.

It also undoubtedly true that adherents of various “conspiracy theories” transcend a good many conventional boundaries, including “normal” political ideologies, the boundaries of left and right, ordinary economic philosophies, race, religion, nationality, and positions on controversial issues such as abortion or gay rights. Adherents of conspiracy analysis also demonstrate a much greater sense of urgency and a greater radical zeal than many ordinary rightists and leftists alike, and tend to be disproportionately concentrated among the poor and working class as opposed to the affluent and wealthy. Additionally, the establishment seems to genuinely fear conspiracy theorists in a way they do not when it comes to ordinary leftists and rightists.
The pan-anarchist movement is about uniting anarchists, libertarians, decentralists, anti-authoritarians, anti-statists, oppositional subcultures, adherents of alternative economics, and anti-imperialists against the global power elite in favor of a general paradigm of self-determination for all. To be sure, there are important cultural obstacles to the creation of a such an alliance, which is why I have endeavored to introduce anarchists to the thought of intellectuals such as Alain De Benoist and Alexander Dugin, and their advocacy of a genuine cultural pluralism that accepts the legitimacy of a multiplicity of cultures with a wide divergence concerning their core values.
This is a perspective that seems highly relevant and complementary to the principles of anarchist decentralism even if one rejects some of the other ideas of these thinkers. At present, much of the anarchist milieu holds to a standard brand therapeutic leftism with regards to cultural questions, and those who don’t often fall back on a conventional rightist perspective. The incorporation of ideas similar to those of Dugin or Benoist would clearly be an advancement in anarchist theory and thought.

However, the question also remains of how to go about generating propaganda, recruiting, and organizing on the ground level. At present, substantial sectors of the anarchist milieu continue to focus principally on various youth cultures, the far Left, and the sexual minority subcultures. Yet an embrace of the conspiracy milieu would seem to be a way to dramatically increase not only the numbers but the diversity of the anarchist camp. Certain stands within anarchism have already begun such an effort.
On an organizational level, it would appear that the best route for anarchists would be to strive for the creation of international federations similar to the old Anarchist and Communist internationals that existed in the early twentieth century and which are inclusive of the many different kinds of anarchism and overlapping ideologies. The different kinds of anarchists would continue organizing and recruiting among their respective cultural milieus, but towards the wider aim of building populist movements on a nation-by-nation, region-by-region, community-by-community basis for the purpose of attacking the global power elite, and decentralizing political and economic power to the level of the natural community. The incorporation of conspiracy analysis into the anarchist strategic paradigm would seem to be a powerful weapon for the cultivation of “grass roots” populist movements that would in turn be among the most significant constituencies for anarchist-led popular organizations, economic enterprises, front-parties, and civic militias.

Beyond Nationalism, But Not Without It

BY Ashanti Alston
from Anarchist Panther zine #1

 What motivates me more than anything else about anarchism and its relevance to Black revolution is that it has offered me some powerful insights into why we have not been able to recover from our defeat (the 60’s revolution) and advance forward to the kinds of untities, organizations and activities that make for invincible revolutionary movements.

There are all kinds of Nationalisms and there are all kinds of reactions to nationalism. I would like to address this issue from the perspective of someone who has moved through and grown within some of the Black Nationalisms specific to the Black Community. I would like to share what that means to me as it pertains to the questions you raised for this ONWARD theme of Anarchism and Nationalism.

"…we have been taught either to ignore our differences, or to view them as causes for separation and suspicion rather than as forces for change. Without community there is no liberation, only the most vulnerable and temporary armistice between an individual and her oppression. But community must not mean a shedding of our differences, nor the pathetic pretense that these differences do not exist. – Audre Lorde

Great quote. I’ve taken it from the latest issue of Arsenal #4 (page 4) as it introduces its own discussion into the very same theme. As a Black anarchist TIRED of primarily white anarchists just totally dismissing nationalism, I truly appreciate Arsenal & Onward taking this on as two of the newest newspaper/mags on the scene.


Black nationalism saved my life, in a sense, as a teenager in the 1960’s. It "jarred" my unconscious acceptance of amerikkanism dogging my peoples and helped me to see the larger picture. I am a 60’s child. There was Malcolm, there was H. Rap Brown and Stokeley Carmichael of the Black Power movement, and then there was the Black Panther Party. All were nationalists, all represent, also, an evolution of nationalism within the black community. But because of the totally racist, genocidal dynamic within this Babylonian Empire, the black nationalist understood that we must…we must…we must primarily look to ourselves to free ourselves. Point blank. And none of these thinker felt it was necessary to ‘check in’ with The White Man (from the ruler to the revolutionary) to see if it was okay. Ha! Picture that. It was about our survival as a people, not as that mythical "working class" or that equally mythical "citizen." SO, for me, as this teenager who had just witnessed the 60’s Rebellions in my own hometown, my own thoroughly racist hometown, nationalism was a lifesaver. WE MUST LOVE EACH OTHER. BLACK IS BEAUTIFUL. WE MUST CONTROL OUR OWN COMMUNITIES. Etcetera, etcetera.


Its funny cause as an anarchist searching for some good anarchist shit from the 60’s to be able to hold up and show "proof" that the anarchist were better on the position of Nationalism than the Marxists and Leninists, I found hardly anything! I found some positive stuff from a "libertarian" publication but to my surprise they represented the "anarcho-CAPITIALIST tendency! Yet, I found them to be on point and consistent on RESPECTING nationalism and national liberation. ("The Libertarian Forum" of the late 60’s and early 70’s. Karl Hess, Joseph Peden, and Murray N. Rothbard). They, at least, understood that black people’s nationalist struggle was a struggle against the State, the Babylonian state. They, also, looked at what the nationalist groups were doing in their actual grassroots practice, like creating concrete defenses against repression and alternatives in survival institutions. Thus, they liked what the Panthers were doing on the ground through their programs and supported that kind of nationalism as being compatible with "anarchism on the ground." Paul Goodman made similar observations of the early civil rights movement groups. But it was understood that these groups were dealing with issues of survival against genocide, and that these groups were developing their own analyses and programs to rally their communities. One last thing about the libertarians of LF, they interestingly enough were critical of the Panthers when the Party turned towards Marxism and other authoritarian ideologies because in their "on the ground" practice the survival programs were no longer spontaneous responses to specific oppressions but increasingly had to be kept under the tight control of the Party.


Nationalism and statism are different in that nationalism can be anti-state. But they can have commonalities in that nationalism may only be against a particular kind of state, such as a Racist State, or a Fascist State. Anarchism and nationalism are similar in that they are both anti-statist, but what does it mean when the specific anarchist movements within a specific country are racist and dismissive of any and all nationalism, be it reactionary or revolutionary???? For me, even the nationalism of a Louis Farrakhan is about saving my people, though it is also thoroughly sexist, capitalist, homophobic and potentially fascist. Yet, it has played an important part in keeping a certain black pride and resistance going. Their "on the ground" work is very important in keeping an anti-racist mentality going. As a black anarchist, that’s MY issue to deal with cuz they’se MY FOLKS. But it points to where anarchism and nationalism have differences, and that is in anarchists having NO understanding of what it means to be BLACK in this fucked up society. We do not have the luxury of being so intellectual about this excruciating boot on our collective neck, this modern-day middle-passage into the Prison Industrial Complex, this…that…this…that.

As a postmodernist anarchist, identity politics is important to me. Go back to Audre Lorde’s quote. Every time I hear someone talk about my people as if we are just some "working class" or "proletariat" I wanna get as far away from that person or group as possible, anarchist, Marxist, whatever. As a postmodernist anarchist I also find my people’s experience the font from which we will find our way to liberation and power. That’s what I get from being the "insurrection of subjugated knowledges. My nationalism gave me that kind of pride because it was such a rejection of White thinking or at least a decentering of the primacy of white thought, capitalist, socialist, whatever. I say this to say that folks outside of our experience need to respect that they aint got no monopoly on revolutionary thinking and dam sure aint got none on revolutionary practice. It is easy to sit back and intellectualize about our nationalism from the modernist, eurocentric framework of rational, scientific, materialist models. While one does that, it is our nationalism which constantly rally our people come together, remember our history, love ourselves, dream on and fight back. Black anarchists and anti-authoritarian revolutionaries understand the limitations of nationalism in terms of its historical sexism, hierarchy, or its modernist trappings in general. But we also recognize anarchism modernist trappings in the form of American racist privilege when it comes to people of color.


The efforts of Lorenzo Kom’boa Erving, Greg Jackson and others to build an organization/federation of black community partisans/organizers is an example of uniting black revolutionary nationalism and anarchism. I believe that Black Fist, even if called generally a people of color or third world anti-authoritarian organization, understood the necessity to be grounded in the experiences of black and brown communities. Thus, the experiences of the Panthers and the Brown Berets and other like groups were essential. The question seems to be whether white anarchists and anti-authoritarians can work with such groups. Even if those two groups no longer exists, their experiences are important.


White folks need to deal with being ANTI-RACIST ALLIES to folks of color communities and activists. Activists in particular because we are usually whites’ entry point into any possible relationship with our communities.. Anarchist theory and practice cannot take the form of a mere adherence to the founding fathers and canonal practices, such as Kropotkin, Bakunin, and the Spanish Civil War. Tired of hearing it! Anarchism HERE in Babylon must reflect our unique problems and possibilities for struggle. Our struggles are not just against capitalism. Too simple. Our struggles are not just against racism. That’s, also, too simple. There’s all kinds of negative isms we are fighting against and just as importantly, all kinds of worlds we are fighting for. That’s why I feel that the whole idea and practice of "convergences" and "spokescouncils" are sooooo important to activists in general to learn from and enhance because they are about making space for all "Voices" to be heard and factored into the decision-making so that whatever activities comes forth from it prefigures the kind of new worlds we truly want. This rambles, right? My apologies. I end this by advising: WHITE ANARCHISTS, DEAL WITH BEING THE BEST ANTI-RACIST ALLIES YOU CAN. WE NEED YOU BUT WE WILL DO THIS SHIT WITHOUT YOU.


To my folks of color:

COME ENVISION…envision a world, of worlds within our world where there’s principled co-existence within the wonderful diversity of the Black Community.

Harlems / Spanish harlems / watts / hip-hop communities / villages of the Carolina coast / college communities / gay-lesbian-transgender communities / zulu nation / new afrikan / religious communities that come together mainly on Saturday or Sunday / squatter communities / outlaw communities / kemetic communities / ibo-ghanaian-sierra leonean-ethiopian-rasta neighborhoods / nomadic poet-artist tribes / and then those of us who just be plain ignant and harmless and crazy when we have to be and fun-loving and like to journey through and between communities and sometimes just create new mixed ones…WHAT IF ? …and HOW ?


Ella Baker said we can do it if we can trust ourselves and get away from leadership-led revolution; Kwesi Balagoon said we can do it if we willing to create a chaos that will shut this mutha down; Audre Lorde said we can do it if we LEARN TO LOVE AND RESPECT OUR BEAUTIFUL DIVERSITY and reject the tools of our oppressors; Harriet Tubman daid aint a better way t live THAN AT-WAR FOR A RIGHTEOUS CASUE; and Franz Fanon said if we smack that mutha across the face, drive that pig outta your territory at the point of a gun IS LIBERATING FOR THE SOUL.

WHAT IF ? Envision it…HOW?…


Like Huey Newton’s community of communities, BEYOND NATIONALISM and fully self-determining, embracing our diversity of beliefs, lifestyles and non-exploitative economic arrangements, reuniting Earth-loving peoples with a loving Earth.

Through the Imagination, All is possible.