The Night they Drove Old Dixie Down!

Judge Slaps Down an SPLC Hit Man

January 25, 2014   AFP

• Judge orders leftist group to pay $50K

By Pete Papaherakles

For years, organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Anti-Defamation League have gotten away with harassing, smearing, suing, threatening and generally irritating prominent patriotic and free speech groups and individuals in the United States. That all changed in January, though, when an American Indian sued one of these groups and won after the conference he was scheduled to speak at was forced to shut down due to threats.

The lawsuit stemmed from an incident in February 2010, when One People’s Project (OPP), founded by Daryle Lamont Jenkins in 2000, targeted a conference set up by the New Century Foundation in North Carolina. After receiving considerable pressure as well as threats, the hotel was forced to cancel because so-called “white racists” and “bigots” were meeting there.

David Yeagley was one of the scheduled speakers. Although Yeagley is a Comanche Indian, he has very strong nationalist convictions and is a fierce advocate for the right of whites to defend their own interests. A true American patriot with multiple master’s degrees and a long list of achievements, he has been called the “American Indian Leonardo DaVinci.” Yeagley took it upon himself to file a lawsuit against  OPP and finally succeeded in getting justice in an Oklahoma court—amounting to a $50K judgment against OPP.

Over the years, OPP has targeted groups such as AMERICAN FREE PRESS, the Council of Conservative Citizens and even prominent revisionists like historian David Irving. OPP is supported by Morris Dees’s SPLC, which has reaped hundreds of millions of dollars by instigating racial tensions and capitalizing on the exploitation of alleged victims of racism.

Jenkins, an obviously self-indulgent man with secretive funding, directs small groups of young, unemployed leftists with too much time on their hands. He operates OPP’s website, which publishes phone numbers, home addresses and workplace addresses of individuals  OPP has targeted and slandered as being far right or racist.

This writer has also been a victim of OPP’s harassment. In 2009 Canadian free speech activist Paul Fromm spoke to a small gathering at my home. Members of OPP placed fliers throughout the neighborhood with my name, address and pictures of hooded Klansmen, misinforming them that a Klan meeting was taking place at my house.

The local media was even contacted, and the event made the evening news as a half-dozen disheveled demonstrators with signs protesting racism marched in front of my house.

NATA-NY's experience at the seventh annual NYC Anarchist Book Fair

By Gabriel Brown

NATA-NY member and co-founder

On April 6, 2013, the seventh annual NYC Anarchist Book Fair, which was held at the Clemente Soto Velez Cultural Center in New York City, provided the setting for a violent attack on the peaceful members of the National Anarchist Tribal Alliance of New York (NATA-NY).

NATA-NY originally planned to attend the book fair to check out books and the different workshops. We always hope to further develop our philosophies and understandings by speaking to anarchists of all hyphenations. NATA-NY always seeks to learn from others in the anarchist community as well as share our own experiences, attempting to find unity among people on all sides of the “left/right”spectrum. We are involved with creating educational materials, building intentional communities, DIY permacultural projects, environmental clean-up actions, homeless outreach programs, etc. Our ultimate goal is to help communities build self-sufficiency for the present and the future.

The controversy began on the Anarchist Book Fair facebook event page shortly after Craig FitzGerald began posting up information about NATA-NY and Pan-Anarchism. Someone by the name of “Modern Man” began posting up a collection of articles including the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) article on the defunct group known as the Bay Area National-Anarchists and an essay that NATA-NY recently reposted entitled “Anarcho-Fascism” by Jack Donovan, who is NOT a affiliated with NATA-NY (nor a National-Anarchist at all). 

  Modern Man’s posts remained on the book fair's event page alongside other anti-NATA-NY smears including demands that Craig be banned from the book fair. The articles Craig posted up on the event page were permanently deleted so no one would have an opportunity to read about NATA-NY firsthand. When I saw that the articles Craig posted were being censored, I decided to get involved with the discussion as an attempt to set the record straight regarding the inaccuracies and false narratives in the “antifa” articles written in January and February of 2013. As soon as I became part of the discussion, other event page participants began accusing Craig and I of being “fascist,” “right-wing,” “nazi” and “racist” (just to give a few examples of the typical buzz words) as an attempt to discredit our input and malign our group. Every time NATA-NY members posted articles to encourage other anarchists to see NATA-NY’s ideas for themselves, the articles were either deleted or responded to with juvenile remarks illustrating a complete lack of reflection and analysis.

Over the week of discussion, it was proclaimed that no violence would be tolerated at the Anarchist Book Fair. NATA-NY asked if that also applied to “antifa” given their modus operandi of brutally attacking those with whom they disagree. (Insert link from the Australian antifa attack on N-AM members in Australia) In response to this genuine question, Eugene Onegin explained that “antifa” isn’t violent, and that “antifa's” victims are actually assaulting themselves. These are the kind of illogical statements made when NATA-NY attempts to have a philosophical and intellectual exchange of ideas with dogmatic “anarchists”. 

Over the week of discussion, it was proclaimed that no violence would be tolerated at the Anarchist Book Fair. NATA-NY asked if that also applied to “antifa” given their modus operandi of brutally attacking those with whom they disagree. In response to this genuine question, Eugene Onegin explained that “antifa” isn’t violent, and that “antifa's” victims are actually assaulting themselves. These are the kind of illogical statements made when NATA-NY attempts to have a philosophical and intellectual exchange of ideas with dogmatic “anarchists”. 

Considering that NATA-NY is not involved with racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and upholds the principle of non aggression, NATA-NY should have been allowed to be present at the book fair as fellow anarchists. However, a message was put out by one of the organizers of the event, Elias Naser, that NATA-NY would not be allowed to attend the book fair because “NATA’s position and agenda is causing a rift in the Anarchist community not only here in NY but the world.”

Although NATA-NY practices anarchist principles and has never engaged in violent actions toward activists or those within a variety of diverse political circles, it was clear that hypocrisy, censorship, group-think, and the sort of dramatic behavior that one finds in high school was at play.

Members of NATA-NY, who have been members of other organizations in the past, are not strangers to false accusations and libel; this has been a common occurrence by government front groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League. “Antifa,” like its hidden SPLC/state masters, have used character assassination methods to discredit those they disagree with politically and philosophically. The same “ smear and attack” formula is used in the narratives of both nazi and communist groups as an attempt to destroy us for aiming to bridge the gap between the “left and right” under the principle of freedom. 

“Antifa's” scathing description of NATA-NY is unfounded and ridiculous when you look at the diverse group of individuals and our body of activist work.

It became clear that the organizers of the book fair desired to retain an exclusive monopoly over anarchism; they were even oppressive to their own supporters by censoring the legitimate questions regarding an alleged rapist and informant's presence at the book fair.

The day before the book fair an announcement was made that the facebook event page would be deleted and further information and location details could be found on their website. Before the event page was shut down, a “wanted poster” was posted up and distributed amongst those who said they would be attending the bookfair to be on the lookout for NATA-NY members and to send “antifa” information on individuals involved with NATA-NY.

Knowing that there was a possibility that NATA-NY would be banned from entering the book fair, as originally planned NATA-NY members went ahead with a street action in front of the event, giving people an opportunity to speak directly with NATA-NY members about the controversy.

The book fair had a large police presence outside, and there were several security guards checking bags upon entry. There was also a secondary check point inside of the building before you entered the book fair.

When I arrived with other NATA-NY members and supporters who intended to interview speakers and participants for their independent media outlets, “antifa” dupes outside were handing out “wanted posters” with photos of NATA-NY members. One of these people handed me a copy of the flier and informed me to be on the watch because a bunch of “nazis” were going to show up to the book fair. Apparently, he did not realize that I was one of the individuals pictured. It was a scene right out of the movie “The Fugitive.”

Eventually one of individuals on the flier attempted to walk into the book fair but was stopped by security and told he could not go in. I attempted to walk into the event and also was told I could not go in. Eventually everyone trying to enter was not allowed in and it became rather chaotic with attendees arguing with security. At this point those provoked by “antifa's” smears recognized me, pointing directly at me shouting “fascist!” Eventually other people started looking at me as if I was the devil incarnate. It became a rather hostile environment so one of our allies began to video document the belligerency for his own safety and the safety of others, including an older woman who came out in support of NATA-NY.

I attempted to speak rationally with the angry mob of people but reason and common sense were nowhere to be found. The only thing these people “knew” was what they had been told by “antifa.” Nobody seemed interested in looking to see if the narrative fit the claims made against the live human beings they were interacting with. It was as if Mao’s Cultural Revolution and the gospel of the “Red Book” had once again taken form but not by communists, by anarchists or those claiming to be anarchists

Even though I brought out information that would debunk “antifa's” claims about NATA-NY, the venue's attendees stated they did not care about the facts and continued to chant “nazi” at me.

I soon recognized Eugene Onegin (self-described “Secular Humanist” and “Communist anarchist”) who had been arguing with Craig and I online, so I attempted to initiate a dialogue regarding what NATA-NY stands for. Of course the same sort of responses that were given on the event page were repeated in person. With narrow-minded condescension, he claimed that the word “national” could never possibly be used within anarchism at all. Eugene attempted to make claims that anarchism was communism and justified “communism” as an acceptable term within anarchism but refused to extend that same respect toward other words or ideas.

Outside of the book fair, NATA-NY legally posted up on a public sidewalk. “Anarcho”-communists tried to do everything in their power to make our experience as uncomfortable as possible. They verbally attacked us, claiming that we were just trolls who are not anarchists at all but really just fascists. We were falsely accused of only providing a helping hand to white people during the National Anarchist Movement International Day of Action when NATA-NY gave out food and provisions to homeless people on the streets of New York. (Those claims are easily debunked by the photos that NATA-NY took that day.) Anti-NATA-NY zealots even went as far as to claim that NATA-NY is affiliated with the Aryan Nation ( A long defunct white supremacist group), which is a complete lie.

As I took pictures, I was harassed by attendees who demanded I delete any photos with them in the background. They also demanded to take my camera so they could see the pictures I took, claiming it violated their privacy rights. I attempted to be respectful (despite the ridiculousness of the authoritarian demand upon my private property), but mutual respect was never given in return. People were very sensitive to having photos taken of them or the venue, but had no problem plastering inaccurate, unfounded wanted posters with our photos all over the event. These hypocrites attempted to impose a double standard of respecting only some people’s privacy on a public sidewalk. Intimidation and hatred began to heat up beyond words when a book fair attendee spit on me, calling me a “fucking Nazi” as she walked off.

NATA-NY's opponents argued that anarchism is about homogenized collectivism, that anarchism is communism, that the Individual is of no importance to the overall mission of replacing the state, and that freedom and equality only extend to certain groupsdeemed privileged because of their “oppressed” status.Many of our defamers' platform issues were identical to the talking points of statist political parties, and the rest were all regurgitated summaries of Marxist philosophy. The idea of separation (i.e. independent self-determination) was said to be oppressive and counterproductive to replacing the state and that people did not have a right to retain their culture or individuality within a global anarchist world. Mere ideas were called dangerous and differences in opinion were defined as “violent” behavior. Some of the attendees saw the idea of real diversity (as opposed to “gray-race” homogeneity) as the root of all oppression. Many defended the “need” for people to be forced into reeducation institutions or killed off if they refused to assimilate into the greater collective of a single people. It was clear that people had limited understandings or unrealistic expectations about what an anarchist society would actually look like. Some of these individuals were becoming the very things that they claimed to oppose.

Although there was a great deal of negative behavior at the book fair, a positive side did exist. Several people asked NATA-NY members directly what we really believe. Despite the ignorance, fear, and hateful remarks made toward NATA-NY members and those associated through friendship, it was clear that individuals outside of the group-think mindset were curious about what all of the controversy was really for and why NATA-NY had been targeted so viciously. Those conversations were generally productive. NATA-NY members were able to distribute fliers explaining what NATA-NY represents for several hours outside of the book fair and managed to have diplomatic discussions with those who were concerned, curious, and open-minded.

At one point, I was discussing NATA-NY's stance on racism (we're against it) and racial separatism (it's not for us, but we accept it as a reality in a decentralized world) with someone who was willing to have a rational dialogue. In the middle of our conversation, a book fair attendee came outside and handed this person a copy of the wanted poster, warning him that NATA-NY was “racist.” Rather than join the discussion which dealt directly with the topic of race, he proceeded to run back inside the building. It was clear to the person who was speaking with me that something more complex was at play here. Based on the actions of our defamers, this neutral person realized that the banishment and slander of NATA-NY was not only unwarranted, but abominable as well.

Toward the end of the night, NATA-NY had just about exhausted our supply of literature, and many people had already left the book fair. As NATA-NY was preparing to leave and take a quick group photo, a few people nearby noticed the NAM flag and became enraged. One of the most militant yelled “fuck off with your nationalist shit!” She quickly became irrational and physically confrontational, flailing her arms at the NAM flag and calling us “racists” and “fascists”. Robert of NATA-NY tried to rationally point out that her violent behavior towards a peaceful group was more authoritarian and fascist than anything we have ever done. The reactionary woman and her associates immediately increased the level of physical aggression.

Steve of WeAreChangeCT attempted to film the scuffle while a man wearing a hood hit Steve’s camera out of his hand and then ran back into the book fair. The attacker then came back outside and ran up on Steve, attempting to punch him from behind. Steve was knocked directly into a older woman (who came out in support of NATA), who fell into the street. While we were each dealing with assaults from all angles, a shadowy individual from the right side of the building ran up to me and grabbed the NAM flag. This person ran like a football player on a mission to receive a touchdown. As I tried to retrieve the flag, I was attacked by an individual from behind a car who sucker punched me in the head about five or six times. Then the man who assaulted Steve joined my attacker before he was scared away by the NYPD, who were nearby.

The Anarchist book fair violated its own policies by showing intolerance toward diverse groups, and for allowing “antifa” and their supporters to engage in physical violence against NATA-NY and those deemed associated. The environment of the book Fair was corrupted with fear, elitism, privilege, group-think, and juvenile behavior. It was a very chaotic situation, and a glaring example of hypocritical double standards that do a great disservice to the philosophy of anarchism and to individuals within the greater anarchist community.

Anarcho-Fascism

 Members of NATA-NY and the greater NAM have in the past made arguments against use of the term anarcho-fascism, because of its seeming hypocrisy. This is largely based on the fact that authoritarianism and the leader principle have been the dominant trend in fascist movements worldwide. Upon a closer evaluation of the word and its etymology one can see that fascism does not imply hierarchy but rather strength through unity, and some anarchists may want to reclaim the term. - CF NATA-NY

 VIA:  http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/


By Jack Donovan
On March 3, 2013

 “In a society that has abolished every kind of adventure the only adventure that remains is to abolish the society.”

—Situationist graffiti, May 1968

As a political ideology, fascism was a mixed bag of 20^th Century ideas. Its athletic presence hung with flirty, politically expedient schemes like universal suffrage, in many ways last century’s fascism was defined by its responses to other political movements of the time—like Marxism and liberal capitalism.
But, just beyond the historical details of fascism, there is something eternal. Italian writer Umberto Eco called it “Ur-fascism” —meaning “primitive” or “original.” Unfortunately, his snatchy “fourteen points” were overly concerned with the top-down totalitarianism of fascism’s notable dictators and their party boys. His “ur-fascism” wasn’t “primitive” enough. It wasn’t “eternal” at all.

The word “fascism” has become sloppy shorthand for any violent, intrusive police state. For most people, fascism evokes a people forced into lockstep conformity by an all-powerful government. 20^th Century political fascism had many other features, and they were instituted differently in different nations. Oppressive, runaway governments are also not unique to 20^th Century fascism. Marxism, Catholicism and Islam have all produced cruel, iron-fisted police states. If being more afraid of your own government than you are of its external enemies is a measure of totalitarian tyranny, America’s own “progressive” surveillance state is headed that way. Fascism and totalitarianism may be confused in the popular imagination, but they aren’t the same thing.
The fasces was a
powerful symbol before Mussolini was born, so it is possible to separate the symbol from his regime and see it in its own right. I am not concerned so much with the usage of the fasces as a symbol of magisterial power in Republican Rome. I am more interested in the phenomenon this pre-Roman symbol appears to represent. Fascism has been described as a “male fantasy,” and I agree that the fasces symbolizes a distinctly male worldview. What is it about the fasces that captures the male imagination?
Most people associate the “evils” of fascism with a top-down bureaucratic institution, but to me the fasces itself appears to symbolize a bottom-up idea.

The bound rods of the fasces represent strength and the authority of a unified male collective. That’s its “primitive” appeal. True tribal unity can’t be imposed from above.  It’s an organic phenomenon. Profound unity comes from men bound together by a red ribbon of blood. The blood of dire necessity that binds the band of brothers becomes the blood of heritage and duty that ties the family, the tribe, the nation. The fasces captures the male imagination because it appears to symbolize the unified will of men. Men prefer to believe that they offer their allegiance by choice, whether they truly do or not. Free association—or the appearance of it—is the difference between free men and slaves. If you can’t just walk away, you’re a prisoner. If you choose to stay, if you choose to align your fate to the fate of the group and submit to the collective authority of the group, you are a member, not a slave. As a member, you add the weight of your manhood to a unified confederacy of men.
The fasces became a popular decorative motif for American government buildings in the 19th and early 20th Centuries, and its symbolism is consistent with an earlier Latin motto adopted by the union: e pluribus unum. “Out of many, one.” 20^th Century political fascism itself was preceded by the Italian fascio—voluntary “bundles” or unions of men uniting to assert their collective interests. Mussolini was member of a fascio before he was a “fascist.” This idea of men choosing to band together and increase their strength was most eloquently explained by the ape “Caesar” in Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011).  Breaking a single stick, and then gathering a bundle, Caesar shows his imprisoned comrades that, “Ape alone…weak…apes together…strong.”
When the fasces is revered, it symbolizes “our power.” When the fasces is reviled, it is despised because it has become a symbol of “their power.”

Virile men do not unite to become sandbags. The fasces symbolizes men bound together with an axe, ready for action, issuing a threat of violence—of “or else.” The fasces is a warning, a promise of retaliation, a paddle on the wall for traitors, slackers and law-breakers.

In The Way of Men, I wrote that “The Way of Men is The Way of the Gang.” Primal masculinity is rooted in the practical, tactical ethos of a gang of men struggling to survive and triumph over external forces.
From this perspective, I see the fasces as a “universal gang sign.” It symbolizes, better than any other symbol I can think of, the moment when men tie their fates together and align themselves against nature, against other men, against…the world. The fasces depicts the genesis of “us,” of “our team,” of “our culture,” of “our honor” —the formation of a collective identity. It symbolizes then moment when the war of all against all becomes a war of men against men, of “us” against “them.” The fasces symbolizes the moment when men create order from chaos.

This pure, primal manliness can only be realized under stress. It can only rise out of chaos, as a reaction to external forces. From there it matures, shaped by time, into an honor culture, and from that culture—that combination of collective history and custom that characterize the identity of a people—comes Tradition. Everything I recognize as good and worth saving about men and masculinity thrives in this cultural sweet spot between the purity of the warrior-gang and the spoiled, conniving depravity of complex merchant-based cultures.

With no more frontiers to explore, save space—which can only be allowed, even in fantasy, as a neutered bureaucratic project—the modern, effeminate, bourgeois “First World” states can no longer produce new honor cultures. New, pure warrior-gangs can only rise in anarchic opposition to the corrupt, feminist, anti-tribal, degraded institutions of the established order. Manhood can only be rebooted by the destruction of their future, and the creation of new futures for new or reborn tribes of men. It is too late for conservatism. For the majority of men, only occupied structures and empty gestures remain.

The way of men can only be rediscovered in Night and Chaos.
Ur-fascism is the source of honor culture and authentic patriarchal tradition.
Ur-fascism is a response to anarchy.
The political position of The Way of Men is “anarcho-fascist.”
This anarcho-fascism is not an end; it is hungry for a new beginning.

START THE WORLD

The secrets of the hoarie deep, a dark
Illimitable Ocean without bound,
Without dimension, where length, breadth, & highth,
And time and place are lost; where eldest Night
And Chaos, Ancestors of Nature, hold
Eternal Anarchie, amidst the noise
Of endless Warrs, and by confusion stand.
—Milton, Paradise Lost

When NATA-NY Met NYC Antifa: the True Story

By Craig FitzGerald

Earlier this month it was brought to our attention that the collective that runs ABC No Rio declared they would  not hold the “Punks Against Police” show because one member of the headlining band is loosely affiliated with NATA-NY.* At the same time, the first of two hit pieces on NATA-NY was posted on the NYC antifa blog in an attempt to intimidate us and  members of the above mentioned band. Members of the band who were never affiliated with us then made public statements distancing their band from NATA. This pleased the organizer of the show, NYC Antifa’s Maoist “Joey Steel,” enough to keep the  band on the bill.  The venue changed to “The Swamp ”(allegedly a NYC antifa “place”) and mention of the band and the accompanying photos were retracted from antifa’s article.  “Joey” personally smeared us, calling NATA “racists, homophobes, xenophobes, anti-semites and right wingers,” and censored my attempts to defend the group and explain our positions on  the show’s event page.

In solidarity with the band and the message of the event*, we promised to be in attendance and were hoping to show that we are not a fascist group.  On the afternoon of February 16th, after taking some group pictures, five members of NATA-NY attempted to attend the “punks against police” matinee. We never had any intention of, nor did we attempt to “storm the show” as claimed in the antifa article. Upon entering the venue, we were met by a masked skinhead (most likely a member of RASH*) who, armed with a maglite, was working the door. Robert Erick paid the $10 and was patted down for weapons.  At this point, because we were not there to start trouble, I asked the masked doorman if he could hold the two pocket knives I had until the show was over.  During this interaction, an unmasked goon who was also running the door must have recognized me because as I was about to pay the admission  he said “hold on a minute” and went upstairs.  Five seconds later he came back saying  “he cant come in” while pointing at me. We asked why and said we wanted to speak with the organizer “Joey Steel” and the two members of the headlining band I know personally .

“Joey” eventually came out whining that “N.A.T.A. was not welcome here” and we “needed to leave.” After some debate and protest we demanded to speak to members of the above mentioned band.  We were told, “fine, but you all have to wait outside.” We  refused to comply until the member of the band who is loosely affiliated with NATA came downstairs and our money and my knives were returned. At one point “Joey” attempted to push the member of NATA mistakenly identified in the second article as Luke Bilgrey (who was not present at all). When none of Joey’s comrades joined in, he promptly ceased physical confrontations. A few moments after we were reimbursed and my knives were returned, one of the guitar players of the band in question, who never had any affiliation with NATA,  came downstairs and told us that his band did not want us at the show. Although I doubted that this was the band’s consensus, we decided to respect the principle of voluntary association and exclusion, and left the building. Antifa locked the doors behind us. We milled around in front of the venue discussing and lamenting the authoritarian measures employed to keep a punk rock/hardcore show homogenized and politically correct.

After about five minutes approximately eight guys came out, some of them armed with maglites. One said, “we know what you trying to do.” When we asked what he was talking about, he replied “you guys can’t hang out around here.” After explaining to these “gentlemen”  that we would hang out wherever we wished and they would have to try to physically remove us from the area, one of the antifa goons told us we “can’t be anti-fascist because we are opposed to the group antifa,” as if they owned the concept of anti-fascism. Eventually the members of the band in question all came outside. The band member affiliated with us was obviously distressed by all the intimidation and drama, and seemed to be sad that “politics” was dividing up the punk/hardcore scene and pushing his band into the middle of it. On the other hand, two members of the band (who were not personally known to me or ever affiliated with NATA) vehemently and belligerently opposed anything we said in our defense. After Rob bought a beer at the local bodega and brought it back to drink in a paper bag (to illustrate our intention of staying put), the antifa goons realized we would not be intimidated from hanging out in front of the venue and they went back inside, locking the door again. 

As the evening progressed more folks began to show up, many of whom asked us if this was “the Swamp, where the show is?” We happily confirmed that it was, but asked them to make sure to tell the guys working the door that the “neo-nazi group outside” directed them to the show. This was met with an incredulous “wait a minute-- you guys are a nazi group?”  NATA responded with laughter explaining the situation and why we were being blackballed. Some of these attendees actually agreed with NATA that antifa were “authoritarians on a divisive witch hunt” and that as anarchists they could not use coercion against those who voluntarily lived in separatist enclaves if those communities lived by the non aggression principle. After posting up an anti-antifa sticker on wall outside the venue, we left the area at our own pace and of our own volition. 

NATA-NY is not surprised by the coercive tactics we encountered at the “Punks Against Police” matinee, or by the excess of smears and inaccuracies in the two articles by antifa. On the contrary, we find it very illustrative of antifa’s deceptive and authoritarian nature. The questionable sources for information on Troy Southgate and National Anarchism in general reveal the establishment’s role in steering antifa‘s agenda. It seems the intelligence on Troy was taken verbatim from the “Searchlight” magazine (published by a UK-based group that is much like the Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC]).  Antifa’s suggestions for further reading on “national anarchism and related currents”  include an SPLC article smearing both National Anarchism in general and the defunct Bay Area National Anarchists (BANA) in particular. Disingenuously, antifa doesn’t mention the fact that NATA-NY and Troy Southgate have denounced BANA and its mouthpiece Andrew Yeoman for the very Islamaphobic and reactionary activities mentioned in their article. The first article shows cropped screen shots of a discussion about “holocaust” revisionism as proof of our “anti-Semitism.” However, if one actually read the entire thread, it would be clear that it was a debate among members of NATA-NY (some of whom are Jewish) about the legitimacy of questioning certain facts about the “holocaust.” In the same article, it is claimed that I am an apologist for the Greek Golden Dawn party.  This is based on my comment that although the GD are a Greek Nationalist party, to say they are the Greek Nazi/fascist party is hyperbole at best and sophistry at worst. The claim that we support bringing back a “voluntary” Jim Crow style racial separatism is ridiculous. NATA is obviously not a racial separatist group.  While we recognize individuals’ and communities’ right to exclude based on any factor including race, to claim that we support Jim Crow, a form of oppressive, state-enforced racial segregation, is preposterous.

Antifa’s mission to demonize anyone who disagrees with their own form of politically correct fascism is a complete joke.  NATA-NY will not be intimidated by threats or attempts at physical coercion.  We are laughing at the glaring inaccuracy of NYC antifa’s pathetic smear campaign, and saddened by the pathetic dedication it takes to cause such unnecessary conflict.





 *Ironically, back in 1994, I marched with the ABC collective to the NYC HPD in protest of the illegal eviction ABC was facing at the time.

*The name of the show “punks against police” was a superficial gimmick meant to attract an audience who were opposed to the police. In reality the show did nothing to thwart the police state or its brutality other than maybe raise  some awareness.

*I assume he is RASH or some other communist skinhead based on my over 15 years experience with the NYC skinhead scene.