Saturday, May 5, 2012

Free Markets vs.Capitalism






By Jamie O'Hara & Craig FitzGerald 
National Anarchist Tribal Alliance - NY

Anarchists with socialist leanings associate the terms “free market” and “capitalism” with oppression and exploitation.  To anarcho-capitalists, the absence of state intervention in the market is the ultimate form of liberty.  In both the underground and mainstream political worlds, free enterprise is virtually synonymous with capitalism.  But these expressions are not one and the same.  The etymology of the word “capitalism” reveals characteristics that are completely antithetical to the concept of a free market, as well as the philosophy of anarchism.
                    
In English, the word “capital” dates back to the thirteenth century, when it was used to mean “primary,” “chief,” or “head.”  These words all necessarily imply the existence of hierarchy; “capitalism” as an organized economic system is inherently hierarchical.  Rather than describe free markets, the word is synonymous with plutocracy, which comes from the Greek for “rule or power of the wealthy or of wealth.”  When “capital” received its financial definition in the sixteenth century, its now double meaning—“money” and “head”—began to solidify this comparison to plutocracy.  No evidence exists of the word “capitalism” until 1854 when it meant the “condition of having capital.”  In 1861, French anarchist Pierre Joseph Proudhon coined the word “capitalism” and described it as a plutocratic economic system.

By the fourteenth century, the word also connoted mortality and life or death (hence “a capital offense” and “capital punishment”).  It is interesting to consider the way that most people today perceive money as a matter of life and death.  For those who participate in the plutocracy, abundant finances mean everything, while the lack thereof can bring one’s demise.  Our culture has been bombarded with the false value that currency equals wealth, and wealth equals life.  In actuality, the most common manifestation of capital punishment is the imposed system of fiat money.

So, capitalism is a life or death system in which money is the hierarchy’s head.  This perception of the word stemmed from an examination of the word’s etymology in English, but even more telling are the original Latin meanings of capitale.   In addition to the definitions associated with being first or on top, capitale could also mean “something stolen.”  This suggests a hint of corruption and theft (which may have influenced Proudhon’s idea that “property is theft”).  It also reflects the contemporary economic situation everywhere: banks and governments steal from the people. 

Such an understanding of the word “capitalism” allows one to draw a stark contrast between this economic system and the potential for truly laissez-faire free markets.  The theory of Agorism, posited by Canadian libertarian Samuel Edward Konkin III in 1975, is an ideal representation of real free enterprise.  The term comes from the Greek word agora, meaning “open marketplace,” and refers to the voluntary building of parallel underground economies.

Unlike capitalism, agorism is compatible with all forms of anarchism, regardless of hyphenation.  In An Agorist Primer, Konkin’s first and third Axioms of Agorism are, respectively: “The closest approach to a free society is an uncorrupted agora” and “The moral system of any agora is compatible with pure libertarianism” (i.e. anarchism).   If an anarchist community maintains an alternative economy apart from the state, that community is implementing agorism, regardless of whether that economy is communist, free market, or anything in between.  In fact, anarchist groups who do not embrace an agorist model will inevitably fail at being independent from the state and its corporate partners.  Even though agorism originated in a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist context, it is equally applicable to socialist anarchist communities.  Whether an anarchist community’s goals include socialized welfare and healthcare systems or alternative currencies and autonomous methods of trade, agorism is the only means.  

Anarchists of all stripes must bridge the gap between theory and action.  Economics is pragmatic, realistic and material.  Without it, anarchist communities are solely philosophical.  Agorism represents a way for tribes to attain successful and sustainable independence from the state. 

The intention behind anarcho-capitalism is to create free markets, not to establish hierarchies of wealth.  Anarcho-capitalists should consider completely disassociating from the label of capitalism at all, and instead employ terms like “free market,” “free enterprise,” “voluntaryism” and “agorism.”  Anarcho-capitalists who argue that their libertarian brand of capitalism is completely different from the statist-corporatist-Keynesian version of capitalism fail to recognize the historical reality that capitalism has never produced a free market.  They also ignore the etymological significance of the word.  While anarchism has enough semantic arguments and divisions, language is important.  The history of words has significance for humanity, and we should be very conscious of the messages we proclaim.


Pushing the System: Troy Southgate’s National-Anarchism: A Reader



National-Anarchism: A Reader
Ed. Troy Southgate
London: Black Front Press, 2012


“That which is falling, should also be pushed” — Nietzsche, as quoted by Troy Southgate


This is a very well organized book. This is an interesting, enlightening, and autodidactic book. This is a much needed book. While I don’t recall when I first heard about National Anarchism, I do know that I have never really fully understood it. Until now.


Troy Southgate’s own words regarding National Anarchism capture the essence of this book:


Our vision, in a nutshell, is one of small village-communities in which people occupy their own space in which to live in accordance with their own principles. These principles depend on the nature of the people forming the community in the first place, because the last thing we wish to do is impose a rigid or dogmatic system of any kind. In theory, therefore, National-Anarchists can be Christian or pagan, farmers or artisans, heterosexual or homosexual. The important thing, however, is for National-Anarchist communities to be self-sufficient. They should also be mutualist, rather than coercive. In other words, people should be free to come and go at all times. If you are unhappy with the unifying principle of one National-Anarchist community, then simply relocate to another. On the other hand, communities must be respectful of their neighbors and be prepared to defend themselves from outsiders.


Finally, contrary to the increasingly desperate smears of our enemies on the both the Right and Left of the political spectrum, we are not using Anarchism as a convenient tactic t conceal a secret fascistic agenda of any kind—we are deadly serious. In addition, as mutualists we abide by the ‘live and let live’ philosophy. People are different and have different values. I modern, pluralistic societies, those values tend to conflict and it is inevitable that some values will override or perhaps even eradicate others. We think certain values are worth preserving for future generations and this is why we wish to create a climate in which this is possible. National-Anarchism, therefore, is Anarchism sui generis. An Anarchy of its own kind. (pp. 43–44


Troy Southgate has put together an ambitious tome: a reader that holds the essential text of a revolutionary political movement inside its simple black, red and white covers, while remaining clear, to the point, and amazingly approachable. Southgate’s collection of 23 essays is deceptively easy to read, and collectively deep to ponder.


Combining the talents of contributors such as Keith Preston (attackthesystem.com), Welf Herfurth (A Life in the Political Wilderness [Finis Mundi Press, 2011]), Flavio Gonçalves (of Finis Mundi Press), Brett Stevens (of the Amerika.org blog), Andreas Faust, and Josh Bates as well as Troy Southgate, National-Anarchism: A Reader represents the best of a new cycle of visionary thinkers.


From the very first sentences of the foreword, Southgate pulls no punches regarding the ideological underpinning of this book:


It may sound hard to believe, but there was a time when ordinary people had more control over their own lives and inhabited a world in which the vast majority of individuals were able to live in close-knit communities with their own kind, pursue a more rural existence away from the shallow environs of the average shopping mall, hunt or grow food for their own consumption, make conversation and music in a society without television or computer games, and even pass traditional values to their own children without the pernicious influence of Establishment schools and the mass media. So what went wrong? (p. 1)


This book offers both the answer and the antidote to that question. Kicking aside the shallow left and right sidebanks of history, National Anarchism “seeks to transcend the superfluous and obsolete ideologies of ‘left’, ‘right’ and ‘centre’” (back cover).


It is refreshing — in an age where the typical answer to that question would have been full of backward glances, romantic hand-wringing, and pessimistic doom and gloom predictions concerning the outcome of the challenges we are up against as a folk and as a people — to read the words of those who look straight ahead, critically and with sound plans for a continued undimmed and undiminished existence. Our continued undimmed and undiminished existence, and the rest of the sane world’s as well. Hope is here. More than hope — here we see a presentation of vision, a collection of thought, experience, reason, and will combined with a testament of faith from those who have obviously been digging deep and thinking hard about the future we face as our past crumbles away.


The book opens with a historical overview of the movement. Part educational, part who’s who and what’s what, this chapter is essential reading as a refresher or as a crash course, depending on your level of knowledge. Either way, it gives a great amount of detail and background succinctly and clearly, without condescension.


This chapter is followed by Brett Stevens’ interview with Troy Southgate which expands the overview of the movement in an interesting and personable manner. This feeling of personal presence, of the book having been written in the authentic voices of real men, coming out of real experience and practical reflection, is a quality that sets this book apart from most political texts. It is extremely readable (without being ‘dumbed down’); the chapters build with seeming effortlessness upon each other like conversations that take place when great minds meet.


Troy Southgate’s essays act as the central ‘voice’ alternating with and connecting the other ‘speakers’ in this conversation.


Chapter 3, aptly titled “National Anarchism in a Nutshell” is just that. Josh Bates does a great job of distilling the movement to its vital essence: “National-Anarchist philosophy, then, is not the oxymoronic amalgamation of right and left wing political ideologies but a harkening to the original and true meaning of nation combined with a desire to preserve the natural races of man and the aspiration to free all people from the chains of both left and right wing totalitarianism and imperialism” (p. 28).


Flavio Gonçalves’ essay, “National Anarchism: The Way of the Future,” which makes up Chapter 5, defines further what National Anarchism stands for in light of the movement’s repudiation of dogmas of state, racial supremacy, racism, anti-racism, equalitarianism, and the whole left/right concept.


N-A stands for something that many believe to be pessimistic and/or defeatist, and considering the degree of social degradation that is so deep and rooted we see no way of turning this boat around, if you will allow me to use an analogy from “Ship of Fools”. Drugs, alcohol, MTV and sexual degradation have affected our society in such a way that it is impossible to return to the old days, some even consider those things as a fundamental part of our society.


N-A stands for the termination of nation-states, has a necessity for survival and upholds the need of a rebirth of our tribal spirit. All national territories should be regionalized, fragmented, reduced to small territories and within those territories people with common ethnic or cultural affinities will gather together . . .” (pp. 37–38).


Keith Preston’s essays comprise chapters 7, 11, and 13. These vary from his brief 4 page “Anarchism of the Right” which presents core ideas: “White libertarians and anarcho-capitalists tend to be economics-oriented, anarchists of the Right prefer to emphasize the particular, and champion the sovereignty, autonomy, and preservation of the unique cultures, regions, ethnicities, identities, faiths and tribes against the homogenizing and universalizing forces of the global economy, technology and imperialism” (p. 47) and core names: “De Benoist, Nietzsche, Jünger, Evola, Schopenhauer, Belloc, . . . Proudhon, Bakunin, Tolstoy, Stirner and Kropotkin. Its leading current proponents are Troy Southgate, Flavio Gonçalves, Hans Cany, Peter Topfer, Andrew Yeoman, Welf Herfurth, Chris Donnellan and, at least peripherally, myself” (p. 46) to his 103 page “Philosophical Anarchism and the Death of Empire,” an essay which is, as he notes in his preface, “an effort, however humble, to apply traditional anarchist theory to the world situation we contemporary radicals currently find ourselves in, particularly the emergence of the New World Order, the ongoing dilemma of the Leviathan state, and the uniquely subtle form of totalitarianism that has caught the fancy of the elites of the First World nations, so-called “political correctness” (p. 126). Heady, heavy stuff, written in clear and accessible language free of multi-syllabic words that sound clever but are devoid of substance.


Along with essays that cover stances on everything from alternative education, economic autarky, and environment all the way to addressing and examining anarchism itself,National-Anarchism: A Reader includes essays that deal with components that should be part of every emerging and existing movement’s normal operations. Andreas Faust weighs in on the power of pranks and hijinks as promotional tools, looking at ways activists can use and manipulate the media in his essay “Humour as a Weapon,” and Welf Herfurth offers examples, pointers and truisms concerning the positives of political confrontation in “The Strategy of Tension.” Again, as with every piece of text in this book, the essays are logical, understandable and worth reading.


As an editor of a book that is destined to become the defining text of a movement, Troy Southgate lives up to his role. Not only are his essays well written themselves, and balanced adroitly throughout the book, the chapters are arranged intelligently, each leading up to, complementing or building from the others that come before it. The individual voices of the writers are not lost in an overall mix, yet the book keeps to its single note – that of being a National Anarchist Reader—with no jarring or discordant elements. Apt quotations (“A good man and a good citizen are not exactly the same thing.—Augustine” (p. 74)) head up some of the essays, while handy lists of further reading suggestions follow others. The font is easy to read, the paper stock bright and the margins wide enough for note making.


While no one ought to judge a book by its cover alone, a well-designed cover is no small advantage in giving a book appeal; National-Anarchism: A Reader is beautifully designed—from the glossy black of its background to the stark red of its lettering to the well sized and well placed NAM Star-in-circle symbol presented in eye-catching white in the center of the front cover. The back cover is as well laid out as the front, albeit less stark and more textual as befits its place.


The first real words in the book are from the finest of all English poets, John Keats: “The only means of strengthening one’s intellect is to make up one’s mind about nothing; to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts” (unnumbered fourth page). The last word printed in this book is “victory.” It concludes a final sentence: “In the long-term, it is the only possible road to victory” (p. 306). I don’t know if Mr. Southgate realized that he began and ended his reader this way, but I find that he chose (however he chose) perfectly — with a fitting opening quotation, and a fitting final word that make two perfectly fitting sentiments. National-Anarchism: A Reader makes a great case for the complete and utter sensibleness of its positions, thoughts, stances, attitudes, agendas, and, ultimately, its victory.

Indigenism, Anarchism, and the State: An Interview with Ward Churchill





I just recently read this interview with Ward Churchill from 2003, in which he makes the excellent argument that Anarchism is fundamentally a form of anti-statist nationalism. Mr.Churchill is a very controversial figure who the American Indian Movement (AIM) maintains is in the employ of COINTELPRO, despite his published material exposing the famed counter intelligence program. -- CF NATA-NY


Ward Churchill is one of the most outspoken activists and scholars in North America and a leading commentator on indigenous issues. Churchill's many books include Marxism and Native Americans, Fantasies of the Master Race, Struggle for the Land, The COINTELPRO Papers, Genocide, Ecocide, and Colonization, Pacifism as Pathology, and A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas. In his lectures and published works, Churchill explores the themes of genocide in the Americas, racism, historical and legal (re)interpretation of conquest and colonization, environmental destruction of Indian lands, government repression of political movements, literary and cinematic criticism, and indigenist alternatives to the status quo.

Churchill has recently come under attack for views expressed in the article Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, written in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. An important part of the future of US academic freedom in the coming years will likely be determined by the outcome of the ongoing attempts to strip Ward Churchill of his academic position at Colorado University in Boulder. Two members of Autonomy & Solidarity sat down with Ward Churchill in Toronto in November of 2003 to do this interview. It was transcribed by Clarissa Lassaline and edited by Tom Keefer, Dave Mitchell, and Valerie Zink.


Upping The Anti: We want to start off by asking you about your thoughts on the anti-globalization movement which, in terms of anti-capitalist struggles, has been one of the most significant developments in the past decade. This movement has also been criticized in the US context, as being largely made up of white middle class kids running around "summit hopping". What's your take?

Ward Churchill: I think the anti-globalization movement, for lack of a better term, is a very positive development in the sense that it re-infuses the opposition with a sense of purpose, enthusiasm, and vibrancy. The downside is that it’s a counter-analytical movement in that it thinks it’s something new. We used to call it “anti-imperialism,” just straight up. The idea that “globalization” is something new, rather than a continuation of dynamics that are at least 500 years deep, is misleading. That needs to be understood.

UTA: In your book Struggle For The Land, there’s an essay called “I Am Indigenous.” Can you elaborate a bit on the politics and genealogy of indigenism?

WC: Perhaps I can by way of your introduction of yourselves. You know, you say you're post-Leninists. Fine. But why are you something that goes beyond Leninism, rather than something that isn’t?

UTA: It’s a reflection of the roots of where our political grouping came from.

WC: But you top that off by describing yourselves as revolutionaries, and I’m saying “why?” Do you aspire to overthrow the presiding order in the Canadian state so that you can reorganize the state in a more constructive fashion? Then you’re a revolutionary. Do you want to see the Canadian state here when you’re done in some form or another? If not, then you’re a devolutionary and you might want to call it by its right name.

UTA: So would you say that no anarchists could call themselves revolutionaries?

WC: If they do, they’re deluding themselves. They’re not understanding themselves or the tradition that they’re espousing in proper terms because, for starters, anarchists are explicitly anti-statist. And the object of a revolution is to change the regime of power in a given state structure. So I think “revolutionary” is a misnomer.

UTA: One of the issues with devolution is that, at least potentially, it represents an attempt to go back to some kind of ideal way the world once was. But we can’t just roll back the clock of history.

WC: No, of course not. But again we’re into this implicitly Marxist progression, and anarchists aren’t especially progressive. In fact, you get a physical fight from some of them for using that term, because they consider it an insult. And I think properly so. There’s no immutable law of history. The structures, however, aren’t immutable either, and they can be devolved.

One conflation of terms that really bothers me a lot, which seems to be plaguing the discourse still, is the conflation of the term “nation” and the term “state.” You have this entity out there called “the United Nations.” It really should have been called “the United States,” because to be eligible even for admission to the Assembly you have to be organized in that centralized, arbitrary structure. No “nations” as such are even eligible for admission to the United Nations. “The United States” was a name already taken, however, and this was very useful in obfuscating the reality.


But the upshot of that is that you’ve got a whole lot of anarchists running around thinking they’re anti-nationalist, that nationality, nationalism in all forms, is necessarily some sort of an evil to be combated, when that’s exactly what they’re trying to create. You’ve got four or five thousand nations on the planet; you’ve got two hundred states. They’re using “anti-nationalist” as a code word for being anti-statist. With indigenous peoples, nationality is an affirmative ideal, and it hasn’t got any similarity at all to state structures.


You may have nations that are also states, but you’ve got most nations rejecting statism. So you can make an argument, as I have, that the assertion of sovereignty on the part of indigenous nations is an explicitly anti-statist ideal, and the basis of commonality with people who define themselves as anarchists. We’ve got to deal with our own bases of confusion in order to be able to interact with one another in a respectful and constructive way.

UTA: Are there correlations between your indigenous perspective and anarchism? Many people might make the argument that, in fact, indigenism is an ancestor to anarchism, and not vice versa.

WC: Well, that is precisely my argument. The two are not interchangeable, point for point, but they have far more in common than they have dividing them, if each is properly understood. And part of the task here is to make them properly understood. If you look at green anarchy, for better or worse, you’re going to find all kinds of references to commonalities with indigenous peoples on every basis, from social organisation to environmental perspective. It will take some time, but you can make that conceptual bridge between indigenism and anarchism, and it’s understood.

I would see the main distinction, on this continent, as being a detachment from base. Indigenous peoples are grounded, quite literally. There’s a relationship to the land that has evolved over thousands of years, and that’s completely denied to the people from the settler culture who self-describe as anarchists. With that distinction made, however, we’ve got all kinds of principles in common, aspirations in common, perspectives in common, and we need to build upon those in order to develop a respectful set of relations that allow us to act in unity against that common oppressor that we share.

Read rest of interview 

Friday, May 4, 2012

Wildlife benefits of hemp crop revealed



from Farmers Guardian
20 April 2012

A recent study by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT), has found hemp, in addition to becoming a profitable crop for growers, is also a highly prized crop for swallows and whitethroat.

The study was investigating the wildlife benefits of growing hemp compared with oilseed rape and field beans. It revealed birds used all three crops as habitats for gathering food during the nesting season, but hemp was also used as a roosting site by swallows before their southward migration at the end of the summer.

Flocks of more than 1,000 swallows were seen using the hemp fields on the GWCT’s research farm in Leicestershire. Another migratory bird which was associated with hemp was whitethroat, a warbler which breeds on farmland throughout the UK.

Dr Chris Stoate, head of research at the GWCT research farm, says: “We know hemp has low requirement for inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides, but we needed to investigate whether there are any effects on wildlife of a crop that is relatively new to modern farming systems.

“Our research found numbers of insects, including those used as food by birds, were broadly similar in the three different crop types. Weed cover and weed species did not differ greatly between the crops, which was surprising as hemp grows vigorously, shading out competing weeds so herbicides are not needed.”


The research was carried out at the GWCT’s Allerton Project research farm and was funded by Hemp Technology, a leading processor of hemp for the construction industry.

Attack the System: The Ideology of Totalitarian Humanism


April 19, 2012
Voice of Reason
Political Correctness
Keith Preston discusses the ideology of present day Western elites. Topics include:
  • Why Keith prefers the term “totalitarian humanism” to describe Political Correctness;
  • Various theories on the origins of the totalitarian humanist world view and the conflict between realist and other-worldly thinking in traditional Western intellectual life;
  • How the Left embraces the Other as a means of denying human nature and how totalitarian humanism has become the self-legitimating ideology of modern Western states;
  • The demographics of totalitarian humanism and why the primary constituency for PC is found in the upper middle class;
  • How the mainstream “culture wars” represents a class conflict between the rising culturally leftist upper middle class and the dying traditional WASP elites;
  • Why a class revolution has occurred in Western civilization in recent decades that is comparable to the bourgeois revolutions against the traditional aristocratic orders that transpired in the 18th and 19th centuries.
  • Listen here

Attack the System: Interview with Craig FitzGerald




Voice of Reason

Keith Preston interviews Craig Fitzgerald. Topics include:
  • Craig’s experiences growing up around the patriot and militia movements of the 1990s;
  • His participation in various youth subcultures and how these influenced his political ideas;
  • His involvement with a wide variety of dissident movements from the John Birch Society to Occupy Wall Street;
  • His role as an activist with We Are Change-New York;
  • His journey to Chiapas to spend time among the Zapatista rebels of southern Mexico;
  • His development of an interest in national anarchism and his co-founding of the National-Anarchist Tribal Alliance of New York;
  • The Left’s misinterpretation of national anarchist views on race;
  • Craig’s activities as a homesteader and professional in the field of permaculture.
Craig FitzGerald is a native New Yorker who has been involved in dissident politics since his youth. His analysis is rooted in nationalist, localist and anarchist philosophies and his activism centers around anti-globalization, anti-zionism, and individual and community autonomy and self-sufficiency. He has worked with a varied selection of activist organizations and is an instrumental member of We Are Change NYC. In early 2011, Craig co-founded National Anarchist Tribal Alliance – New York (NATA-NY). He recently moved to the Adirondack Mountains to homestead with fellow NATA-NY members.
Listen to the interview here.

SECRET CONCLAVE SITE FOUND



Bilderberg group will meet in Chantilly, VA in late May

By James P. Tucker Jr.
American Free Press

MEMPHIS—Hundreds of patriots were on
hand for two consecutive rallies held in Memphis on April 27, one at noon and
one in the evening. Many pledged to bring busloads of other like-minded advocates for
American sovereignty to Chantilly, Va. on the weekend of May 31-June 3 to protest the annual meeting of the secretive Bilderberg group being held there. Bilderberg will meet in Chantilly at the Westfields Marriott, a short distance from Dulles International
Airport, some 30 miles outside Washington, D.C. Bilderberg previously met there in 2002 and then again in 2008. A gathering of high-level figures from the elite ranks of global finance and industry in the self-interested sphere of influence of the plutocratic Rothschild and Rockefeller families, Bilderberg works to direct the course of world affairs, unimpeded by popular concerns, rightly raising the hackles of the kind of good patriots who gathered in Memphis.

In Memphis, those attending represented a wide array of patriot and civic organizations. The gathering was organized by a local man, James Stewart, a reader of AMERICAN FREE PRESS. This writer was on hand to speak, representing AFP. Support for the maverick Republican presidential campaign of Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) seemed unanimous, all expressing strong support for Paul’s call for all U.S. troops to be brought home to defend U.S. borders. “I will vote for Ron Paul whether he is nominated or not. I will write his name in. I can’t stand the idea of either Obama or Mitt Romney as president,” said one. Many agreed. Others argued that although Romney was bad, Obama had not illegally attacked Iran despite of Israel’s insistence, whereas Romney, if president, certainly would. A recent poll of its readers by AFP found that many of those responding rejected the idea that Paul or any other third party candidate enter the fall election campaign, fearing that a split opposition vote would allow Obama to win reelection. However, some critics of that proposition point out that, surprisingly, many national polls actually show that Paul has a stronger base of support among self-described “liberal” voters than among self-described “conservative” and “tea party” voters, suggesting that Paul would perhaps draw more votes away from Obama than from Romney.

------------------------------

Spread the word about the Bilderberg Group and support NATA-NY by ordering a shirt with the above "Bilderberg Hunter" design at SEEDSnAMMO.