![]() |
Friedrich Nietzsche, 1875
|
By Keith Preston
Patrick Ford's recent discussion of the "libertarian problem"
observed how resistance to the neoconservatives had produced an unusual
alliance on the Right between such divergent elements as "hedonistic
anarchists and medieval Catholics." Patrick expressed skepticism of whether
the libertarian-traditionalist alliance can be a durable one, given the sharp
differences to be found among the respective philosophical foundations of the
two camps. Traditionalist objections to libertarianism are usually rooted in
what is often described as libertarianism's "atomistic individualism"
whereby an ideologically constructed conception of "abstract liberty"
is elevated over and above more concrete and immediately tangible matters of
culture, history, tradition, community, family, religion, and so forth.
Libertarians are accused of deifying the economy as an end unto itself, rather
than as a means to the end of meeting human needs and irrespective of the
impact of economic forces on non-material values. The traditionalists will say
that while libertarians may deny the innate equality of individuals,
libertarians implicitly endorse an egalitarian ethos regarding human groups
such as nations, cultures, religions, regions, races, and genders. Libertarian economism simply
regards these things as interchangeable commodities, and no more significant
than different brands of deodorant or fast food. In other words, libertarians
are simply liberals who reject the welfare state, according to the
traditionalist critique. For this reason, many libertarians see mass
immigration from the Third World into the West as no big deal, as human
cultures and ethnic populations are interchangeable, with economics and
political ideology being what really matters.
This critique is a fairly accurate one, though it does not
apply to all brands of libertarianism. Murray Rothbard, for instance, rejected
this kind of reductionist outlook and became an outspoken critic of such
tendencies among libertarians in the latter part of his life. Further, it does
not follow that the baby of anti-statist politics should be thrown out with the
liberal-reductionist bathwater. Over the last decade, there has been a
proliferation of radically anti-statist tendencies that might be collectively
described as an "anarchism of the Right." Commonly labeled
"national-anarchism," this new anarchism draws its inspiration less
from Ayn Rand or Milton Friedman and more from such divergent sources as De
Benoist, Nietzsche, Junger, Evola, Schopenhauer, Belloc, and older strands of
anarchism such as those advanced by Proudhon, Bakunin, Tolstoy, Stirner, and
Kropotkin. Its leading current proponents are Troy Southgate, Flavio
Goncalves, Hans Cany, Peter Topfer, Andrew Yeoman, Welf Herfurth, Chris
Donnellan, and, at least peripherally, myself. "Anarchism of the
Right" differs significantly from other ideological strands bearing the
"anarchist" label. It shares the anti-statist politics and opposition
to imperialist war of the Rothbardian anarcho-capitalists, yet rejects their
neo-Lockean philosophical foundations in favor of a Nietzschean or Evolan
"radical traditionalist" outlook. While 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 unique cultures, regions, ethnicities, identities, faiths, and
tribes against the homogenizing and universalizing forces of the global
economy, technology, and imperialism. On economic questions, these anarchists
likely have more in common with the Catholic distributists, Southern Agrarians,
Proudhon, the classical anarcho-syndicalists, or Kirkpatrick Sale than with the
editors of Reason. Nor do the anarchists of the Right share the vigilante
liberal sentiments of the "antifa" stormtroopers. Indeed, they are
more likely to be the target of such unsavory elements.
Central to this new but growing form of anti-statist
radicalism are the concepts of community and tribe. Towards this end,
anarchists of the Right favor the development of autonomous communities
existing independently of overarching state systems for the sake of maintaining
the identity and ideals of the tribe, and therefore look askance at mass
immigration, preferring instead community self-determination with full rights
of exclusion. Matters of ethnicity and race are certainly essential to this
outlook, though not exclusively so or in a reductionist way. For instance, a
"tribe" can be a group of persons committed to a particular way of
life, set of cultural norms or political ideals. The "tribe" can
therefore be a community of ascetic religious sectarians, radical ecologists
committed to the non-use of industrial technology, hippie communalists,
homosexuals, neo-pagans, radical survivalists, racial separatists, or drug
users. The Alternative Right is a genuinely diverse milieu of beliefs and
ideas. This is in sharp contrast to official "diversity" with its
emphasis on a diversity of skin colors, genitalia, and sexual habits, but
complete uniformity of thought. Perhaps one of the most common characteristics
we share is our pariah status in the eyes of the liberal ruling class. The
therapeutic-multiculturalist-welfare states that currently rule our Western
societies are clearly our enemy. An anarchism of the Right may prove to be an
essential part of the intellectual arsenal against our enemy, the state.
(Source)
-----------------------------------------------
* Facebook: National-Anarchist
Movement (N-AM)