If white people are not violent porch monkeys, what is the point in keeping them bound by law? Many people today cannot imagine a world without laws. Wouldn't people all be naked throwing shit at each other while living under rocks? Well, what does National Anarchism mean? It means you live in a stateless society like it was in human pre-history times. Take for example Anglo-Saxon England. Before the Norman Conquests, life was relatively simple. People lived in large communities of their own kind, hunted for food, had conversations and played music without computers or television, even pass on traditional values without establishment schools. After the Norman conquests, it became a land of serfs and its people exploited. Then during the Middle Ages it was a monarchy. At first the kings were taking jewish bribes and putting the country in debt (until Edward I expelled them). Then in the 16th century it was the Protestant Reformation where Catholics were persecuted as well as the Renaissance period that lead us to the French revolution and the English Civil War (plus Cromwell's shenanigans).
Anarchy originates from the Greek "an archos" meaning "no rule" or "without rule". But you can just replace the word "rule" with slavery, because that's all it boils down to. But just given the lack of rule does not automatically mean chaos. "Society seeks order in Anarchy." ~ Pierre Joseph Proudhon. In other words, it is natural authority. Hierarchy is a basic fact of nature. In the words of Rudyard Kipling, "the strength of the pack is the wolf and the strength of the wolf is the pack". Leadership is by the "chief" or "alpha male".
Also, Anarchism is not "Marxist". In fact, Proudhon attacked both capitalism AND communism (as well as Peter Kropotkin and Mikhail Bakunin, who advocated for a more decentralized autonomous leadership) and believed in human individuality rather than some left-wing bureaucracy.
Under National Anarchism, people get to live in villages of small communities under their own principles. Since this is Anarchism we are talking about, a National Anarchist can be Christian or Pagan, artisan or farmer, heterosexual or homosexual. Btw, individualism is what you want, not collectivism, because NA is mutualist rather than coercive (which is government). So instead it is a 'live and let live' mentality. You respect your neighbors and defend yourself from any outsiders. In pluralistic societies, conflicts tend to emerge over values, and it is inevitable that some values will override or even eradicate another. This is why certain values need to preserved, and this type of system would give everybody the chance to do so unlike other forms of anarchism (like anarcho-syndicalism/communism) where it is more dogmatic. Self-sufficiency is what counts.
Lincoln Reed
I have nothing to add to your shitty bait thread, I didn't even read past the title. I'm here to say fuck niggers and to tell the jannie to wipe my ass clean, for free of course.
>conflicts tend to emerge over values, and it is inevitable that some values will override or even eradicate another You just described the problem with it. How is that any different from the current system where the loudest voices drown out the others and the group with the most guns get a monopoly on violence (any government). I like some things about anarchy but in the end it reverts to, well anarchy where the man with the biggest stick calls the shots and then it's no longer anarchy anymore is it?
Luis Bennett
Because organized society will always overcome unorganized individuals. It is a bad survival strategy which would lead to the extinction or enslavement of those who fell for it.
Dominic Clark
Anarchy is distinctly different from artifical statehood because it imposes natural law of man, not bureaucracies where a few rule a many. Further, National Anarchism seeks to create tightly-knit communities of people who are all related in some way or another, be it through values or race. It will inevitably transpire, just given how multiculturalism will collapse within the next couple decades. Hoarding them onto cattle cars into concentration camps is not going to solve, address or fix the issue; instead true diversity must be embraced where all races can live separately. It's about community. I am a racial nationalist and separatist. I believe in a non-violent approach to the matter (see Varg's take on vanguardism aka starving the beast). However, I am not a supremacist or a racist in that I hate others for their differences. I don't believe in taking away your right to feel that way, but the style of self-governance I just described will be the inevitable outcome.
Evan Perez
Btw, all the racial conflicts we're seeing now and balkanization that is occurring is proof of the concept that we will all exist separately within the coming years.
Josiah Johnson
I will collect other like minded people and form my own state to enforce my will on others. Boom anarchy is now dead. You can't prevent me from doing so, if you could stop me then it wouldn't be real anarchy.
Seems to me that it would quickly turn into an artificial statehood. What you are basically describing is a primitive form of governance where small communities, aka tribes could decide the rules for their own in-group. I don't see anything wrong with this necessarily, in fact it's far preferable to the current state of governance. However I still fail to see how it qualifies as anarchy in the strictest sense.
Charles Brooks
How are anarchists going to stop people from making laws? The world was anarchist by default and order game out of that, so why would you assume we could go back. Your provided history of anarchism is just getting btfo by stronger societies with laws. Pipe dream for young arrogant retards.
Hudson Jenkins
It works for awhile but others will come and invade ur shit because of this anarchist never had a great history of surviving an onslaught against any foreign power.
Ryder Baker
>So instead it is a 'live and let live' mentality. You respect your neighbors and defend yourself from any outsiders.
Noah Garcia
Checked
Jace Parker
>You respect your neighbors What if you don't? >and defend yourself from any outsiders. How is your cute little weed commune going to defend itself from an organised force that wants to take your shit?
Aiden Lee
it seems reasonable but Earth is fucked beyond repair and all those anarchist communes would see competition for the remains of a dying planet and let's not forget the conflicts that have divided humanity for milennia at this point, it is not going to be forgiven easily
Ethan Foster
Technology.
Luke Perez
And how are you going to insure that your neighbors subscribe to the same live and let live ideology without using some form of laws or threats of violence? If it's every man for himself, how can you insure a cohesive community?
John Sanders
>What are your arguments against anarchism? None. However, I do not want to force this belief in others. In fact, as an anarchist I have realized there's a way to benefit from the state without the need to believe in authority. I don't believe in liberation from slavery because work is necessary for survival at some point, and groups and hierarchies are constantly created to control and delegate work. In ideal conditions, anarchism only led to the creation of an entity more powerful than others: The State, and therefore the ruler before the rules.
Anarchism is an stagnant ideology, because is unrealistic. Only one kind of anarchist is realist and that is the "Anarch", conception created by Jünger in Eumeswil.
Hudson Wilson
Thats all fine and good but Southgate whom many NAs parrot does not even live in such a way. He just pretty much lives a normal middleclass life I think after moving to Portugal with his wife, now just selling books.
Luke James
>You just described the problem with it. How is that any different from the current system where the loudest voices drown out the others and the group with the most guns get a monopoly on violence (any government). I like some things about anarchy but in the end it reverts to, well anarchy where the man with the biggest stick calls the shots and then it's no longer anarchy anymore is it? You just have to get a bigger stick.
Blake Sanders
what makes you assume your enemies won't be at least at the same technological level? societal collapse?
Justin Brooks
Technology developed by who? Are you seriously suggesting that a small commune is going to have better technology than a nation state?
Adrian Ortiz
Disingenuous answer. Technology benefits organized forces as much if not more than disorganized individuals. In fact, an organized state can afford far superior technology than a bunch of disorganized family homesteads.
Evan Johnson
>Anarchy occurs >People form groups >Rules for group form >Soon societies begin to form >Soon government rises >Laws/rules are made >OP is a faggot >Sage Done refuted your bait thread in less than a minute.
Did you not read the fucking post? Here's another reference from a prior statement I made ITT:
>"Society seeks order in Anarchy." ~ Pierre Joseph Proudhon
Well I mean here's the fucking problem with your statement: what state? Becauze if you haven't noticed by now the world is burning all around you. We live in a plutocratic globalist world. A system like that can't hold itself together forever. Eventually, things are gonna settle back at the way things were before laws.
Aaron Walker
Most supremely based
Gavin Ward
No form of anarchism really works. Even this tribalistic proto-nationalist one. There is just "alphas" of packs, there is going to be an oligarchy that eventually develops out of this. Might as well just skip this foreplay and jump into fascism, because the most successful tribe is going to be fascistic.
Adam Cook
Ah, the ideology even more insufferably stupid and deluded than ancap. If you’re going to be an anarchist, be the honest kind that embraces chaos, not the idiot who thinks that if we just abolish current hierarchies that human nature is going to change and we’ll all sing and hold hands in a utopia.
I keep thinking the reason why so many people make fun of ancaps is as part of a conspiracy to hide the fact "national anarchism," "anarcho-fascism," "right-wing anarchism" and "religious anarchism" exist.
Adrian Rivera
The problems you raise are the same problems that will occur within ANY fucking system. How does that discredit Anarchism?
Jeremiah Butler
I do not agree with this ideology but in Southgates defense, it is more akin to several micro-nations rather than hippy dippy communal shit that leftists often dream up. If I remember correctly from the facebook group years ago and their page he said it isnt utopian at all.
Austin James
It is satanic and retarded. Formally founded by Freemasons Proudhon and Bakunin with the basis of atheism, nihilism, materialism, revolutionism, pantheistic occult philosophy, and the clandestine fraternity. The occult roots go back to the Renaissance.
>Eventually, things are gonna settle back at the way things were before laws. you're fucking delusional states have existed for thousands of years, famines, wars etc have never gotten rid of the state, just split them into smaller competing states did the black death get rid of states? no did the fall of the Roman empire get rid of states? no did WW2 get rid of states? no did the million little different Chinese wars and calamities get rid of the state? no in fact in china there's more state than ever fairy tale tier understanding of the world and politics
Sebastian Diaz
This. It is almost like Native American tribal communities in the US. But one that doesn't necessarily believe in the nation-state.
Camden Taylor
They are all pretty stupid. Ancom and ancap I would say are the most cringe - the others are just ideological labels for shit that just happens naturally, so it lures people into thinking there is truth to it. Really all it does is just describe human nature and how societies form prior to (inevitable) corruption.
Ryder Garcia
It doesn't, its just that any anarchist society is going to inevitably revert back to statism. You talk about artificial states and but what you are really talking about is artificial anarchy, because anything else simply won't last long enough to a viable
Asher Wright
How tf do you think that a system like the one we have currently is gonna hold together indefinitely, exactly?
Christian Price
>The problems you raise are the same problems that will occur within ANY fucking system. How does that discredit Anarchism? Are you profoundly retarded to think that any system not revolving around anarchism has this issue? Order does not create anarchism it is anarchism that creates order. >Sage
Brayden Harris
The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory first developed by the German-born Italian sociologist Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties.[1] It asserts that rule by an elite, or oligarchy, is inevitable as an "iron law" within any democratic organization as part of the "tactical and technical necessities" of the organization.[1]
Michels's theory states that all complex organizations, regardless of how democratic they are when started, eventually develop into oligarchies. Michels observed that since no sufficiently large and complex organization can function purely as a direct democracy, power within an organization will always get delegated to individuals within that group, elected or otherwise.
Using anecdotes from political parties and trade unions struggling to operate democratically to build his argument in 1911, Michels addressed the application of this law to representative democracy, and stated: "Who says organization, says oligarchy."[1] He went on to state that "Historical evolution mocks all the prophylactic measures that have been adopted for the prevention of oligarchy."[1]
Interestingly this fellow started out as a Social Democrat in Germany and eventually joined the Italian Fascist Party.
Noah Robinson
well it's still here so the burden is actually on you to demonstrate why you think there will be a global collapse temporary financial crises and wars don't count I'm talking no states existing in the world anymore, an event that has never happened in the thousand year history of civilisation if you're over 18 this is embarrassing
Brandon Russell
Who said it will? Does that mean it will be replaced by anarchy? Maybe for a brief spell, but after the pieces get picked back up it's going to be replaced by another state that has a monopoly on power
Jack Scott
something like greek city states? the problem there of course would be the existance of a body of government that ranges from democratic to tyrannical it is not utopic but power has been reduced to it's minimal expression without losing functionality and the oppression the state can cause without facing rebellion is established.
Carson Hughes
Okay, let me rephrase that statement for you: do you think any system of government, be it capitalism, communism or fascism/NS will, in turn, not be conquered by a more powerful actor, do you think? Do you think that just any system of government cannot be displaced because it's government? That's why I said "it's the same problem". It's like when communists say that real socialism has never been tried before because of how much of a failure marxism is. On the other hand, you have people who endorse capitalism, not realizing it'll eventually devolve into crony capitalism.
