Just cause you don’t understand what’s going on
don’t mean it don’t make no sense
And just cause you don’t like it,
don’t mean it ain’t no good
And let me tell you something;
Before you go taking a walk in my world
You better take a look at the real world
Cause this ain’t no Mister HoWARd’s Neighbourhood
Can you say “feel like shit”?
Yeah maybe sometimes I do feel like shit
I ain’t happy ’bout it, but I’d rather feel like shit than be full of shit!
And if I offended you, oh I’m sorry…
But maybe you need to be offended
But here’s my apology and one more thing…fuck you!
While tens of thousands of young Australians do a Pauline and take to the streets with Australian flags wrapped around their heads, shoulders, waists and bottoms — and painted on their faces, chests, arms, legs and stomachs (they’re obviously a forgetful mob) — and while comrade Tracey maintains that “right wing groups such as Australia First, the League of Rights, One Nation, etc. have been very successful in mobilising working class people around a nationalist ideology” (while teh left remains mired in an unproductive ‘internationalism’), there has been some re-arranging of the deckchairs on the Good Ship White Australia. Thus:
The Australian Nationalism Information Database is now closed.
Go to www.ironbarkresources.com for essential information on Australian nationalism and the fight for our nation’s future.
Following in the footsteps of the Australian Nationalism Information Database, Ironbark Resources is an educational resource to promote Australia’s national identity and culture, and to offer criticism of mass immigration, multiculturalism, and Asianisation as major threats to our environment, our people, and our way of life. A wide range of on-line publications and articles are provided on these issues, as well as on other issues of interest to Australian Nationalists.
Files are being transferred to Ironbark Resources, with updates or additional work as appropriate.
What follows is a potted account of the groups Tracey mentions; much more information is available on this blog or at FightDemBack!
Australia First (AF)
While still linked to by that Lebanese bloke from Tempe, the ‘Australian Nationalism Information Database’ has switched its allegiances to AF’s chief rival, the Australian Protectionist Party, linking to it, its zine, and its disco forum. By the same token, AF has been reduced to 53-year-old Dr James Saleam and a coterie of similarly middle-aged White racists in Sydney, 58-year-old John Drew in Brisbane (who, it should be noted, enjoys “mixing and relating to young people especially fit and virile chaps”), a 40-something nutzi named Jim Perren in Crows Nest (Toowoomba, Queensland) and a relatively youthful Nathan Clarke in Newcastle.
Like the other groups referred to below, it would be mistaken, I think, to believe that AF has been “very successful in mobilising working class people around a nationalist ideology”. Rather, nationalism is a deeply-rooted phenomenon (hardly unique to Australian society), but in the development of which (White) racialist ideology has, historically speaking, been of critical importance. The Australian nation-state was, after all, based on the establishment of a British penal colony, the genocide of the indigenous peoples, and, for the bulk of its life, consolidated through the institution of a White Australia policy. This policy has been embraced by the vast bulk of the population, and only began to fracture following the mass migrations after WWII, the re-classification of indigenous peoples as citizens rather than fauna (as a result of the 1967 referendum), the gradual abandonment of this policy in the 1960s and 1970s, and the re-conceptualisation of Australia as a ‘multi-cultural’ (multi-ethnic and multi-racial) society.
- NB. There is also a rump AF based in Shepparton in Victoria, led by Diane Teasdale.
At this point, an extract from an essay by Koori activist Gary Foley:
Early Days and Australian Genocide
The first thing that Anglo-Australian supporters [of indigenous struggles] have to face up to is that the society from which they come has a long history of entrenched, institutionalised racism. As Ruth Frankenberg says,
For the greater part of…history…arguments for the biological inferiority of people of colour represented the dominant discourse…for thinking about race. Within this discourse, race was constructed as a biological category, and the assertion of white biological superiority was used to justify economic and political inequities ranging from settler colonisation to slavery.
Australians must come to terms with the fact that their perceptions have been shaped by their culture and its construct of time, space and history. Australian racism has manifested itself as fear and loathing of all who might be perceived as racially or culturally different (or the ‘other’). But the first and longest suffering victims of White Australian racism have been the Koori peoples. From the very first contact Aboriginal peoples have been regarded as ‘sub-human’ and ‘primitive’ and the imposition of British sovereignty under the guise of terra nullius formalised the non-acknowledgment of Kooris as human beings. The subsequent mass slaughter of Aborigines and the appropriation of their land without compensation a clear sign of the contempt that white settlers had for the indigenous occupants, and that contempt has been transmitted culturally from generation to generation to this day.
From the beginning of the British invasion of Australia indigenous people were slaughtered on a grand scale. In Tasmania between 1804 and 1834, the Aboriginal population was reduced from an estimated 5000 people to just 200, which represented a 90% reduction in just 30 years. In Victoria it has been estimated that the Koori population declined by about 60% in just 15 years between 1835 and 1850 as more than 68 individual ‘massacres’ were perpetrated in that period. According to representative of the North West Clans of Victoria, Mr Gary Murray, of the 38 clans that lived in Victoria B.C. (Before Cook) only 24 today have living descendants. By 1850 virtually all active resistance to the invasion had been quelled in Victoria. Census figures published in March 1857 showed only 1,768 Aborigines were left in all of that state. So comprehensive was the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of Australia that out of an estimated 500 language groups on mainland Australia when the British arrived, barely half that number of languages were to survive. By 1871, one correspondent, G. Carrington, felt compelled to write:
We shall never possess a detailed history of this singular and gradual work of extermination – such a tale would be too horrible to read – but we have an opportunity of seeing a similar process in full work in the colony of Queensland, and when we have seen that, we shall understand the mystery of Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia.
By the middle of the 19th Century the situation for Aborigines in most parts of Australia looked very grim. Barry Morris has described it thus: “‘The colonial process had reduced the Aborigines to a residual minority, but they had not been eliminated. The problem was expected to resolve itself.” In other words a new policy emerged dubbed ‘Smooth the Dying Pillow’, based on the assumption that what was left of the Aboriginal populace would now die out. So whilst indiscriminate killings of Aborigines were to continue well into the 1930s, the widespread genocidal activity of early ‘settlement’ gave way to a policy of containment. This was embodied in the Aborigines Protection Act 1909, which established the first Australian ‘concentration camps’ to provide a place for the doomed race to die off. It is also interesting to note that the first Act of the new Commonwealth of Australia in 1901 was to restrict non-white immigration so, as Pat Grimshaw put it, “Australia’s spaces would be filled instead by pure white babies”.
Social Darwinism was also a popular notion in Australia about that time, especially among the scientific community. Andrew Markus has said, “one doesn’t have to read extensively to discern that a central concern of anatomists was to establish whether Aborigines were closer to the animal than human”. The Elder Professor of Anatomy at the University of Adelaide in 1926 said that Aborigines were “too low in the scale of humanity” to benefit from “the civilising influence of Anglo Saxon rule”.
Many eminent Australian scientists of the day were to express similar attitudes. In Victoria, as Christie notes, ‘Throughout the frontier years (between 1835 and 1850) the intellectual argument that the Aborigines more closely resembled “the ourangoutangs than men” made it easier for the squatter to treat the Aborigines as subhuman, to lump them with the dingo and shoot them as a “rural pest”.’ Thus was Australian society’s justification for the terrible treatment meted out to the original inhabitants. In the face of such racism pervading society and resonating down the white generations, Koori activists and thinkers realised that the path forward was necessarily through self-reliance and Koori control of Koori affairs.
See also : Warwick Anderson, The Cultivation of Whiteness: Science, Health and Racial Destiny in Australia, University of Melbourne Press, 2002 (review) | Race… (interview with Anderson), ‘Lingua Franca’, ABC, July 27, 2002 | Anarchy 102 : Race (April 10, 2007) | Anarchism and Aboriginal sovereignty (July 16, 2008)
Australian League of Rights (ALOR)
The League of Rights is The League of Rights is The League of Rights. If it has experienced any upsurge in support recently, I’m unaware of it. Rather, following the death of “fascist fruitcake”/”Lion of Freedom” Eric Butler, the Empire Loyalists are under the command of fellow South Australian Betty Luks. According to the League, “We are now into the year 2009 and the demands on the League to keep up with providing news and information, educating and serving our people is as great as ever. Will you help us by supporting the League’s Basic Fund[?] We start the year with $14,038.45 already contributed. The target is $60,000. Please support us generously – and thank you to those who contributed over the Christmas/New Year break.”
Alexander Downer spoke at an ALOR event in 1987, but this fact was only publicly exposed in 1994. Typically, Downer relied upon his reputation as an idiot to escape criticism, claiming that — despite being filmed ‘looking on as SA ALOR director Frank Bawden urges the audience to read the literature “explaining the aims of the League” on their seats’ — he didn’t know who he was addressing, who organised the event and — for all I know — why he was even there (perhaps he tripped and fell?). In any case, no harm was done to the witless Adelaide private schoolboy’s career: twenty years later, he became Foreign Minister; after the Tories lost the 2007 Federal election, he was appointed vewy special envoy to Cyprus, and joined the spooky Hakluyt.
One Nation (ONP)
Minus Pauline, One Nation is up shit creek without a paddle, a fact reflected in the miserly electoral results the Party — which continues, in one form or another, to eke out an existence in NSW, QLD, SA, VIC and WA — has received since its foundation. In fact, Pauline’s election to the Australian Senate in 1996 (One Nation was formed in 1997 by Pauline Hanson, David Oldfield and David Ettridge) and the election of 11 members at the Queensland state election in 1998 proved to be the peak of its success.
Thus in November 1998, one member (Charles Rappolt) had resigned his seat, in February 1999 five members resigned from the Party to become Independents, and in December 1999, the five remaining members split from ONP to form the ‘City Country Alliance’ (CCA). Of the 11 ONP members elected in 1998, one had resigned his seat, while eight — including all six members of the CCA — lost their seats at the subsequent election in 2001, and just two (Dr John Kingston and Dorothy Pratt) were re-elected as Independents. Kingston subsequently resigned in 2003, while Pratt continues to hold her own in Nanango in Queensland.
In essence, ONP’s downfall — and leaving aside the dirty tricks campaign overseen by the Mad Monk Tony Abbott — was its inability to establish a real base outside of Queensland, and the absorption of its key policies by the HoWARd Government.
ONP currently has one sitting MP, Rosa Lee Long.
Neither Pauline nor her former Party experienced much success at the polls in the 2007 Federal election. Well, not in terms of votes anyway. In terms of money, she’s laughing ka-ching! all the way to the bank, with a cheque for over $162,000 (Loser Hanson cleans up, Herald Sun, Ellen Whinnett, November 25, 2007).
In what will probably be her final tilt at Parliament, Ms. Hanson came fourth in the Queensland Senate race, having gained 95,131 votes or 4.12% and 0.2883 of a quota. One Nation, on the other hand, gained a meagre 4,144 votes, or just 0.18%, placing them fifteenth of 24 Senate tickets. In other states, One Nation fared a little better: in NSW obtaining 16,611 votes or 0.41% (by contrast, Pauline’s United Australia got 38,165 votes or 0.95%); in Victoria, 12,414 votes or 0.41%; in WA, 10,354 votes or 0.93%; and in SA, 5,583 votes or 0.61%. In total then, across the nation ON received 49,106 votes: a far cry from 2004, when in Queensland alone ON received 71,032 votes. In 2001, the Hanson ticket in Queensland received 215,400 votes…
In the seat of Murray, Diane Teasdale, with 623 votes, placed sixth of nine candidates. In Werriwa, Dr James Saleam’s comrade Joe Bryant fared a little better, gaining 2,019 votes, and placing fourth among a field of six.
Other parties on the right include the Jesus Freaks in the Christian Democratic and the Family First Parties, and the Free Market Fanatics in the LDP (Liberty and Democracy Party). In the Lower House, 129 Family First candidates received 245,144 votes, or 2.0%; 63 Christian Democratic Party candidates Hallelujah! received 104,433 votes or Can I Get A Witness? 0.8%. In the free market of ideas, the Liberty and Democracy Party found much fewer buyers, their 47 candidates collecting just 17,003 votes or 0.1%.
Australian Protectionist Party (APP)
The APP emerged as a split from the AF in September 2007, in part as a result of wanting to de-Nazify Australian fascism, and based on the understanding that the British National Party’s strategy of mainstreaming was impossible under the leadership of Dr James Saleam, given his unabiding hatred of Jews, criminal past, and continued association with outright nutzis (of which Ross ‘The Skull’ May is the most prominent example). Thus far, the APP has contested just one election, with derisory results.
Both AF and APP are currently seeking Federal registration (requiring a minimum of 500 members).
Citizens’ Electoral Council (CEC)
Established in 1988, the CEC is a front group for the followers of former Trot Lyndon La Rouche. It regularly contests elections, and can frequently be found in the CBD, suburban shopping malls, and outside University campuses flogging its crackpot ideology, the most awesome aspect of which is their belief that The Queen sits at the heart of an illegal international drugs cartel. The ALOR has noted some of the other, equally-appealing characteristics of the La Rouchites. ‘La Rouche Misleads’, OnTarget, Vol.33, No.13, April 11, 1997: “In spite of our warnings over the years concerning the activities of the American-based La Rouche movement, operating in Australia through the “Citizens’ Electoral Council” which publishes The New Citizen, we continue to come across sad cases of sincere people who have been pressured on the telephone to donate thousands of dollars to a movement which claims it is the only movement which can save Australia. Like all such movements, some of what they say or write is correct. But much is dangerous rubbish. The Royal Family is constantly alleged to be behind the international drug problem, while the Republican cause is constantly advocated. It is not without significance that the La Rouche movement constantly targets conservative movements. Whatever the motive, the effect is one of tending to neutralize the genuinely conservative cause.” Further, (OnTarget, Vol.28, No.48, December 18, 1992): “Initially the League provided tacit support for establishing the Citizens Electoral Councils, believing they offered a mechanism for advancing citizens initiated referenda. The C.E.C. movement has changed completely, and we are now no longer sure that initiative and referenda is still even a policy of this group. If the C.E.C. is using the high pressure fundraising techniques of some North American groups, we issue a strong warning of caution to our readers. We now hold the gravest reservations about both the methods and motivation of this group.”
Boneheads (Wankers)
There are a few organised groups of boneheads in Australia, all of which are foreign imports. The biggest (but still tiny) are Blood & Honour Australia and the Southern Cross Hammerskins. In addition, Volksfront has recently announced a new franchise. There are also a few boneheads belonging to the bizarro Creativity movement, while a number of older boneheads find a happy home in the local punk rawk milieu.
B&H and the SCHS have been in and out of the media spotlight over the last few years as a result of the difficulties they’ve experienced organising their annual knees-up in Melbourne. Briefly, in 2006, the boys held their noisefest at the Birmingham Hotel in Fitzroy. In 2007, it was held at the Melbourne Croatia Social Club (Sunshine). In 2008, at the Beaconsfield pub in Beaconsfield. Note that the location for these events is never publicised.
Over to the boneheads:
The crowning achievement of B&H Australia activities each year is the Ian Stuart Memorial concert. Every year we put this on in conjunction with the Southern Cross Hammerskins, the organization that we’ve worked with hand-in-glove, in brotherhood, for the past fifteen years or so. Together we brought out from Europe one of the most inspiring and active bands in the White Nationalist world, Kill, Baby Kill!, for last year’s concert. The year before that it was the infamous Final War from Orange County, California. Other bands and/or members to take the trip to Antipodean shores include the awesome Bully Boys, Ken McLellan from Brutal Attack, Billy and Lyndon from Celtic Warrior, Jim of Squadron fame, and guests from German band Noie Werte, one of the few bands still active that actually played with Skrewdriver.
The exposure of their first venue, the Birmingham Hotel, and the institution of a boycott, eventually resulted in the pub changing hands. Under new management, it’s no longer available to fascists to hold events. That said, two dozen or so local punk bands continued to support the venue and its manager, Gary K. Unfortunately for them, their support was insufficient to render the pub a going concern.
Of the over 20 bands that elected to support the pub, the most vocal were Bulldog Spirit / Marching Orders / Napalm Hearts (which have overlapping memberships) and The Worst. None of these bands appear to have suffered greatly as a result of their support for a fascist-sympathising pub, and Marching Orders are scheduled to play the Rebellion ‘punk’ Festival in August 2009, along with a number of ‘anti-fascist’ and ‘anti-racist’ bands.
This tells you more or less all you need to know about the current status of the there’s no business like punk business.
In 2007, the tricksy boneheads arranged with fascist-sympathising Croatians to hold the gig at their social club. Bonehead again:
[In 2007] there was an unprecedented amount of harassment from the Red scum. These dickheads seem incapable on focusing on their own crappy lives and instead dedicate themselves to trying to give us grief. As usual, however, they rose to the same pathetically ineffectual standard they’ve managed in previous years and had absolutely no bearing on how the gig went. And, again as usual, they’ve upheld a long tradition for Red filth by spreading disinformation and dragging innocent parties through the mud in their frustration that they have no chance of stopping any B&H Australia functions.
My advice? Have a Cornetto, and harden the fuck up.
In 2008, “Because of police interest, the gig was a low key event, without the usual banners, flags & such, but hey we all knew what we were there for & that’s what matters”. Which is as it should be, although bringing out a group of nutzis from Europe isn’t cheap… LOL.
As for the future, the boneheads are organising a gig in Perth on ANZAC Day to celebrate the deaths of Australians who fought Nazism. Playing for the White traffic will be Indigenous Hate, Quick & the Dead and Ravenous (the former drummer of which now plays for local band Bulldog Spirit).
New Right (NR)
The New Right Australia (and er, New Zealand) is the brainchild of Sydney-based fascist Welf Herfurth. A former member of the NPD, Democrats and ONP, the yuppie racist is a also a former friend of B&H and the SCHS, but has recently teamed up with Douglas Schott (Blood Red Eagle) to (re-)establish Volksfront Australia. One critic — Poodle38 on Stormfront — has attacked Welf and accused him of loving “slopes” and cheating on his wife. Which is not very nice, but one of the hazards of “trying to appear everything to everyone”; Welf has also, at different times, embraced both Dr. James Saleam (AF) and Darrin Hodges (APP). Currently, Welf acts as the brains for the handful of brainless teens who believe their destiny is best placed in his hands rather than Don Black’s or David Duke’s.
KKK (White Bedsheets)
The KKK come and go: currently, there at least two different factions of white bed-sheet wearers, the (possibly defunct) ‘White Legion Knights’ and the ‘Church of the National Knights of the Ku Klux Klan’ (CNKKKK). Some believe that the KKK is an elaborate conspiracy hatched by members of the haberdashery industry, but this rumour is unconfirmed. Readers interested in joining the handful of racist psychotics in the CNKKKK are encouraged to contact the GRAND DRAGONESS OF AUSTRALIA/ASSISTANT TO THE IMPERIAL WEBMASTER at [email protected].
Stormfront Down Under (White Bread & Circuses)
Stormfront is the brainchild of Don Black, a convicted terrorist (he and a small group of fellow racist cranks attempted to take over the island of Dominica in 1981) and David Duke, both former Grand Poobahs in the KKK. Black’s wife (and Duke’s ex-wife) Chloe is friends with some of Florida’s richest, while his son, Derek, has been embraced by the local (Florida) branch of the Republican party.
Currently, the Grand Poobah of Stormfront Down Under is Paul Innes of Perth. In addition to being granted the authority by his Fat Yanqui Controllers to perform this vital task, Paul is also planning a ‘Pioneer Little Europe’ in the Perth foothills. Fellow nutzi Kyle Chapman (a KKKiwi) recently got his ugly mug in the papers following the ‘disclosure’ that he and some of his White mates are planning the same for Canterbury. Otherwise Paul, a bonehead, is a supporter of B&H.
1.jpg)
in the quest for the test to fulfill an achievement
everybody’s only loaded just to shoot themselves
when the fact of the matter is they just don’t care
to extend a helping hand to anyone else
so tell me why, did you have to lie
and try to make me all confused about PTBA
when the fact of the matter is you just don’t hear
to comprehend or understand a single word I say
why oh why oh why to go against I?
why oh why oh why to go against I?
well let me tell you now…
the same old story, no factual glory
I against I against I against I
and I say I don’t like it
and I know I don’t want it
I against I against I against I
almighty watching
almighty watching
I against I against I against I
and I say I don’t like it
and I know I don’t want it
I against I against I against I
I said who’s gonna tell the youth about the drugs
about the drugs, mugs, bugs, and the police thugs
about the rotten stinkin’ rackets and the fantasies
around the nation
around the nation
oh what you gonna do?
I tell you the truth is looking straight at you
oh baby baby what you gonna do?
I tell you the truth is looking straight at you
I got a brass continental with a 300 Z
I got a plasma TV with DVD too
I got a rest home in Victoria with my fantasy for my family
around the nation
what you gonna do?
what you gonna do?
what you gonna do?
what you gonna do?
The LDP supports the decriminalisation of marijuana, homosexual marriage, a woman’s choice on abortion, more immigration agreements (with for example Holland, Singapore and countries with similar institutions) along the lines of the the similar existing agreement Australia has with New Zealand. Oh and yes the LDP wants lower taxes. For some reason the last issue trumps everything else and you label the LDP as “right wing” and fanatics. If by right wing you mean that the LDP isn’t wedded to Marxist philosophy then yes I suppose you are correct, however I think you should apply labels with more care than that.
If people want to know where they stand relative to the LDP on the issues they can make a start with the LDP quiz:
http://www.ldp.org.au/quiz/index.html
And then take a look at the policy positions of the party;
http://www.ldp.org.au/federal/policies/index.html
And just for the record the LDP was called the “Liberty and Democracy Party” at the 2007 federal election because the AEC refused to allow it to register under its chosen name of “Liberal Democratic Party”. After the election the AEC changed it’s mind and the party is now registered as the “Liberal Democratic Party” with the abbreviation “Liberal Democrats (LDP)”.
http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/party_registration/Registration_Decisions/liberal_democratic.htm
The LDP is not a far right party. Ideologically it is best described as classical liberal or libertarian.
The Liberty and Democracy Party are lunatics. You have been fooled by the propaganda of the capitalist-intelligentsia regime. Your credit free market policies are a joke. Look at what neo-liberalism has gotten us into. As Rudd said last week in that essay, neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism is dead.
Bonehead,
Are you any relation to Peter Watson?
Good post. It’s interesting to see the slightly less stupid characters above make a few tactical political decisions to work their way into the mainstream. Outside of Australia, I believe the BNP, that erstwhile workers’ party, are supportive of the latest round of strikes in Britain. They may also have at least partially contributed to these strikes having assumed a belligerently nationalist tone (i.e. ‘British jobs for British workers, etc).
Oh and yes the LDP wants lower taxes. For some reason the last issue trumps everything else and you label the LDP as “right wing” and fanatics.
Ah, the libertarian cranks. I doubt a libertarian has ever fought for ‘liberty’ anywhere, ever, with the exception of the blogosphere. The other exception is taxation, which is apparently a heinous abuse of human rights. On the plus side, if your working definition of liberty is this narrow, it can’t leave too much room for intra-party squabbling and factionalism.
TerjeP (say tay-a),
Thanks for your comment.
My reference to the LDP is ripped from an earlier post (Left, Right…, November 28, 2007) examining the 2007 Federal election results, in which I describe the LDP as being ‘on the right’. Perhaps I am mistaken… but I don’t believe so.
I agree that a more detailed look at the LDP’s policies will reveal what you outline. That is, given its support for the decriminalisation of marijuana, homosexual marriage, reproductive rights, and so on, the LDP is what might be termed socially ‘liberal’. Without going into too much detail, or wanting to teach you how to suck eggs, the LDP’s general political perspective accords with what is generally understood to be classical liberal doctrine on the nature of the individual and his/her rights and capacities in a ‘free market’ economy (capitalism). In the ‘private’ domain — the one in which people get drunk, stoned, fuck — individuals should have the right not to be subject to state control (repression).
The LDP’s position on immigration — that is, it supports certain forms of immigration, and the institution of bilateral agreements with certain other countries — places it at odds, in some respects, with Australia First and the policies of the other parties I examine in the post above. Crucially, the LDP does not appear to have as one of its central concerns the alleged ‘Asianisation’ of Australian society, something which greatly agitates AF, ALOR, ONP and the APP.
Regarding the Australian Political Quiz, one of the first examples of this compass — which forms a grid on the LDP site — appeared in Meltzer and Christie’s The Floodgates of Anarchy (Sphere Books, 1970). As a means of locating individuals, parties and ideologies in relation to one another, both models are of some benefit, but have obvious drawbacks. In any case, I believe that, according to this model, the LDP might be described as right-wing, and libertarian, whereas an anarchist such as myself would be described as left-wing, and libertarian.
One interesting aspect of the LDP model is the identification of ‘socialism’ — that is, left-wing economics — with state control, or a “command economy”. Thus in the LDP model “Democratic Socialism — A belief in a command economy and personal freedom” is in Meltzer and Christie’s model libertarian socialism / anarchism. Given the anarchist opposition to the state, a planned economy is obviously out of place.
“For some reason the last issue [immigration] trumps everything else and you label the LDP as “right wing” and fanatics.”
Yes, I do believe that the LDP might reasonably be described as right-wing, but not because of any position it maintains on immigration. As for fanaticism… I’m being cheeky, and only partly serious. Nevertheless, I do believe that there is a large dose of fantasy in right-wing libertarianism… but perhaps that’s another story.
“If by right wing you mean that the LDP isn’t wedded to Marxist philosophy then yes I suppose you are correct, however I think you should apply labels with more care than that.”
No. And yes.
On the BNP and the recent (wildcat) strikes:
Energy wildcats continue to spread across the UK
“The wave of wildcat strike action that has swept across the UK escalated today as hundreds more workers walked out in the protest against the use of foreign labour at the expense of local jobs…”
The strikers have employed the soundbite Gordon Brown used recently: ‘British jobs for British workers’.
What does ‘British jobs’ pledge mean?
Justin Parkinson
BBC News
November 17, 2007
“Gordon Brown’s statement that he wants “British jobs for British workers” has created a political furore…”
An exercise in cheap populism which, like other such exercises, have a tendency to rebound.
The BNP is obviously delighted at this development, but from what I understand, the situation is a little more complicated, and the BNP itself neither a motivating factor nor an especially welcome one.
“It’s interesting to see the slightly less stupid characters above make a few tactical political decisions to work their way into the mainstream.”
Yeah… but it’s a tough gig. HoWARd effectively neutralised Pauline by adopting a number of her key policies and giving a nod and a wink to her racist populism. The ALP, on the other hand, took a strong, principled position.
LOL.
After the fall out of the much predicted credit crisis, any one who believes in a deregulated financial sector and a free market is either mentally insane or apart of the international conspiracy of the capitalist-intelligentsia to turn us all into wage slaves living in third world conditions. The Citizens Electoral Council, Communist Party and the SLA have been [sic] predicted the collapse of the world economy for twenty years now. Lyndon La Rouche was right about there being a plan to destroy our living conditions. Multiculturalism, multiracialism, globalisation and free trade are all fronts of the capitalist-intelligentsia regime. The Liberty and Democracy Party is simply a means to fool people into working within the system but end[s] up playing into the hands of the global dictatorship.
Peter,
Thank you.
And good bye.
Despite the fact Lyndon La Rouche is a fucking idiot and conspiracy theorist with no accreditation to his name…
Anyone who thinks The Beatles were constructed by the British psychological warfare department is absolutely bonkers.
[Why don’t B&H openly advertise their gigs Dennis the Nemesis?]
Why did you delete my post? Was it a little to close to the truth for you? Why don’t you openly advertise who is behind the @ndy persona?
To answer your question; Probably so they don’t have to put up with fuckwits like you trying to disrupt the gigs and having them shut down. Threatening venue staff, bomb threats etc… you know all the usual bullshit scare tactics that you inflict upon the innocent publicans who are trying to make a living.
“Why did you delete my post?”
Because I find fascist trolls tedious.
Re “innocent publicans”. Gary K is “innocent”? Of what? What “bullshit scare tactics”? I openly advocated a boycott of his pub; a legal, peaceful, and perfectly reasonable course of action. Some chose not to join it, others did. Roughly 18 moths later, the pub changed hands. Gary had hosted B&H events for some years, and lied about doing so. Why he bothered is up to him to explain.
Stop talking shit.
Do you consider the bomb threats you incited [through your public announcement of the gig location] to be legal and peaceful?
When did you stop hitting your wife?
Again, you’re talking shit.
Anyone can read what I wrote:
Blood & Honour ISD 2006 Memorial Gig : Tonight at The Birmingham Hotel, Collingwood
@ndy
September 23rd, 2006
in Music, Anti-fascism, Collingwood
Huh.
In a return to an earlier tradition, tonight’s Ian Stuart is Dead celebration — co-sponsored by the neo-Nazi Blood & Honour Australia and Southern Cross Hammerskins — is being held at The Birmingham Hotel…
@ndy – thanks for a considered and informed reply.
John Humphreys (the LDP founder) recently shared his views on the history of libertarian and anarchist thinking. You may enjoy the dialogue it created. Your comments on the article would be appreciated.
http://alsblog.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/brief-history-of-libertarian-ideas/
In particular you may have something useful to add about the relationship or otherwise between left-anarchists and socialism.
Terje (say tay-a),
Cheers.
Humphreys’ potted history is Humphreys’ potted history. I’m not convinced as to its validity, but I suppose it is of some value in the sense that it references a number of thinkers and writers — Locke, Hume, Smith, Voltaire, Paine (17th and 18th Century); Spencer, Molinari, Tucker, Spooner (19th Century); Rand, Friedman, Rothbard (but not, surprisingly, Hayek) (20th Century) — who have made some contribution to the development of what he terms ‘libertarian’ ideas.
A few points.
First, to begin with, I understand ‘anarchism’ to be a distinct political philosophy, one that has its origins in the popular struggles of the 19th Century. In this context, anarchism is the political and philosophical expression not of intellectuals but of social movements, generally rooted in the working class. Many historians classify the period extending from the mid-19th Century to the late 1930s as constituting the period of ‘classical anarchism’, and argue that this particular form of anarchism was extinguished with the defeat of the Spanish revolution. Be that as it may, and without wanting to enter into debates regarding the correctness of this line of argument, or the development of various forms of ‘post-anarchism’, what is termed ‘libertarianism’, on the other hand, has largely been the product of a small collection of intellectuals, and is an ideology which, unlike anarchism, has failed to generate any degree of popular support.
Secondly, 2008 marked the 150th anniversary of the first use of the term ‘libertarian’ in a political context. Thus:
Benjamin Tucker first made use of the term ‘libertarian’ in February, 1897 in the course of discussing “libertarian solutions” to land use.
As an aside:
As Dan Clore notes, one standard (English-language) history of anarchism is George Woodcock’s Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements, first published in 1962. It has since been supplemented by Peter Marshall’s Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism (1992/2008). Two valuable anarchist anthologies (but certainly not the only) are Daniel Guerin’s No Gods No Masters: An Anthology of Anarchism (originally published in French in 1980; English translation 1998) and Robert Graham‘s Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas, Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300CE-1939) and Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas, Volume Two: The Emergence of the New Anarchism (1939-1977).
Thirdly, I think that the reason anarchism is sometimes confused with libertarianism — especially in the Anglosphere — is a shared opposition to the state. However, this opposition proceeds from radically different bases and, I think, expresses a different conception of the state. This confusion was not aided by the publication, in 1994, of Ulrike Heider’s Anarchism: Left, Right, And Green (City Lights Books, San Francisco, 1994); the original and accurate title for which is Die Narren die Freiheit: Anarchisten in den USA heute (1992).
In essence, I’m arguing that ‘libertarianism’ has little real existence outside of Anglo-American societies — principally the USA — in the latter half of the 20th Century. Classical liberal writings do not, I think, provide a sufficient basis to conclude that contemporary ‘libertarianism’ is truly rooted in the 17th, 18th or 19th Centuries (with the possible exception of some of the American ‘individualists’).
Finally, I think that ‘libertarianism’ is ‘idealist’; that is, it fails to come to grips with history. Typically, the understanding of society expressed in libertarian thought lacks any real depth or sophistication, and reads more akin to an abstract political manifesto than a political or social analysis. This is reflected in the libertarian understanding of the state and its relationship to capitalism; the state and society; labour, capital, and property. It’s not so much that ‘libertarianism’ is under-theorised so much as it simply lacks the conceptual tools with which to produce ‘theory’.
See also : Anarchy: Against Capital, Against the State, June 23rd, 2007; a reply to ‘Is there anything radical about anarchism?’ by Mick Armstrong (Socialist Alternative, No.117, June 2007).
PS. On the relationship b/w “left-anarchists and socialism”, moar l8r.
Peter Watson is now a National Bolshevik.
It had to happen eventually.
When will he realise the truth and embrace Deep Ecology?
OBITUARY
Arne Naess, Norwegian philosopher, dies at 96
William Grimes
International Herald Tribune
January 15, 2009
Arne Naess, a Norwegian philosopher whose ideas about promoting an intimate and all-embracing relationship between the earth and the human species inspired environmentalists and Green political activists around the world, died Monday. He was 96.
His editor, Erling Kagge, confirmed his death to Agence France-Presse.
In the early 1970s, after three decades teaching philosophy at the University of Oslo, Naess (pronounced Ness), an enthusiastic mountain climber and an admirer of Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring,” threw himself into environmental work and developed a theory that he called deep ecology. Its central tenet is the belief that all living beings have their own value and therefore, as Naess once put it, “need protection against the destruction of billions of humans.”
Deep ecology, which called for population reduction, soft technology and non-interference in the natural world, was eagerly taken up by environmentalists impatient with shallow ecology — another of Naess’s coinages — which did not confront technology and economic growth.
It formed part of a broader personal philosophy that Naess called ecosophy T, “a philosophy of ecological harmony or equilibrium” that human beings can comprehend by expanding their narrow concept of self to embrace the entire planetary ecosystem. The term fused “ecological” and “philosophy.” The T stood for Tvergastein, his name for the mountain cabin he built in 1937 in southern Norway, where he often wrote.
Arne Dekke Eide Naess was born in Slemdal, near Oslo, in 1912. His older brother was the shipping tycoon Erling Naess, who died in 1993. After earning a degree from the University of Oslo in 1933 Arne Naess continued his education in Paris and in Vienna, where he became part of the Vienna Circle, a philosophical school dedicated to empiricism and logical analysis. In the belief that philosophers should be self-aware, he also underwent psychoanalysis.
After completing “Knowledge and Scientific Behavior,” his dissertation, in German, he was given a teaching position at the University of Oslo, where, as Norway’s only professor of philosophy until 1954, he was the animating figure in the Oslo School. Working in teams, the Oslo School’s adherents used questionnaires to investigate the meanings that ordinary people assigned to terms like “truth,” “free enterprise” and “democracy.” In 1958 he founded the journal Inquiry.
Over his career, Naess progressed from a radical empiricism to pluralism and skepticism. In his many publications, he took on a wide variety of philosophical problems. Harold Glasser, the editor of “The Selected Works of Arne Naess” (2005), has called him “the philosophical equivalent of a hunter-gatherer.” He was interested in language, meaning and communication, a subject he wrote about in “Interpretation and Preciseness” (1953) and “Communication and Argument” (1966), and in the relationship between reason and feeling. He also wrote books on two thinkers central to his worldview, Spinoza and Gandhi.
In 1969 Naess left the university to develop his ecological ideas, which, he believed, demanded political action. With other environmentalists, he chained himself to rocks in front of the Mardal waterfall, successfully pressing the Norwegian government to abandon plans for a dam on the fjord that feeds the falls. He also wrote extensively on the ethics of mountaineering, a field in which he had considerable expertise. In 1950 he led the first expedition to climb Tirich Mir, a 25,000-foot peak in the Hindu Kush in Pakistan.
His ideas on ecology and ecosophy were developed in numerous books and articles, notably “Freedom, Emotion and Self-Subsistence” (1975), “Ecology, Community and Lifestyle” (1989) and “Life’s Philosophy: Reason and Feeling in a Deeper World” (2002).
Surveying the continuing destruction of the environment, Naess was pessimistic about the 21st century but optimistic about the 23rd. By then, he predicted, population control would show results, technology would be noninvasive and children would grow up in a natural environment. At that point, he said, “we are back in the direction of paradise.”
Pingback: “What hasn’t been broadcast is Downer’s role with corporate intelligence company Hakluyt…” | slackbastard