Anarchist tribalism

James L Walker · February 18th, 2014

This is a thread I wanted to create articulating what I call anarchist tribalism.

It in many ways is immensely tied into national anarchism however as I've said in another thread nationalism I think is an inappropriate word for anarchist vocabulary as nationalism is more of a statist expression that it takes a central organization to manifest itself. Simply put nationalism is only achievable through government centralization of power.

Instead I use the word tribalism since before the advent of a nation there are tribes which stem back to an existence of anarchism before a state is even formulated. Before any state is formulated, it is preceded by anarchism. Before the advent of civilization through the agricultural revolution anarchism preceded it.

Within these tribes is territory but nowhere near as large of territory as exhibited by the state that can properly be called a nation. This is explained by the fact that anarchism supports more of community decision making through local rule where everything revolves around a platform of regionalism.

This is why I think the word tribalism is more apt for use here than that of nationalism in regards to anarchism. Nationalism by comparison implies the dominion of numerous regions simultaneously at once through one singular centralized bureaucracy.

Anarchist tribalism promotes the self directed collective action of local indigenous communities that organize themselves on a racial, ethnic, and cultural identity.

The tribe is an expression of a decentralized social order in maintaining distinct autonomous local villages or territories.

Whereas anarchist tribalism promotes ecological sustainable living there is also the promotion of organic living within a close bond with nature and the organization on racial, ethnic, and cultural identity is viewed as an extension of this natural organic process.

Within this tribal hierarchy, it is meritocratic socially however it is aimed to be mutual between all member participants as self sufficient living is heavily promoted. Within the state in a sort of captivity has a way of stripping individuals and people of their self sufficiency in creating total dependency which causes the master- slave relationship we are familiar with under government.

In anarchism, there is the aim to remove that societal relationship supplanting it with mutual self sufficiency of all its members.

In contrast, all production within capitalism is reduced to private enterprise that through a monopolization of entrepreneurs via corporations forces a majority of the people to be dependent on them for a living. As those corporations grow a competitive small group of corporations centrally control everything. The similar could be said of communism that nationalizes everything into state collectivized property which in turns becomes controlled by a centralized group of bureaucrats that forces a majority of people to be dependent on them for a living as well.

The anarchist steps outside of this vicious ring promoting self sufficiency within communities where there is instead the motivation for self production of people and communities for themselves. With this, the vicious cycle of dependency on others for a living is broken. The power is given back to the people to make their own infrastructure, trade, and production as they see fit to do so.

With this, we can say genuine anarchism is post capitalist and communist as it embraces neither.

James L Walker · February 23rd, 2014

The symbol that I have devised for tribal anarchism. It is our banner.

We see the serpent Ouroboros and the Celtic Triskelion.

The Ouroboros meaning civilization, government, and larger society eating themselves in eternal unending repetitive conflict to their own self destruction.

The Celtic Triskelion as a symbol of nature, eternity, and ultimately of knowledge or liberation.

The serpent tries to control and contain the Triskelion but ultimately destroys itself in trying to impose its will on nature.

James L Walker · February 24th, 2014

The most basic definition of a tribal anarchist.

We are anarchists that believe in the preservation of race, language, customs, traditions, and culture.

In our interpretation of anarchism we want to live, exist, and thrive amongst our own people of similar ancestral background without foreign influences.

We want to have anarchist tribal societies with those that look in appearance just like ourselves.

We believe that this builds a more better and efficient social cohesion within our anarchist communities.

James L Walker · February 24th, 2014

The uneasy alliance with national statists

For now, tribal anarchists or those anarchists with racial and cultural sentiments are a minority worldwide. That leaves us with a bit of a quagmire as to what we should do or who we should make alliances with.

Because of pervading propaganda of how anarchists are portrayed historically it is difficult for us to make alliances with other groups of individuals.

I believe that we should ally ourselves with the nationalists quite simply in saying all of this.

Certainly we and the nationalists do agree on the preservation of race, cultures, languages, and customs. We also agree that international Zionists and Jews are a foreign pervading enemy everywhere on the planet.

We agree that all current governments on this planet seek the extinction of the white race and to utterly enslave us all economically to an increasingly global international elite primarily run by Jews in Western civilization. All in all we agree with a great deal about many things.

The great divide is the fact that they believe in a centralized government structure where we don't. It is because of this that they resent and in many cases hate us.

Add in that Marxism and communism has hijacked most of the anarchist movement worldwide where even a tribal anarchist like myself can see why they perceive us as a threat.

It is clearly up to the minority of tribal anarchists to educate people including nationalist statists what we represent so that we can show them not all of us are under the influence of the Marxist or communist scourge.

I think with our leaders discussing and reaching out to their leaders an alliance can be made.

An anarchist might say that making any sort of alliance with statists is utterly self defeating for our cause where if the national statists do succeed in their endeavors they would just seek to forcibly have us submit to their created government.

I agree that is a threat of our uneasy alliance. It is very possible. Certainly our own people have persecuted us through centralized governments various times all throughout history.

Still, if we make an alliance maybe they'll allow us special concessions for us to carve out our own territories where we are left alone to flourish according to our own values. This is my hope of our uneasy alliance. Quite simply I believe this is a necessary gambit or gamble on our part in negotiating an alliance with the national statists.

I think at this point the extinction of our race, cultures, languages, customs, and traditions is the greatest threat to our way of living where it is more necessary to ally ourselves with the national statists setting aside our political or in our anarchist sense lack of political beliefs behind us temporarily.

None of us want to see countries like England or the United States as example become inhabited by a majority of nonwhite foreigners.

Once we achieve territorial protection of our homelands from foreigners only then we and the national statists can have discussions or debates on the question of the role of government into people's lives.

For now I believe in an alliance between us to fight against a very large internationally coordinated enemy.

James L Walker · February 24th, 2014

The difference between an anarchist and supporter of government.

What makes a person an anarchist? An anarchist is an individual that through some level of personal experience or self education and a combination of both comes to the conclusion that all forms of government are oppressively tyrannical.

Usually individuals that have gone through intimate levels of being oppressed their entire lives come to the conclusion of anarchism.

Anarchism draws in the oppressed, exploited, disenfranchised, rebellious, and the outlaw.

Government supporters on the other hand usually come from backgrounds of those that either thrive or benefit somehow from enacted governments. Under government, they find protection, political solace, economic opportunity, and purpose.

This is usually why people from both polar opposite ends cannot understand each other.

The anarchist will stand in stern defiance of the government unwavering in their rebellious tone while the government supporter will try to tell them that they're wrong with a zealous tone of trying to convert them to governance also like themselves.

The government supporter usually ignores the anarchist's motives for being what they are and this never resolves anything.

RickHolland · February 24th, 2014

I already heard about the existence of national anarchism in english speaking countries like the USA and Australia. In the US they were more organized in the San Francisco bay area (Bay Area National Anarchists (BANA)) but i think they are gone by now.
I don't think they are a serious political movement, they are more of a life style with some hobbyist activism in some selective causes.

National-Anarchism and the American Idea

Quote:

National-Anarchism and Classical American Ideals: Is A Reconciliation Possible?

“Establishing a new world order of supranational government is Hitlerian in concept and will need to be Stalinist in execution.” (1)

-Taki Theodoracopulos

“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”(2)

-George Washington

“That government is best which governs least.”(3)

-Thomas Jefferson

http://attackthesystem.com/national-...american-idea/

http://www.national-anarchist.net/

http://www.nationalanarchism.com/

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/National-Anarchism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National-Anarchism

National Anarchist Welf Herfurth on Attack the System - YouTube

Whites as an Ethnic Minority - Identity and Survival (Oct 17, 2013) - YouTube

I know there is a strong anarchist racial movement at a national level in Germany (it exists also in Belgium (Flemish region) and the Netherlands). This guys seem to be more politically involved in "attack the system" than the others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonome_Nationalisten

NS Black Bloc: Autonomous Nationalists - YouTube

Autonome Nationalisten Tribute - YouTube

Demo gegen einen Nazi-Aufmarsch in Hamburg Wandsbek - YouTube

1. Mai 2013 Dortmund - YouTube

Neonazi Kundgebung am 1. Mai 2013 in WÃ¼rzburg SW-N TV - YouTube

James L Walker · February 24th, 2014

To Rick Holland:

Yes, indeed I would compare anarchist tribalism and anarchist nationalism as very much alike if not the same thing only with some minor differences.

I've coined anarchist tribalism myself in that I don't believe the word nationalism is quite suited for anarchism.

Anarchism is more about territorial regionalism or localism whereas nationalism is more of an expression used by the state.

This anarchist tribalism that I am creating as a new ideological approach to anarchism in general is embedded with a lot of my own philosophical and historical interjections. I am however very strongly influenced by the ideology of anarchist nationalism by doing so.

It's a shame that it isn't gaining more traction within the United States, but I am extremely hopeful.

I am confident that in the future we will see racial and cultural anarchist autonomous zones or communities.

Clancy · February 25th, 2014

Anarchism cannot work because it ignores the inherently social nature of modern commodity based production which forms the super structure of society. Anarchism would only work in primitive "hunter gathering" economic systems, if that.

James L Walker · February 25th, 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clancy

Anarchism cannot work because it ignores the inherently social nature of modern commodity based production which forms the super structure of society. Anarchism would only work in primitive "hunter gathering" economic systems, if that.

We had 10,000 years of tribal anarchy before the advent of the agricultural revolution and even with that many cultures still remained anarchistic.

I could point out the tribal and clan cultures of ancient Celtic Gaul, Germania, and Britannia as examples.

What today's Amish shows is that small independent communities isolated and cut off ruling themselves is still possible even in today's modern world.

Eventually with the global energy crisis most of civilization around the world will be forced to revert to older living standards eventually where this commodity based production you speak of will collapse in onto itself.

Clancy · February 25th, 2014

Quote:

Eventually with the global energy crisis most of civilization around the world will be forced to revert to older living standards eventually where this commodity based production you speak of will collapse in onto itself.

If you want Anarchy, that is your only hope. Advanced economic systems could never function without government. How would the credit system be able to function on a large scale without laws, for instance?

James L Walker · February 25th, 2014

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clancy

If you want Anarchy, that is your only hope. Advanced economic systems could never function without government. How would the credit system be able to function on a large scale without laws, for instance?

Advanced economic systems are collapsing as we speak with laws not to mention are nonetheless corruptible and tyrannical even with them in place.

Common decency and communal respect precedes any written laws.

When you have to officially write common decency and communal respect into law you have already lost for what you have is a society of distrust amongst one another. You have already harbored a divisive society.

The type of society I envision people work together and for each other.

There would be no need of a credit system.

RickHolland · February 25th, 2014

"From Anarchism to The New Right" with Richard Spencer and Keith Preston on Alternative Right - YouTube

PT 2 "From Anarchism to The New Right" with Richard Spencer and Keith Preston on Alternative Right - YouTube

James L Walker · February 27th, 2014

Survivorman - Off The Grid - Full Documentary - YouTube

James L Walker · February 28th, 2014

The dichotomy between anarchists and government supporters

You say people cannot or are unable to govern themselves independently.

Yet you say by contrast that billions of people worldwide can be governed by a handful of a few individuals.

Sounds irrational, doesn't it?

James L Walker · March 2nd, 2014

Tribal anarchists view of fascism or totalitarian government regimes.

Because anarchists are a majority of the time from the lower white working class we oppose fascism and totalitarian government regimes.

The national fascists will say that they support race, culture, and national unity where the white lower working class if it knew what was good for it should support them.

While we lower working class whites also care about race, culture, and a type of national unity or identity ourselves we have lived also very brutally under similar internationalist forms of fascism.

You can put a white face on fascism, but that will not acquire our loyalties because in the end we still remain the working class serfs and slaves to the system. We simply refuse being anybody's working class serfs and slaves any longer.

History has shown that before the great historical calamity and scourge of global international multiculturalism our own people would oppress each other viciously. Even if a statist national homeland is achieved, what will be done or addressed towards that subject?

I do not believe that the national fascists or statists will address those issues.

Often enough it is the middle and upper classes that represent the ideological underpinnings of fascist or statist forms of thinking.

For them, they have no desire of liberating the white lower working class but instead only to keep the boot heel pressed upon us just as equally in comparison to the internationalists.

Therefore we aspire towards more organic anarchist tribalism communities to secure our race, culture, and national identity instead as an alternative.

We support tribal anarchism for our independence, self sufficiency, and freedom.

James L Walker · March 2nd, 2014

How internationalism and multiculturalism later evolved into globalism were created to oppress the white lower working class.

It was the 18th century in the greater European continent where everywhere peasants and workers demanded more individual rights, equal protections, higher wages, and a overall higher standard of living with more freedom separate from the yoke of aristocratic rule.

It was the era where anarchist thought within great works by Johan Kaspur Schmidt were being created in Leipzig. Germany that would later influence American anarchists like James L. Walker, Benjamin Tucker, and others.

It was the era where Mikhail Bakunin grew up in Tver, Russia who would later influence greatly anarchism as a whole.

It was the era where Pierre Joseph Proudhon grew up in Besancon, France who would write great anarchist works criticizing centralized forms of banking in conjunction with government speaking of theoretical credit alternatives.

What happened between the 18th century and onto our present in the western world?

The industrialists within every western nation in collaboration with the financial banking Jewish system came to the conclusion that they would never negotiate with the rebelling white lower working classes decided to flood our nations with racial foreigners in order to retain control or power for themselves.

They decided to repress the white working class even more by lowering its wages forcing it to compete with hordes of racial foreigners who would work for far less. This even further reduced the white lower working class's standard of living.

The most damning thing however was that as these hordes of racial foreigners would out breed the white lower working class in a democracy via demographics their social or political influence into anything was completely diminished altogether.

Later in Nottingham, England within the same era the Luddites were rejecting that their entire livelihood being replaced by machinery illustrating the emergence of an aristocratic technocracy with racial foreigners attacking the white lower working class from both directions.

Where the white lower working class would embrace anarchism in their defiance of government and institutional authority disgusting Jewry created Marxism or communism in hijacking a majority of public anarchist organizations leaving the white lower working class no vehicle whatsoever to express its malcontent.

February 18th, 2014	#1
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	Anarchist tribalism This is a thread I wanted to create articulating what I call anarchist tribalism. It in many ways is immensely tied into national anarchism however as I've said in another thread nationalism I think is an inappropriate word for anarchist vocabulary as nationalism is more of a statist expression that it takes a central organization to manifest itself. Simply put nationalism is only achievable through government centralization of power. Instead I use the word tribalism since before the advent of a nation there are tribes which stem back to an existence of anarchism before a state is even formulated. Before any state is formulated, it is preceded by anarchism. Before the advent of civilization through the agricultural revolution anarchism preceded it. Within these tribes is territory but nowhere near as large of territory as exhibited by the state that can properly be called a nation. This is explained by the fact that anarchism supports more of community decision making through local rule where everything revolves around a platform of regionalism. This is why I think the word tribalism is more apt for use here than that of nationalism in regards to anarchism. Nationalism by comparison implies the dominion of numerous regions simultaneously at once through one singular centralized bureaucracy. Anarchist tribalism promotes the self directed collective action of local indigenous communities that organize themselves on a racial, ethnic, and cultural identity. The tribe is an expression of a decentralized social order in maintaining distinct autonomous local villages or territories. Whereas anarchist tribalism promotes ecological sustainable living there is also the promotion of organic living within a close bond with nature and the organization on racial, ethnic, and cultural identity is viewed as an extension of this natural organic process. Within this tribal hierarchy, it is meritocratic socially however it is aimed to be mutual between all member participants as self sufficient living is heavily promoted. Within the state in a sort of captivity has a way of stripping individuals and people of their self sufficiency in creating total dependency which causes the master- slave relationship we are familiar with under government. In anarchism, there is the aim to remove that societal relationship supplanting it with mutual self sufficiency of all its members. In contrast, all production within capitalism is reduced to private enterprise that through a monopolization of entrepreneurs via corporations forces a majority of the people to be dependent on them for a living. As those corporations grow a competitive small group of corporations centrally control everything. The similar could be said of communism that nationalizes everything into state collectivized property which in turns becomes controlled by a centralized group of bureaucrats that forces a majority of people to be dependent on them for a living as well. The anarchist steps outside of this vicious ring promoting self sufficiency within communities where there is instead the motivation for self production of people and communities for themselves. With this, the vicious cycle of dependency on others for a living is broken. The power is given back to the people to make their own infrastructure, trade, and production as they see fit to do so. With this, we can say genuine anarchism is post capitalist and communist as it embraces neither.

February 23rd, 2014	#2
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	The symbol that I have devised for tribal anarchism. It is our banner. We see the serpent Ouroboros and the Celtic Triskelion. The Ouroboros meaning civilization, government, and larger society eating themselves in eternal unending repetitive conflict to their own self destruction. The Celtic Triskelion as a symbol of nature, eternity, and ultimately of knowledge or liberation. The serpent tries to control and contain the Triskelion but ultimately destroys itself in trying to impose its will on nature. Last edited by James L Walker; February 24th, 2014 at 12:11 AM.

February 24th, 2014	#3
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	The most basic definition of a tribal anarchist. We are anarchists that believe in the preservation of race, language, customs, traditions, and culture. In our interpretation of anarchism we want to live, exist, and thrive amongst our own people of similar ancestral background without foreign influences. We want to have anarchist tribal societies with those that look in appearance just like ourselves. We believe that this builds a more better and efficient social cohesion within our anarchist communities. Last edited by James L Walker; February 24th, 2014 at 12:19 AM.

February 24th, 2014	#4
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	The uneasy alliance with national statists For now, tribal anarchists or those anarchists with racial and cultural sentiments are a minority worldwide. That leaves us with a bit of a quagmire as to what we should do or who we should make alliances with. Because of pervading propaganda of how anarchists are portrayed historically it is difficult for us to make alliances with other groups of individuals. I believe that we should ally ourselves with the nationalists quite simply in saying all of this. Certainly we and the nationalists do agree on the preservation of race, cultures, languages, and customs. We also agree that international Zionists and Jews are a foreign pervading enemy everywhere on the planet. We agree that all current governments on this planet seek the extinction of the white race and to utterly enslave us all economically to an increasingly global international elite primarily run by Jews in Western civilization. All in all we agree with a great deal about many things. The great divide is the fact that they believe in a centralized government structure where we don't. It is because of this that they resent and in many cases hate us. Add in that Marxism and communism has hijacked most of the anarchist movement worldwide where even a tribal anarchist like myself can see why they perceive us as a threat. It is clearly up to the minority of tribal anarchists to educate people including nationalist statists what we represent so that we can show them not all of us are under the influence of the Marxist or communist scourge. I think with our leaders discussing and reaching out to their leaders an alliance can be made. An anarchist might say that making any sort of alliance with statists is utterly self defeating for our cause where if the national statists do succeed in their endeavors they would just seek to forcibly have us submit to their created government. I agree that is a threat of our uneasy alliance. It is very possible. Certainly our own people have persecuted us through centralized governments various times all throughout history. Still, if we make an alliance maybe they'll allow us special concessions for us to carve out our own territories where we are left alone to flourish according to our own values. This is my hope of our uneasy alliance. Quite simply I believe this is a necessary gambit or gamble on our part in negotiating an alliance with the national statists. I think at this point the extinction of our race, cultures, languages, customs, and traditions is the greatest threat to our way of living where it is more necessary to ally ourselves with the national statists setting aside our political or in our anarchist sense lack of political beliefs behind us temporarily. None of us want to see countries like England or the United States as example become inhabited by a majority of nonwhite foreigners. Once we achieve territorial protection of our homelands from foreigners only then we and the national statists can have discussions or debates on the question of the role of government into people's lives. For now I believe in an alliance between us to fight against a very large internationally coordinated enemy. Last edited by James L Walker; February 24th, 2014 at 01:31 AM.

February 24th, 2014	#5
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	The difference between an anarchist and supporter of government. What makes a person an anarchist? An anarchist is an individual that through some level of personal experience or self education and a combination of both comes to the conclusion that all forms of government are oppressively tyrannical. Usually individuals that have gone through intimate levels of being oppressed their entire lives come to the conclusion of anarchism. Anarchism draws in the oppressed, exploited, disenfranchised, rebellious, and the outlaw. Government supporters on the other hand usually come from backgrounds of those that either thrive or benefit somehow from enacted governments. Under government, they find protection, political solace, economic opportunity, and purpose. This is usually why people from both polar opposite ends cannot understand each other. The anarchist will stand in stern defiance of the government unwavering in their rebellious tone while the government supporter will try to tell them that they're wrong with a zealous tone of trying to convert them to governance also like themselves. The government supporter usually ignores the anarchist's motives for being what they are and this never resolves anything. Last edited by James L Walker; February 24th, 2014 at 01:57 AM.

February 25th, 2014	#8
Clancy Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 555	Anarchism cannot work because it ignores the inherently social nature of modern commodity based production which forms the super structure of society. Anarchism would only work in primitive "hunter gathering" economic systems, if that.

February 28th, 2014	#14
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	The dichotomy between anarchists and government supporters You say people cannot or are unable to govern themselves independently. Yet you say by contrast that billions of people worldwide can be governed by a handful of a few individuals. Sounds irrational, doesn't it? __________________ "No gods, no masters, and against all authority through anarchy!" - Popular anarchist saying\|"Where the state begins individual liberty ceases, and vice versa." - Mikhail Bakunin

March 2nd, 2014	#15
James L Walker Radical Racial Anarchist Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Minnesota-[FEMA Region V]- ZOG Occupied United States Posts: 349	Tribal anarchists view of fascism or totalitarian government regimes. Because anarchists are a majority of the time from the lower white working class we oppose fascism and totalitarian government regimes. The national fascists will say that they support race, culture, and national unity where the white lower working class if it knew what was good for it should support them. While we lower working class whites also care about race, culture, and a type of national unity or identity ourselves we have lived also very brutally under similar internationalist forms of fascism. You can put a white face on fascism, but that will not acquire our loyalties because in the end we still remain the working class serfs and slaves to the system. We simply refuse being anybody's working class serfs and slaves any longer. History has shown that before the great historical calamity and scourge of global international multiculturalism our own people would oppress each other viciously. Even if a statist national homeland is achieved, what will be done or addressed towards that subject? I do not believe that the national fascists or statists will address those issues. Often enough it is the middle and upper classes that represent the ideological underpinnings of fascist or statist forms of thinking. For them, they have no desire of liberating the white lower working class but instead only to keep the boot heel pressed upon us just as equally in comparison to the internationalists. Therefore we aspire towards more organic anarchist tribalism communities to secure our race, culture, and national identity instead as an alternative. We support tribal anarchism for our independence, self sufficiency, and freedom. __________________ "No gods, no masters, and against all authority through anarchy!" - Popular anarchist saying\|"Where the state begins individual liberty ceases, and vice versa." - Mikhail Bakunin Last edited by James L Walker; March 2nd, 2014 at 03:00 PM.

Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode