National-Anarchist Movement

Time 2020-09-24 06:03:00

Web Name: National-Anarchist Movement

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

ID:57813

Keywords:

National,Anarchist,Movement,

Description:

Here are a few photographs from what was a very memorable and successful event held at a beautiful medieval pub in a tiny village at the heart of the English countryside. The photographs show images from the various speakers and attendees at the conference, as well as the beautiful farm where a number of us camped for several days. Fascinating talks, brilliant company, fine mead, baked sausages and potatoes and a few friendly animals thrown in for good measure. A perfect weekend in every way.I have finally received the proof I need to completely destroy the lie that I am, or have ever been, a 'neo-nazi,' 'neo-fascist' or 'racist'. The American academic, Ryan Shaffer, was kind enough to send me a copy of his Palgrave Macmillan book on post-war British Fascism, which includes a discussion of the 1980s National Front (NF) of which I was part some thirty years ago and more. Although the book is now priced in the region of 80 to 100 and aimed chiefly at university libraries, I have photographed some of the pages that refer to me directly. Page 130, for example, reveals that I was openly talking about "Nazi-type filth" as early as the mid-1980s when I first joined the organisation on account of its radical economic policies and that on account of "praising blacks" our group was being denounced as "communist" by the fascists that had been purged from our ranks. On Page 136, which deals with 1988, you can see that I was highlighting our links "with peoples of different races" and, on Page 137, promoting the political, social and economic ideas of Qathafi's Green Book. At the foot of Page 180 I am mentioned as being among the founders of the International Third Position (ITP) and, in the final sentence of Page 181 - continuing onto Page 182 - eventually condemning the ITP for being "fascist at its very core". In fact it was me who engineered a major split in their ranks and led 75% of the membership into the newly-formed English Nationalist Movement (ENM) in September 1992. The ENM itself was staunchly anti-fascist and promoted William Cobbett, Robert Owen, William Morris, Bob Blatchford and Otto Strasser. At the very bottom of Page 182 I am seen attacking Italian fascist Roberto Fiore for his notorious capitalist business activities. Contemporary National-Anarchism also gets a mention on Page 183, but not in the context of being 'fascistic' or 'neo-nazi'.Finally, Ryan's book - and remember that it has been issued by one of the largest publishers in the world - seems very objective indeed and I am pleased to be able to present this information as a way of undermining the disgusting lies that have been said about me over the last four decades. I was, and shall remain, an anti-fascist.Two months ago, I was attacked by Alexander Reid Ross, a notoriously poisonous individual who can only be described as a purveyor of systematic misinformation. I posted a reply to Ross on August 20th this year, but not content with having delivered his spurious opening salvo this thoroughly loathsome and dishonest creature has since assembled a second collection of unfounded insinuations.1. The fact that I responded to his first attack "may mean that I pushed all the right buttons". Since when did attempting to set the record straight amount to an admission of guilt? Does the fact that Ross has now replied to me indicate that I "pushed all the right buttons", too?2. Ross claims that I "joined one of England s fascist parties, the National Front, in the mid-1980s." However, by this time the NF was already in the process of expelling the fascist elements that had worked their way into the organisation during the first two decades of its existence and this is demonstrated by those NF publications that called for an end to racism and which denounced fascism and neo-Nazism on a regular basis. Indeed, as a result of this radical change in direction the NF was denounced by those it had purged as a party of 'nigger-lovers'. 3. It is claimed that I "joined the NF due to the same concentrated effort that he now denies as existing at all." This relates to the fact that I was a skinhead at the time I first became involved with nationalist politics, but of course, he completely neglects to mention that I was heavily into Ska and Reggae music and was not the kind of skinhead who enjoyed sieg-heiling out of car windows through Brixton. Ross also fails to mention that the NF expelled racist skinheads associated with the Blood Honour movement and set up a musical alternative that was devoid of fascism and neo-Nazism. Success was limited, which is why the NF then tried to recruit from Folk circles. Attempting to recruit skinheads, however, should not imply that the NF I belonged to was interested in recruiting Nazi boneheads. Or at least not without trying to educate them and turn them away from such views altogether. Skinhead subculture, remember, even that which is anti-fascist, is nonetheless viewed as a bastion of patriotism and that is what the NF was trying to cultivate. Just as the communists had made an attempt to recruit English youth by way of the punk genre in the late-1970s.4. Laughably, Ross tells us that "the NF s economic program, such as it has been over the decades, is profoundly racist. Ranging from syncretic notions of distributism to a contradictory hatred of the welfare state that rests on a cynical idealization of self-sufficiency, the economic ideas bandied about in the English fascist movement maintain the incessant drone of xenophobia and Islamophobia." Oh dear. He clearly knows nothing whatsoever about the Distributist League's frequent debates with Mosley's Blackshirts during the 1930s, or the fact that when I joined the NF it was a revolutionary organisation that advocated the overthrow of the State itself. Take away emotive words like 'profoundly', 'syncretic', 'contradictory', 'hatred', 'idealization', 'bandied', 'fascist', incessant', 'drone', 'xenophobia' and 'Islamophobia' and there is very little of substance. This, you see, is precisely how this obnoxious little toerag likes to operate.5. The next scurrilous allegation is that "by the mid-1980s when Southgate joined, everyone in England understood that the NF was linked to mass violence, beatings, and even murders, especially of South Asian and Caribbean immigrants, LGBT folks, and leftists." Well, given that the Zionist media had fed that line to them for many years it is hardly surprising, but I never once saw any evidence of violence among the NF that had purged the reactionaries from its ranks. In fact Ross has openly defended the very groups that use violence and intimidation against their enemies. He is not merely a liar, therefore, but a hypocrite. 6. Another incredibly wild claim is that the "NF s pathetic numbers at the polls" meant that the political soldier faction (of which I was part) "became more associated with [...] neo-folk and industrial music." Interesting, given that Neofolk only became popular among nationalist groups during the late-1990s when the NF I had been involved with - and, consequently, left in 1989 - had been dead for almost a decade. This, unfortunately, is the pitiful level of scholarship that we get from a man, who recently published a very inaccurate and badly-researched book on 'fascism'.7. Ross says that "Southgate s own brand of supposedly 'anti-racist' ideology is also informed by the ideology of Alexander Dugin" and that, unsurprisingly, is also patently untrue. I have met Dugin on two occasions and he spoke at one of my meetings in London, but whilst I initially liked the idea of a Eurasian bulwark against Anglo-American imperialism I soon found his thinly-disguised chauvinism and centralist proclivities unacceptable. To say that my anti-racism has ever been "informed" by Dugin is absolutely hilarious and I am sure that even my Russian counterpart would agree. We never even discussed race at all. It is, of course, simply another exercise in guilt-by-association. The fact that I have since criticised Dugin on numerous occasions over the course of the last ten years obviously counts for nothing. I think that's called being economical with the truth.8. One thing that I find curious is the manner in which Ross tries to ingratiate himself with more informed researchers of fascism like Anton Shekhovtsov, Roger Griffin, Tamir Bar-On and Graham Macklin, all four of whom have corresponded with me in respectful, cordial terms. One of these men also found the first attack on me by Ross to be perfectly ridiculous, although I prefer to keep our academically inferior friend guessing as to who it might be.9. Ross then says that "Southgate, himself, has disavowed the Alt Right on the basis of their attachment to Trump". That, and that alone? Really?! Try to pay attention, Ross, there's a good chap.10. Elsewhere, Ross alleges that "Southgate set up the 'New Right' (NR) group in England in the mid-2000s, cloaking his ideology in some antiracist and antifascist rhetoric in attempts to disseminate in a more-or-less antiracist context." Apart from the confusingly repetitive nature of this rather bizarre statement, the New Right was established as a way for me to feed National-Anarchist ideas into the British Far Right. The same kind of entryism, if you will, that Ross only imagines takes place in relation to the Left. Furthermore, to connect me with figures such as Gaston Bergery and Alexandre Marc is also very strange given that I have never made reference to either of them in over thirty years of political involvement.11. The sentence "Perhaps because he could find no true fault with my article, he retreats to his critiques of my book" is pure comedy gold. The fact is, I utterly destroyed him on both counts and it is impossible to decide which of the two amounts to the biggest pile of horseshit. I'll let you know if I do eventually make my mind up, although it's like trying to work out the difference between a donkey and a mule.12. He then bemoans the fact that I published an article on the 'blood and soil' ideas of Richard Walther Darrè, but neglects to mention that this same individual was - as Anna Bramwell points out admirably - perhaps the greatest influence on the Greens. Are they Nazis, too?13. Ross notes that the National Revolutionary Faction (NRF), a precursor of National-Anarchism, tried to create a 'synthesis' between ideas on either side of the political spectrum. The fact that the article in which I made this claim (Transcending the Beyond) was itself dealing with having rejected third positionism for a complete departure from either side appears to have gone right over his head.14. Another odd remark is that "Southgate claims that his movement repudiates Darwin" and yet I went on to publish an article by someone else who endorsed it. However, the reality is that whilst I dismissed the theory of evolution during my speech on Oswald Spengler at the recent National-Anarchist Movement (N-AM) conference in Madrid, it remains a personal opinion and not something that the N-AM itself necessarily subscribes to. Ross tries to infer that "[Southgate] surely advocates an idea of Natural Order that seeks an evolution of the 'folk' through the refutation of multiculturalism and exclusion of gender and sexual diversity". Actually, no. We welcome into our ranks not just all races and religions, but atheists and people with differing notions of sexuality.15. Strangely enough, I totally concur with the final sentence in this incredible litany of falsehood: "Enough with the games and tricks. Let s have honesty and clarity in political discourse." Not that I expect Ross to take his own advice.This articleis just the latest example of how Alexander Reid Ross, one ofthe rising stars in the world of professional bullshit, sets out to vilifyeveryone through guilt-by-association. In actual fact, this is his entire modusoperandi and it is dangerous in the sense that it seeks to facilitate a type ofacademic 'justification' for those making an attempt to demoniseNational-Anarchism through Wikipedia and various other forms of controlledmedia. In other words, when people such as Ross produce a book or an article,the work in question is then cited by others as a means of adding some kind of'intellectual' gloss to the overall strategy of ideological misrepresentationin general. Ross wants people to believe that there is a wide-ranging fascistconspiracy to both infiltrate and take over Anarchist groups and certain musiccircles. This is completely untrue. Groups such as the National Front (NF),mentioned in this article, certainly made an attempt to seize control ofskinhead subculture back in the early-1980s, which is precisely how - as ateenage Labour voter - I found my way into the organisation after buying one ofthe group's newspapers outside a Bad Manners concert and finding myselfimpressed with its stance on alternative economics, but I was never a racistnor a fascist because at that time the organisation itself was already in theprocess of expelling such elements from its ranks and adopting what weregenerally considered to be 'left-wing' ideas and strategies. This included theregular promotion of anti-racism and anti-fascism in the pages of itsliterature, for which I still have a mountain of evidence sitting on mybookshelves. Furthermore, in 1986 those who had been expelled formed their ownversion of the 'National Front' (more properly known as the 'Flag' faction) andbegan labelling us 'nigger-lovers'.Meanwhile, the ever-deceitful and politically-motivated Ross deliberatelytries to conceal the incontrovertible fact that National-Anarchism is somethingwhich, in relation to myself, at least, arrived by way of the late Richard Huntand Alternative Green magazine. Richard, who was formerly editor of GreenAnarchist, fell out with his former allies after defending patriarchalsocieties and making the mistake of supporting the Iraq War. But Richardhimself was never actually Right-wing and had merely thought his way out of theleftist straight-jacket in the way that Bob Black and various other Anarchistshave. Indeed, Richard was not afraid to work alongside those of us who wereEnglish nationalists and who were genuinely opposed to fascism and racism. In fact,it was Richard who introduced me to Anarchist ideas for the first time, sothere was no conspiracy to infiltrate and subvert the Left from people likemyself at all and I certainly never set out to recruit him in accordance withthe imagined designs of a wicked nationalist plot.Moving on, the fact that I have mentioned entryism as a viable tactic in thepast - even praising the tactics used by Derek Hatton's Trotskyist group,Militant, during the 1980s - is used by Ross to provide incriminating'evidence' for my allegedly secret desire to inject fascist ideas into theranks of Anarchism. Ironically, however, in the late-1990s I was accused byNick Griffin of "trying to cherry-pick from the British NationalParty" and he was right. I actively set out to bring nationalists acrossto Anarchist ideas and not vice versa. I am also prepared to admit, quiteopenly, that I even use Strasserism as a 'bridge' in order to bring people overfrom Hitlerism to Anarchism. So again, it's a one-way street and all thetraffic is moving in a single direction. In fact, if you look very carefullyyou can probably see the fading Berlin sunset in the rear-view mirror. Moreseriously, one thing we National-Anarchists always insist on, is that anyonewho joins us is Anarchist. That is the distinguishing feature of our ideologyand the first port of call for anyone wishing to get involved. Anarchism mustcome first, everything else is secondary. We therefore reject fascism and neo-Nazismcompletely and always have. I do not expect Ross and his impressionable friendsto discuss the hard-line stance that we take against such people or the mannerin which we have previously expelled them from our ranks.One further point: I never set out to infiltrate the Neofolk scene, I wasmerely invited to join an existing group (HERR) that had already released itsfirst album and that same person happens to be left-wing. HERR itself has neverpromoted a political agenda in any way, shape or form and its members havealways had a wide range of differing views and opinions and none of them areeven remotely 'fascistic'.Several months ago, Ross published a book, entitled Against the FascistCreep, in which he distorts my ideas yet again. Having seen a pdf of this text,I will now deal with some of the lies and insinuations that appear in relationto me personally:1. Ross claims that I served an eighteen-month prison sentence for assaultin 1988, which is correct, but what he neglects to mention is that myself and10-15 others were attacked by violent 'anti-fascists' on Brighton seafrontduring the non-political skinhead gathering that has taken place there sincethe late-1960s. One individual, whom I did not know personally, given thatskinheads would travel there from all over the country, decided to approach aleft-wing bookstall at the town's annual Mayday gathering and complain thatthey were promoting the Irish Republican Army (IRA). As I watched the debatebecome increasingly heated, the stallholders and around 200 of their friendsassumed that we were fascists - despite the fact that some of us were wearingTrojan reggae shirts - and started throwing large stones from the beach and chasingus along Madeira Drive. There was some roadworks along the seafront at thetime, so in self-defence I tore out one of the metal poles and threw it at thecrowd of people who were attacking us and it struck what later turned out to bea Marxist lab technician on the top of the head. Consequently, I was arrestedby the police for Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) and Affray. The second charge is farmore serious, because it rests on the notion that people were actually fearingfor their lives, hence the harsh sentence that was delivered at Lewes CrownCourt nineteen months later. At the time, and despite the fact that I hadmerely defended myself from a violent attack during which myself and a mutualgroup of virtual strangers were outnumbered by almost fifteen to one, I was theRegional Organiser of a very effective political unit in East Sussex that wasselling over 30 newspapers door-to-door every night, so this was a veryconvenient way for the Establishment to remove me from the equation. In otherwords, I was framed.2. Ross says that I consequently spent a few 'uncomfortable years' in theInternational Third Position (ITP), but neglects to mention that I left indisgust after some of its members - most notably Fiore, Holland and Todd -began promoting fascist ideas. That, as two statements from the time attest,was the main reason I established the English Nationalist Movement (ENM) inSeptember 1992. Ross tells us the ENM was short-lived, although the fact thatit lasted until the end of the millennium possibly indicates that it wasn't tooshort-lived by political standards and, besides, we ourselves decided to changethe name to the National Revolutionary Faction (NRF).3. Ross says that Richard Hunt supported 'blood and soil', which is anotherdownright lie. Richard was always conscious of the fact that his associationwith the ENM might cause others to assume that he also supported racialseparatism and this is why he openly rejected it in the pages of AlternativeGreen. His own artwork even depicts love between people of different races andhe rejected separatism time and time again in the pages of the magazine itself.In Issue 14, for example, published in the Spring of 1996, Richard's headlinewas 'Loyalty to Place, Not to Race'. On Page 10 of the same publication, heclaims that racial separatism is disastrous for multi-racial societies and mustbe stopped.4. Ross claims I am promoting a 'third-position anarchism' when, in actualfact, one of my more well-known essays is called 'Transcending the Beyond: FromThird Position to National-Anarchism' and makes an important distinctionbetween the two.5. Ross tells us that I 'continue to see the individual locked in aDarwinian struggle against multicultural society'. Rather curious, given that Ihave always rejected the theory of evolution and also have no objection topeople living in multi-racial societies at all. So long as they respect theright of others to live in a peaceful and non-coercive manner.6. The one article by me that Ross cites in his bibliography is 'The CaseFor National-Anarchist Entryism', which, again, is designed to imply that I amon a mission to infiltrate Anarchism and worm my way into certain forms ofmusic.Finally, individuals like Ross are not interested in the truth and we shouldnot be deceived into thinking that he has simply got his facts wrong, the manhas an agenda and that involves smearing us by any means necessary.Antifa and ISIS Same, but differentby Welf HerfurthWhen one travels there is a lot of time spent thinking while on long transits between cities and places. Personal things and also the odd political thought. And while I was on a bus traveling in Argentina, I saw a news clip about ISIS, who are currently marauding through the Middle East. Somehow their actions and belief system looked familiar. And then it came to me; they are just like the Anti-Fascist groups, also known as Antifa, that terrorise everybody they believe is a fascist in the western world.Having had personal experience with these so called defenders of democracy , it is actually amazing the extent to which the tactics, rhetoric and belief system of these two groups are identical. So let s have a closer look at these two groups and their actions.The ISIS fighters believe, like Antifa, that they have the moral high ground when it comes what is right and what is wrong. And whatever is not right in their eyes has to be fought and destroyed. While the ISIS believes in a rather obscure interpretation of the Koran, Antifa believes in a rather obscure interpretation of democracy. Both groups are righteous and fanatical in upholding what they think is right. And whatever doesn t fit in their dogmatic box has to be eliminated.ISIS fights a brutal war against the non-believers, beheading people by the hundreds, enslaving and selling women, and killing others by the thousands. We all saw the clips where they themselves celebrate and promote those kinds of activities. Slogans like Kill all infidels , Destroy Democracy , etc., are well known to be spread by them. All in the name of Allah and his prophets.Now Antifa might not kill people by the thousands, but I know many political activists that have been beaten and, yes, killed by Antifa activists. Even more notable are their threats, which are an indication of their fanaticism - threats of violence to, and the destruction of property of the people that they deem to be fascists. And all this they promote and celebrate in video clips that everybody can access on the web. Equally, you can have a look at the Antifa slogans like Death to Nazis , Smash Fascists , Destroy Racism , etc. While they are all only slogans, you might think, the truth is that they are not just slogans for Antifa activists but a call to action!Just recently I received a photo from a comrade that shows a mannequin's head that was covered in red paint and had my name on it, send by the Antifa in Sydney. While this is a juvenile, and I think rather funny thing for Antifa to have done, it also indicates what I might expect should I meet them in person; they want to inflict as much bodily harm on me as possible. What's more, activists around the world are threatened every day by Antifa with violence and death threats. And these are not just threats, because I know they are actually carried out all too regularly in reality.Just recently Antifa put up posters around the Sydney area which state that certain suburbs are Racist Free Zones , and that they are controlling the areas to make sure that this is so. One doesn t have to imagine what would happen if a so-called Nazi fell into their hands... This action of claiming areas and declaring them Antifa-controlled zones is nothing new; it has been happening all over Europe and America since the 1970 s. Now, taking a look at Islamic State and their fighters, one can see that they are doing exactly the same thing, just on a bigger scale and with more brutality. The ISIS controlled areas in the Middle East are spreading, and anything and everything that doesn t fit into their way of thinking is destroyed or killed. In principle, what ISIS and Antifa are promoting and practising is exactly the same! These are just two of the many similarities between the two groups. While the ISIS is a recent development, Antifa has been around for much longer. But both are intolerant and fanatical in their beliefs to a point where they do not hesitate to harm or even kill people, and destroy symbols and property that they deem to be against their faith. One might argue that ISIS is more dangerous and violent than Antifa; I argue that it not the scale that matters, but the thoughts and actions of these two groups.Now, I know that the Antifa activists who read this believe that they are doing the world a favour by fighting racism and Nazis; just as the ISIS fighters believe that they are doing the right thing. So I feel rather sorry for them, because they are slaves to their dogmatic thinking and are, in my opinion at least, nothing but a cult. They are both a brainwashed and righteous people who claim to be against something, and both are very willing to put their twisted thoughts into action.Think about it and act accordingly.I thinkthat personal experience, however small, is always a good start to change theworld around us. I was born in Southern Europe, in the Piedmont that was oncepart of Savoy, and which was still the land of Celts and Ligurians. The Romansmanaged to subdue the populations that lived in this region, but they could notcompletely change their character and attitude. The strong bond with the earthremained, although many centuries later they tried to destroy it with factoriesand industrialization. And above all with television and its surrogate model ofman: a consumer slave of progress and economic well-being, faithful toglobalization. But this vision has begun to take a downturn, it is in the eyesof everyone, otherwise we would not be here to talk about it. The tribal spiritthat keeps pulsing in our veins has arisen in some of us, perhaps still few,but the fact is important in itself. After spending several years around theworld first and then in the city, I felt the need to change direction. Or rather,to go home. Meanwhile, that house that once belonged to my ancestors had beensold, so we, me and my partner, had to look for another one that would suit us.We found it in the Piedmont Langhe, rooted in the history of the place and thesurrounding nature. The primary factor that made us decide in this sense was aslow but inexorable detachment from contemporary society: the way I have beenliving until then was not that of a real man, the real man is the one who wasasleep somewhere in the depths of consciousness. That is why the return tonature and its rhythms marked by the elements, from the cold of winter thattempers the soul to the summer heat that grows the fruits of our garden becomesa "rule." In the manner of ancient monastic orders, land and spirit,a social model that does not need anything else. Over the next 10 years theworld will have to face a number of overwhelming problems: overpopulation, lackof oil and raw materials, climate change, reduced food production, drainage ofdrinking water sources, unbridled globalization, colossal debt. the system ismost likely destined to collapse. So, we have to find solutions to survive. Themedia, the blind dogmatism of economists, an incompetent and destructivepolitical class focused on defending its privileges, a world based oncapitalism, serve only and exclusively to distract the public. But societieschange because new ideas appear. The two main trends of the Left (SocialDemocracy and Communism) and the two main trends of the Right (the one thatexcludes any state intervention in the economy and the one that sees it asnecessary to overcome the crisis) are culturally united by a positiveassessment of the system of industrial production. Yet, if we think of ourancestors there was a time when a different lifestyle was possible, a time whenman was part of nature: in the center was the earth.But how did we get to this point?The waron farmers started in England in the 1700s with the emancipation of enclosurelaws, which obliged to encircle open fields and common lands to allow theadoption of agricultural techniques aimed at increasing the agriculturalyields, in a word to "grow". Being good at nothing perceived as ananthropological impoverishment, along with the identification of the conceptsof "new" and "best", are the distinctive features of theperfect compulsive consumer that the growth economy needs. "Our countryjust buys... It's just a big market of neurotic people all the same, poor andrich, who buy, buy, know nothing, and then they throw away and then buy again.Money is something abstract and religious at the same time, an end, aninvestment: I have money, to buy stuff, how good I am, how my life has beensuccessful, this money must increase "(Goffredo Parise, 1974). All thishas to change: a system based on this kind of principle cannot last, and aboveall it cannot guarantee any prosperity or peace. We need to rethink a modelintegrated with the environment, a model that can meet the needs of thecommunity.The National-Anarchist community.The finalization of the economy to subsistence, the predominantly agriculturalconnotation of the economy, the persistence of craftsmanship and exchangesbased on gift and reciprocity, are the founding characteristics of thecommunities. The etymology is made up of two Latin words: the preposition cum, whichsupports the complement of companionship, and the name munus, whichmeans gift, not so much of things but of time. The economy of the gift does notexclude merchandise exchanges, but they have a scope which is limited to goodsthat are not self-produced and do not exchange in the form of a gift is derivedfrom the sale of surpluses. As a result, it does not turn around and does notneed much, so behavior patterns and lifestyles are characterized by sobriety.You do not buy more than you need and you do not waste anything, so that noneis missing the essential. The socio-environmental context of livelihoodeconomies is the country (the community) where limited groups of familiesderive most of their vital needs from agriculture in the surroundingcountryside and from the resources of the territory (wood, building material,spontaneous fruits). Economies which are therefore poor but not synonymous withmisery, as in the city. Engaging in industrialized countries to end the growtheconomy, rediscovering the importance of self-production for self-consumption,traditional agriculture, crafts, community relations, gift economy, sobriety,respect for the Earth, the symbiosis that binds humanity to chlorophyllicphotosynthesis through the breath, beauty, contemplation, and spirituality.This recovery of values and patterns of past behavior is a necessarycondition to reduce the ecological footprint of the human species and to allowmore equitable sharing of resources among peoples: only a decline can lead tothese assumptions and guarantee a more sustainable and therefore possiblefuture. We must abandon the pathetic attempts to rebuild the left (bankruptcy)because if the finalization is the growth this goal is surely best representedby the right. It must be understood that greater equality between humans canonly be achieved if one pursues greater equity in the relationship between thehuman species and the other living species. Only if you stop believing that theconstruction of a steel mill is a step forward because it raises the number ofoccupants, even if the air gets intoxicated, pollutes the water and increasesthe incidence of cancer diseases, even if it devastates the seafront and theforms of life that live in it, the surrounding farmland and the forms of lifethat populate them, with immature environmental failures. Modern capitalism,the most peculiar and harmful social structure of human history, identifiesprogress with the most rugged competition and rivalry; The social status withthe accumulation of wealth. This is the current picture that distinguishes us.Co-operation by virtue of competition, was the motto of pre-capitalistcommunities. In organic society, often illiterate or tribal, dominance wasvirtually absent. The principle of the irreducible minimum was almost the onlyaxis on which the community was founded: the right to live was not questionedwithin the community itself. Together with substantial equality, the art ofpersuasion, and the conception of diversity seen as complementarities, organicsocieties were also based on the usufruct: objects were not owned but were, onthe contrary, available to individuals and families of a certain community asneeded. In that time nature and society were one, a fade-in, intimatelyperceived as the sense of belonging and the sharing of ancestral costumes. Thisnature was by no means the devitalized entity of today, subject to technicalresearch and manipulation.It was instead made up of wild animals also organized along lines of kinshipsuch as human clans, living forests as places that can offer protection, cosmicforces such as winds, rains, sun and light. Nature permeated the community as aparental lineage that kept individuals and generations united. Mutual loyaltyas a bond of blood was the organic source of community continuity. It wasblood-related affiliation, determined by having both ancestors and descendantsin common, as to whether an individual could be accepted as part of a group,with whom to marry, what his responsibilities were. It was through thebiological reality of these blood constraints and genealogy that nature hadpenetrated into the fundamental institutions of tribal society. The lineagedefined the individual and the group, as well as the skin marks the limit thatseparates one person from the other. This does not mean denying anytechnological development: there is no purely technical progress and a societymust be able to refuse a "more advanced" technique if the socialconsequences or those of other type are negative. Technology is always theresult of a choice and therefore every new technological choice is to bescreened by society as a whole and not by the narrow economic or scientificelites of the community. One of the pillars on which the ecological superficialmovement is based is that the environmental crisis is a technical matter, thatcan be solved with further technological progress, without any change in thementality or economic system. Unlike deep ecology, it emphasizes value choicesand believes that the environmental crisis is produced by a rooted ideology ofconsumption and production. This type of ecology is for us a national anarchistsource of inspiration. As growth prospects, deep-seated partisans are notaiming at a bland reform of today's society, but to a radical downsizing of ourcivilization through responsible global ecopolitics. Ecology must bemetaphysical and not just scientific, it must be ecosophy. The solution isfirst and foremost political, and if you want to hope to overthrow currenttrends (Trump docet) you need a common front between those who fight for theindividual and those who fight against the system. Most institutions areanti-ecological agencies. The crisis of living conditions on Earth could helpus choose a new path with new criteria of progress, efficiency and rationalaction. Reform or Revolution? I propose a revolutionary transformationaccomplished through many small steps in a new and radically different direction.But revolutions do not start by themselves, let alone by entrenching ourselvesbehind a computer. We fight the war by shopping! We can boycott multinationalswho choose to annihilate us without buying their product, as well as we canmislead the political system by not voting. In the biological sphere, ifhumanity wants to avoid being replaced by a different species, the struggleagainst nature must end. In this way, thanks to an increasing sensitivity forecosystem relationships, humans can live by modest material means (where modestis not synonymous with poverty!) and achieve a greater goal. If we do not solvethe problem of the relationship between man and the ecosystem, we will neverget rid of the problems that afflict us. Everything is connected because we'reall linked, not just among humans, but among all species. So, once we begin tothink that we are not above nature, but we are part of it, we will begin tounderstand that our problems can be solved, which is not an isolated issue.It's all connected "(the video-documentary Racing Extinction shows it verywell). "We need to know better about man, the health that comes fromliving by nature, the harmony between Blood, Soil and Cosmos, the Reform of thePurpose of the Nation's Life, Knowledge and Life, the Law of Living,"Rudolf Steiner said in the years of Hitler's Germany. Without being intimidatedby the Nazi party, German organic farmers made a real campaign to bring WalterDarré and his department on their side inviting them to their farms. In 1940,he became convinced of the superiority of organic agriculture (organic-dynamic,or biodynamic). After Hess's defeat in Great Britain, Heydrich and Hitlerbanned the anthroposophic society: but part of the Nazi elite continued tosupport Steiner and the anthropophytes, including Darré, who criticizedHitler's military conduct by announcing the defeat of Germany by having "Betrayed the ideas of Blood and Soil." After the end of the war, thoseNazis sent their children to the Steinerian schools.The problemof oil and the response of substitute energies.Coal,natural gas, nuclear power, nuclear fusion are all temporary solutions andabove all damaging to the environment: each of these solutions presentsproblems that are difficult to solve. Nothing escapes entropy. There are morerealistic hopes focusing on renewable energies supplied by wind, water, plantsand sun:- Well-managed woods- Biofuels (beet, canola, sugar cane, etc.)- Solar power- Wind energy- Biomass- GeothermalIt isInteresting to note that, as in the Abu Dhabi emirate, the Masdar initiativeprovides for a total investment of $ 200 billion by 2020 in the production ofrenewable energies. In Europe there is Baltic One, a project linked to windfarms that is expected to feed more than 340,000 homes. But high technology isnot the only way to change things. The more traditional technologies are oftenmore likely to rehabilitate dying or damaged ecosystems, or to improve theiractivity. Livelihood farming based on permaculture and biodynamics requires lowwater, fertilizers and pesticides consumption. Permaculture, whose concept hasbeen popularized by agronomists such as David Holmgren and Bill Mollison, makesit possible to create an agricultural land that resembles the existing naturalrelationships between different plants, making them at the same time veryproductive. Mollison asserts without hesitation that "he sees no othersolution (political-economic) to the problems of mankind than the formation ofsmall responsible communities, committed to the application of permaculture andthe appropriate technologies. Days of centralized power are counted, and a newtribalization of society is an inevitable process." A project aimed atreducing inequalities among humans should presuppose the dismantling of harmfulindustries and the recovery of subsistence farming by selling surpluses withthe aim of achieving maximum self-sufficiency (based on horticulture,permaculture, biodynamic). After the collapse of the USSR, North Korea and Cubafound themselves without oil or agricultural aid. North Korea, with itscentralized and statist structure, has faced a famine that has caused millionsof deaths. Cuba, liberalizing agriculture, maximizing agricultural land (onroofs, palaces, parks, abandoned land, etc.) and using permaculture techniqueshas succeeded not only in allowing the population to survive, but also inincreasing the Production and quality of food. In the building, passive housesallow you to use the sun light and heat as it used to be in the traditionalway. These techniques had been abandoned due to cheap heating and airconditioning. Modern architecture has built difficult buildings to heat, cooland ventilate. Personally, I am convinced that the recovery of ancient andsolid homes, which have weathered the climate and the wars of men, are a goodstarting point for our self-reliant self-sufficiency. In the field of housingconstruction, where we have not settled in old farms, we can make our ownbio-building baggage. There are several solutions to build our own farmhouse atalmost zero impact, it's up to us to choose how to use our energies.Personally, I think it is very interesting to think of straw houses and rawland. The houses of this type are made by using 100% recyclable and in-housematerials, guaranteeing energy saving and exploiting the natural insulatingproperties of straw and wood. This makes life completely wholesome thanks tothe high breathability of the materials, the absence of stagnation of internalmoisture as well as no energy interference on people for the absence of ironand cement. Thermo-acoustic insulation, resistance to earthquakes and longevityare elements to take into account.We haveto change the mindset we got inculcated with: let's start with the concept ofefficiency.The ecology of a prairie, where many varieties of flowers and herbs maintain afertile and healthy soil, is not efficient: only one species grown in singlecrops is certainly efficient, but in an illusory way. In fact, it will deprivethe soil of its nutrients, ease the erosion and ultimately destroy this landfor a long time. Nature, on the other hand, is totally ineffective from thispoint of view, and it is vital for that! A very interesting example combiningnature and food needs in an inefficient way (but absolutely productive!) Is theso-called "Food Forest", also called forest garden, edible forest andvegetable garden. Food Forest is a multipurpose and multifunctional cultivationin which wood, fruit plants, medicinal herbs, vegetables and so on are locatedin synergy with spontaneous plants and animals. It can be done in a corner ofthe garden or in extents of very large terrain, you can also convert anexisting forest or orchard. Virtually it is a gardening or management techniqueof orchard / garden that simulates a forest ecosystem by cultivating on severallayers (herbaceous, shrubby and arboreal). The fruit trees are upstairs, whilebelow there are edible berry shrubs, perennial and annual plants. Together theycreate relationships to form an ecosystem that can produce high food productionwith less maintenance. It is said that in Italy a few centuries ago a squirrelcould move from Apulia to Aosta Valley without ever landing. Italy, if therewas no man, would be a forest and the more we want to get away from the forestsystem, the more we need to put energy into the system because nature does notreturn to its original form. That is why a Food Forest can be a great way toproduce food by using little energy. Another important point is enough:measuring one's life by quality rather than quantity standards, with regard torelationships rather than things, is one of the keys to happiness. To hell withthe Pil, isn't the Bhutan s system, which points to happiness as a well-beingindex of its inhabitants, much more reasonable? Imagination, rejection ofconstraints and dogmas complete the picture. We must return to live with moresimplicity and frugality, which is not synonymous with poverty and misery!Just have what you need and do notwant what you do not need. The indispensable elements for a successfulindependent community are seven:Water2. Feeding3. Health and Hygiene4. Energy5. Knowledge6. Defense7. Social LinkWater:Being close to a source of water (river, lake, etc.) is a good starting pointto establish a small community. There are several possibilities in the marketfor using it both as a source of energy and as an indispensable element oflife: we humans are made up of a large amount of water after all (the water contentgradually decreases by an average of 75% About 50% in old age)! So, we think ofa Phyto-purification plant that will provide purified water to recycle foragricultural purposes. The ideal solution is to have pure spring water, usesolar energy and recycle 90% of your wastes. They consume mostly organic foods,heat water through solar energy and use natural and biodegradable products toclean. A meeting place where you can approach sustainable lifestyles andconscious nutrition is an excellent starting point for getting to know thethinking model of a national anarchist community. Respect for the environment,nature, people and for all living things is at the center of our 'utopia'.Feeding:Proper nutrition is crucial. I personally adopted a vegan regime after havinghad a brief vegetarian transition. The motives are many, and not all,anthropocentrically healthy. But we'll talk about it later. Getting food is oneof the most felt needs: the goal is to produce as much as possible for ourneeds. Avoiding buying manipulated industrial food and full of preservatives isone of the first goals to keep in mind, consequently using seasonal vegetablesand fruits as much as possible at KM0 if we could not fully satisfy our needs.The biggest change we have to do is from consumption to food production, evenif on a small scale, in our gardens. If only 10% of us do it would suffice foreveryone. From here comes the futility of revolutionaries who do not have avegetable garden and who depend on the system they attack. There is no otherpath than that of cooperative productivity and community responsibility.Healthand hygiene are in step with each other and are a consequence of choosing howto nourish ourselves: great tips are in fact available to everyone in search ofthe word "hygiene" (sunbathing, therapeutic fasting, etc.). Cleaningis of course fundamental, but let's remember that if we opted for a vegan dietthe dirt we pick up in the garden and especially the one that gets stuck underour nails provides abundantly for our vitamin B12 intake. So, wash your hands,yes, but not in a compulsive way. Physical culture inevitably comes to the foreif we choose to take the path of life in nature: do not think about gym orfitness, in the country physical activity goes through a real body work only bycultivating a vegetable garden, deforesting or keep a forest clean, take careof animals and your own home with ordinary and extraordinary maintenance.Closely related to these fundamental features is spirituality: without asincere return to the balance of our mind and spirit we will not go far.Contact with nature is a master and is the foundation on which to lay thecornerstone of our community.Energy:Coming to energy, a small corner of paradise completely self-sufficient fromthe energetic and economic point of view, built directly by those who live init is the dream of many of us. To accomplish this, it is not enough to imagineit, but a lot of knowledge is needed. First of all, what are we talking aboutexactly? Energy? Electricity? Heating? Or anything else? Before answering thesequestions, we need to be sure of which lifestyle and level of comfort we wantto achieve or whom we want to satisfy. If our home is in a very hot area(Mediterranean, for example) our problem will be to protect us from heat. If wehave chosen a temperate or colder area (mountain or hill, for example: and thisis my case!) We will have to think about how to warm it up in the winter. It isclear that the first choice has its advantages, especially of economic order.After evaluating several options, we have now chosen a heating system based ona wood boiler: living near a very woody forest and being a short distance awayfrom a decentralized country where there are still woodcutters, it seemed to bethe less expensive and more acceptable solution at the moment. We get part ofthe wood needs from the cleanliness of the property and part of it we buy fromthe co-inhabitants of the country, triggering and fuelling an economic engineof the indigenous social fabric in which we find ourselves. We also looked atthe possibility of a geothermal system, but at the moment it is still a projectin the drawer. It should be said that wherever there are economicpossibilities, it is one of the most intelligent systems to make themselvesself-sufficient: but what does it consist of? Geothermal energy is the energygenerated by geological sources of heat and can be considered a form ofalternative and renewable energy if evaluated in a short time. It is based onthe principles of geothermal energy, or on the exploitation of Earth's naturalheat (geothermal gradient) due to the thermal energy released by the naturalnuclear decay processes of radioactive elements such as uranium, thorium andpotassium, naturally contained within the Earth (core, cloak and earth crust).From the point of view of the generation of electricity, geothermal energyallows the natural forces to extract a large amount of renewable and cleanenergy. An additional advantage is the possible recycling of wastes, thushelping us to save. Drilling is the greatest cost; In 2005, geothermal energycost between 50 and 150 euros per MWh, but it seems that this cost has droppedto 50-100 euros per MWh in 2010 and is expected to fall to 40-80 euros per MWhin 2020. In relation to the generation of thermal energy geothermal (lowenthalpy) has many advantages: economy, environment, security, availability andarchitecture. Alternatively, there are today several solutions related to windpower (produced by the wind) and solar energy. Depending on our geographicalpositioning and orientation, once again, we must make the right considerations.If we want to fully cover our energy production needs, we need 35 m2 of panels(example valid for a typical family home). However, the problem is the night:in the absence of sunlight, we will no longer have electricity. Considerationshould therefore be given to the use of expensive batteries, or the connectionto the power grid, thus frustrating our goals of full autonomy. A hybridsolution is expected to connect to the power grid, but backed by backupbatteries, to be used only in case of an emergency. Or we can re-evaluateGandhi and his rejection of electricity: "We will have nothing to do withthe shining splendor of crystals, and, like in the past, we will wicker withour cotton and we will use hand-made sub-cups like lamps. In this way, we willsave our eyes and our money and thus achieve self-government."Consequently, without necessarily becoming primitivists, we share Gandhi'scondemnation of the consumer society and exalt an ideal of frugality andvoluntary simplicity.Knowledge:knowledge is the neuralgic point for choosing to live independently and with alook at a sensible ecological society. And knowledge is translated with theterm culture: I mean not only a beautiful library, but a realisticpredisposition to learn everything that may be needed for life in line with ourprinciples. We do not only think about what we like, we reflect on what ourculture defines. The usefulness of this culture is not only that of a pastime,it must be preserved from destruction and convey it to future generations.Knowledge and wisdom will help both us and our extended community recognizewhat is really important. Their broadcasting brings us to the organization ofwhat we can call a community school, where energy is aimed at teaching youngpeople who will be the future of the community itself. Far from theIndoctrination of State Schools!Defense:A first approach is to wonder how to keep our community safe? And above all bywhat to defend it? It is evident that more than animals and natural events werefer to the threat of our fellow men, the greatest danger remains the man. Acompact community is the best possible defense. Being alone is still our weakpoint: that is why it is good to maintain good social relationships with theneighbors, not to let us be carried away by easy instrumentalizations, but tryto put to fruition our experience and that of those who preceded us. That iswhy in times of crisis like this, it is good not to isolate ourselvescompletely. Accepting the fact that having to defend ourselves is our own rightand a duty towards ourselves and our loved ones. Common members of thecommunity must be able to be prepared in the event of an external attack, so itis best to cultivate a good physical culture, practice self-defense withmartial arts and know how to juggle weapons (not just firearms). Knowledge ofthe territory is of course very important; hence excursions are suggested toeveryone. Likewise, an easily accessible community system (castles, farms,etc.) is a great deterrent towards potential aggressors.SocialLink: I deliberately left this point as the last because it allows us a seriesof reflections and a major development. "We cannot eradicate theindividual from the community, because, as the anthropologist Werner Schiffauerpoints out, "collective identity and individual identity are inextricablylinked." Raising and ethnic crucifixion expropriate individual identitiesfrom collective identity, causing a state of precariousness, highly stressful,in individuals. Such a situation raises irrational recovery, true or false, ofgroup membership in a process of frenetic ethnocultural self-reliance (think ofthe US or the former USSR, detested by decades of mass deportations and todayshaken by endemic inter-ethnic struggles). The overwhelming, incontrovertible,widespread return of a series of racial issues is undeniable, especially inlarge urban agglomerations; National-anarchist communities can be the positiveanswer to the problem. Tribal and ethnic understanding must not be a taboo, asit should not be a preconception. As we have already said elsewhere, thecommunity can be based on any principle of belonging (food choice, sexualorientation, religion, etc.), but in this context, I would like to focus onethnicity, obviously far from being labelled as racist. Ethnicity is a moreconcrete and less abstract concept than race. It is historical, dynamic,complex, rich: it encloses culture and nature, genetics and environment, mythsand destiny. Ethnicities are coached by common history and passions, ways to feeland see the world, affinity with blood and ties to your own land. Each andevery one belongs to an ethnic group and it belongs to us. There aremicro-ethnicities and macro- ethnicities, almost like a system of Chinese boxes(e.g. Tyrolean and German). Nature - understood in a much wider sense thanmerely biological - binds us from birth with wires that we can certainly break,but that we often contribute to reinforce. Man's propensity towards autosegregation, not imposed, but spontaneous, seems to be an anthropologicalconstant (see Racial Separatism on N-AM Manifesto). Man has, since itsinception, been a social being, in which sociality, however, is extrinsic tothe double compulsory binary of cohesion and exclusion: the search for a centerand a boundary that defends, imposing "limits", preventing Chaoticcontacts that generate anxiety, stress, conflict. These behaviors are theexpression at the human level of a trend pervading living nature in a globalway: we are talking about tension towards differentiation. In its cyclicalprocess, life creates a series of differences, aspires to give a specific formto both collective bodies and individuals: heterogeneity constitutes its law,while macrophysics predominates homogeneity. Just think of the incrediblerichness and variety of animal and plant species and the differences that weourselves can find not only in physical features but also in behaviors amongthe animals that are familiar to us. The living is characterized by beingindividualized: the difference between subjects and groups increases with theincrease in the level of complexity. Any organism, as long as it lives, winsthe forces of homogenization and levelling, resisting the "entropicfatality", that is to say those forces that dominate inert matter andwhich result in a loss of dynamical ordering factors proper to the system. Asphysicist and epistemologist Stéphane Lupasco wrote, biological death equals afall in the size of the physical, homogeneous, level systems. If one reflectson what is laid, it will be obvious to consider personality as the most complexand profound expression of this natural tendency to differentiation, whosepower is incontrovertible. When we speak of personality we refer, of course,both to the, most notorious, individual one and to that of the groups, thenuclei of subjects belonging to the same species, which join together,separating from their allies, and maintaining cohesion long enough in time. Theflocks of primates, or other zoological orders, reject outsiders, even theconspecific ones, and maintain a high degree of behavioral "conformism within the group: individuals who deviate too far from preconceived behavioralcharges, even in consequence of the after-effects of an illness, are violentlyassaulted by their former companions, as it has been observed by famousethologist Jane Goodall.group is compact against the outsider," says Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt. Withsuggestive words, Robert Ardrey reminded us that "as a member of a herd, aflock or a class or herd or noyau, the social animal belongs to a groupdifferentiated by all the other groups, and within it it conquers a Territoryor a social rank, or a place on which to perch or rest, recognized as its own,distinguishes it from all the other members of the group and thus obtains anidentity. " Differentiation always traces two levels, the individual andthe community, complementary to each other. Generally speaking the livings donot like to mix and, if they do, they follow the rules that nature has imposed.It is interesting to point out that even the results of studies of childpsychology and human ethology converge to outline a similar picture. It shouldbe stressed that the rejection and the sense of strangeness towards the other,which is unknown to us, are much more rooted towards individuals belonging toour own species rather than towards members of other species: the child is muchmore intimidated by the presence of foreign humans rather than of wild animals,albeit not well-known (in this sense, antispecism is absolutely consistent withhuman nature). Konrad Lorenz, in his main text of ethological philosophy, TheOther Side of the Mirror, wrote that "cultures that have reached a certaindegree of reciprocal differentiation behave in a manner similar to that ofdifferent animal species, but closely It is important to emphasize the closedegree of kinship, because it has never happened, as we know, that, due to adivergent evolution, two cultural groups have differed so ethologically andecologically from the point of view of to be able to live peacefully next toeach other in the same area, as they do, for example, different kinds of duckswith a total lack of relationships and without entering into mutualcompetition. " Two points must be highlighted at this point: geographicalproximity and partial similarity as essential factors of competition and clash.In particular, the tensions arise not because they are too different, butbecause they are still too similar, and thus deal with the same ecologicalniches. Adapting to a number of norms within the group, which inevitablyinvolves conformism, becomes a cementing and discriminating factor towards theoutside. The global village metaphor needs to be replaced with that of an ocean(nature) in which many boats sail. Meltin pot, says Eibl-Eibesfeldt forcefully,is antibiological, unworkable without strong coercion, operating only in atotalitarian context: nothing is more distant from the national-Anarchistvision. Therefore, all human cultures tend to separate themselves, isolatethemselves from one another, acting as if they were different biologicalspecies. We are certainly in the presence of a cultural development, but itsbases are biological, that is, the above-mentioned tendency to reject outsidersand to establish and defend their own specific identity. Different species areno longer interfacing, different communities no longer produce overlappingcultural heritage. If it is the break-up of something qualitatively"different" to form a specific ethnic identity, it seems illusory tobelieve that such a traumatic event can easily be forgotten and settled underthe reassurance of welfare: this can happen for a minority of people within thecommunity or, even more easily, if they are separated from it, but not for themajority, which will always remain sensitive to the "mythical"recall: the voice of heredity, a decisive imprinting. In theory, watering everycommunity identity would seem to be the best solution to overcome racial tension,as the causes of tensions will be lacking. Only individual identities,tolerable in an atomized society like ours, would remain. But we forget thatthe tendency to group, to self-assimilate, is not part of the past history ofwestern men or of the contemporary so-called "primitive" tribes only,but it belongs to the human being in his perennial integrity; it constitutes,in fact, an essential, non-accessory element that qualifies us.emergence of new clusters in cosmopolitan cities, as we have already mentioned,still proves it today! It reveals the existence of a complex series of biosociocultural events that contrast the "ideological" tendency,prevalent in mass societies, among which the internal contradictions of theglobal homologation process must be noted. Of course, speaking of identity mustnot lead to misunderstandings: we are far from considering this term as theexpression of a closed, static, fatalistic reality. We consider it in adynamic, open, interactive way: it is a perennial nucleus that is known to bean ever-new "form", adapted to changing times and externalconditions. We could call it a harmonious law that determines certainstructures or, if desired, certain proportions, but that can extrude itself ina thousand different ways, renewing itself. Different ethnicities, bothbiological and cultural, closely related and intertwined, have very differentconcepts and perceptions on basic, central elements of everyday life such asprivacy, interpersonal distances, environmental order, property, boundaries.Their symbolic universes, which go far beyond sociological analyzes, are verydifferent: an open or closed door, a look, a silence, a gesture, have notmutually overlapping meanings between different cultures, meaning the latterterm in an anthropological sense. We are, therefore, in the presence ofsemantics often lacking in mutual tonality, even though they are neighbouringethnicities. The role played by certain factors may be diametrically opposite.The creation of differentiated ethnic-cultural communities, separate nationalanarchist communities, should among other things allow people who live there tointeract, to know each other, to create ever-widespread ties, following theirown rhythms and customs, inverting the processes of mutual extradition sowidespread in mass civilization: the creation of micro-communities would bevery profitable even in contexts free from ethnic tensions. In fact, theprocess of progressive loosening of interpersonal bonds is a tremendousproblem, which makes the megalopoles unobtrusive, leading to the mechanizationof social relationships and hence to an increase of violence typical of thoseenvironments which are populated by anonymous subjects, disconnected from eachother and from the context.On thehistorical strength and disruptive power of the ethnic group, Michael Walzerhas written very lucid pages on "MicroMega" when he noticed thattribalism, or ethnicity, has been the protagonist of recent history, havinglargely fed antitotalitarian and anti-communist fight. "If peoples areadmitted to politics, they will come to you by marching for tribes, bringingwith them their languages, their historical memories, their beliefs, andloyalty. Tribalism indicates the attachment of individuals and groups to theirown history, culture and Identity and attachment is a permanent feature ofsocial life. " This leads to a challenge with uncertain outcome, withwhich we have to measure ourselves in a proactive way; which means to abstainfrom any purely repressive, sterile hypothesis, but adopt the perspective of aglobal integration of human complexity in an order of things that stimulatesand assists the personal and collective growth. To live between differentpeople, respecting each other and maintaining our identities is possible; Butit needs a general framework in which to integrate, regulate and harmonizemigratory flows, without forgetting that the return to a libertarian andanarchist conception of politics could offer a unifying point that would createthe conditions for a fair coexistence between multiplicities linked to onesuperior symbolic unit. The freedom to remain what we are and at the same timeto live with others while maintaining the inevitable tensions at physiologicallevels is an ambitious but concrete goal: to inherit and transmit. In somecases, all this can be frayed, paired, and so we talk about sleepingethnicities; In other cases, it is very alive. In synthetic terms, AnthonySmith's definition of those ethnic groups, that keep on being active on thehistory scene, is based on five points:1. Owning specific origins2. Having knowledge of your past3. believing in one's own destiny4. Having a specific collective culture5. Sharing a singular community solidarity.Collaborationwith other people in the community is therefore fundamental, in those still"conscious" it is innate. As it is the individual experience of itsmembers, it would be impossible to get to be experts in everything, better tospecialize in a branch and ask for mutual assistance in other fields. The ideaof Otto Strasser makes conveys the idea perfectly: Volk, the people who formthe community, must be based on a peasant middle class capable of expressingevery other social and intellectual activity: worker-peasant, intellectual-peasant,soldier- farmer. Personally, I am fascinated by medieval monastic-chivalrouscommunities, I believe that the normalization of the planet must be fought bysmall and self-centered communities spiritually and economically, stronglycohesive with common goals. A society without roots and without spiritualitycannot withstand long, it is an absolute priority to focus on alternativehousing systems. It is not just about changing our way of housing but also ofliving: improving social relationships, producing goods in the respect of theenvironment, and avoid pursuing the sole purpose of profit. The benefits arenumerous: sustainability from the point of view of housing and food, ethicaland integrated jobs in the local socio-economic context, culturalsocio-economic activities of communities that bring added value to the qualityof life, new way of living and building and incentive for self-building. Untilnow, right-wing forces have embarked on non-scientific nationalism, or, to sayit better, on a sentimental patriotism and a jumble that dragged them to theworst imperialist aberrations; and all this gives rise to real nationalinterests. Left forces, blinded by class problems, have not studied nationalaffairs for a long time, and where they did, we think of Stalin, they have madeconfused, unrealistic and largely false attempts (Francois Fontan, MovimentoAutnomista Occitano). National-Anarchism is the answer that combines ethologyand ecology, nation and society.does this reflection relate to the ecological environment?I agreewith Murray Bookchin when he says that most of our ecological problems havetheir roots in social problems and the current disunity between humanity andnature can be traced essentially to social conflicts. I do not think there canbe balance between humanity and nature unless there is a new equilibrium withinsociety. It is necessary to honestly address the fact that if we do nottransform society in a libertarian sense, the attitudes and institutions thatmake us mad at the ecological disaster will continue to operate despite all theefforts that can be devoted to reform the dominant social system. Theecological implications of these systems are even more important than theireconomic determinations, as they involve the destruction of ecological values such as complementarity, mutual support, sense of limitation, a deep sense ofcommunity and an organic conception based on unity in diversity. These values and institutions in which they are embodied are now replaced by competition,selfishness, unlimited growth, anxiety, and purely instrumental rationality, inother words by the belief that reason is nothing more than an"instrument , a "dexterity" in adapting the means to the endsand not a character inherent in an orderly and understandable reality. Thisvast array of "modern" categories, which plays an alienating role inboth our human interrelations and in our collective relationship with nature,finds its most poignant expression in capitalism - both Western privatecapitalism and Eastern bureaucratic capitalism - that is, in a system of"grow-or-die" (i.e. endless capital accumulation as a function ofsurvival in a competitive market), which threatens to destroy the wholebiosphere unless it is replaced by a new radically different social setting.Such social transformation does not simply imply the establishment of neweconomic relations related to ownership or control of property. It involves theacquisition of a new anti-authoritarian sensitivity, the development of newtechnologies that harmonize our relationship with nature and not the other wayaround. If the ecological movement retreated from the social arena, seeking a"healthy" private life, or, if naively, it turned to pure electoralpractice in search of influence and power, the loss for all of us would beirreparable. We have seen the so-called "green" Europeans makingcontinuous compromises with the dominant social system in order to acquire"power" with the only result of being progressively absorbed by thesame power they sought to transform. Ecological thinking can now provide themost relevant synthesis of ideas that has been seen after the Enlightenment. Itcan open prospects for a practice that can really change the whole sociallandscape of our time. It is urgent and of vital importance not to allow anecological way of thinking and the resulting movement to end with degeneratinginto new forms of state-politics and partisan tournaments on the one hand and /or in mystical and spiritualistic ways carriers of quietism and socialpassivity, on the other. There is a way, which is neither the one ofconventional policy - that is, state politics - nor that of mystic quietism: itis the direct policy, the "basic" policy, founded on communitymobilization and municipal federalism, a federalism that can put in jeopardythe centralization of statalism and the capitalist concentration that marks ourage in a nefarious way. The truth has never been simple, one-dimensional. It isoften a thin red thread, so to speak, that links respect for the environment,human and animal differences, ethical, political, and reasoning. Capitalism hasseparated itself from the human race as brutally and cruelly as it hasseparated society from nature. That nature too is a victim of this competitive,accumulative and expansive social fury should be obvious, unless there is astrong tendency to trace the origins of it to technology and industry as such.Many associate this change to technology. But very few reflect on how deep technologyis transforming the world, the objective and factual reality of people, in theguise of consumers, citizens and voters. On the speed of flight and willpowerof technology and its continuous evolution, numerous books have been written inrecent years that propose new conceptual and cognitive tools to betterunderstand technology and / or suggest a critical reflection useful for adifferent and more aware use of technology and to better understand its effectson the future evolution of mankind. That modern technology exalts certainfundamental economic factors, namely development as a rule of life in acompetitive economy and the commodification of mankind and nature, is a clearfact. But technology and industry as such do not transform any ecosystem,especially soil, watercourse, and even the oceans and the air into a mereexploitation. They do not monetize or give a price to anything that can beexploited in the competitive struggle for survival and development. Talkingabout "growth limits" in a capitalist capital market does not makeany sense, as it makes no sense to talk of the limits of war in a war society.The moral scruples which today give voice to so many wise environmentalists areso naive as multinationals are foolish. Capitalism cannot be"persuaded" to put a brake on its development, just as one cannot"persuade" a human being to stop breathing. Attempts to realize a"green" or "ecological" capitalism are condemned to failurebecause of the very nature of the system, which is a system of continuousgrowth. With globalization, there is even the mutation of the Homo oeconomicusin Homo miserabilis, the destitute man: growth and development make"poisoned poors" out of all individuals, says Serge Latouche. Infact, the most fundamental concepts of ecology, such as attention to balance,harmonious development towards greater differentiation, and ultimatelyevolution towards greater subjectivity and awareness, are radically opposed toan economy that homogenizes cities, nature and individual, and that pusheshumans against each other and against nature, with a ferocity that willeventually destroy the planet. For generations left thinkers have preachedabout the "intrinsic limits" of the capitalist system, the"internal" mechanisms that would inevitably lead to self-destruction.Of course, capitalism completely embodies the Bakuninian concept of"evil," without being "socially necessary". Capitalismderives its strength not only from its ability to produce and consume, but alsofrom deceiving individuals and manipulating the well-founded criticisms thathave been levelled at it. After the capitalist system, there are no other"turning points" in history. It marks the end of the path of a longsocial development in which good has been permeated by evil and irrationalityhas prevailed over rationality. For society and the natural world, in fact,capitalism is a point of absolute negativity. It cannot be improved,reconstructed or renewed, simply adding a fashionable prefix("eco-capitalism") to the end. The only possible alternative is todestroy it because it embodies all the diseases of society that have afflicted"civilization" and polluted all its conquests.defense of the landscape against rationalistic deformation must be radical:said with Tuscan anarchist Mino Maccari, "the city of art is the city ofthe country", the countryside is in fact artistic without monuments, it isa work of art, a piece. Let us be inspired by nature and its laws. Agriculturalpractice should not be seen solely as a set of techniques with a productiongoal, but it should take into consideration the whole environment in which itis inscribed, with a real sense of ecology. It must be a regenerating force.Environmentalism as a movement is fortunately in crisis: its adherence tosuperficial ecology that does not question the fundamentals of our society, butbelieves that simple adjustments must be made to it, has failed. Environmentalmovements did not succeed in their relations with state power. They have soldwhole forests in exchange for some symbolic stock, immense wilderness inexchange for some national parks and large portions of coastal swamps in returnfor a few hectares of intact beach. I find that the answer to the presentplanet's death must necessarily go through deep ecology (Arne Naess'definition), which always claims that it is necessary to rethink the evolutionof society, which does not necessarily have to develop. Indeed, it must find amodus vivendi with the nature of the holistic type, of interaction and respect.Deep ecology therefore raises development as a necessity, in favor of anothermodel of life, no longer anthropocentric. It is clear that nowadays the onlyprophetic model of ecology cannot be the superficial one, but the deep one,which can be integrated into certain aspects of the social one. Moreover,superficial ecology is an invention from whole cloth that has nothing to dowith the fathers of environmentalism, such as Thoreau, Emerson, Muir, Whitman,who are certainly more assimilable with the canons of profound ecology. It alsoappears clearly in the eyes of those who are attentive to the things of thisworld, that there is no other development other than the one currently inprogress. And sustainable development is a contradiction in terms: eitherchoose development or choose sustainability. Both do not live together. It isno wonder, therefore, that those who want to engage in the environmental fieldtoday do not delegate to associations that appear old in their structure,contradictory and delayed in time: choice is ours, absolutely ours and anyoneelse's.I wantto close my intervention by opening a parenthesis that I consider to be ofprimary importance for a sustainable future of our communities: the choice toconsciously feed, therefore the vegan one. The reasons are many, but I thinkit's possible to sum them up in three points.Health: Even before thelove for animals or the Earth, the reason why a person should become a vegan istheir health. Eliminating meat and dairy products means reducing the amount offat we take into our body, thus eliminating the major sources of occlusion ofthe arteries that lead to stroke and heart attacks, but also the main sourcesof obesity. According to the latest statistics, vegan people have a percentageof obesity ranging from 5 to 20% less than those who eat meat. In addition tothe scale, also the rest of the body benefits of this diet, like the enormousreduction in the risk of contracting type 2 diabetes. The vegan diet is acomplete nutrition: from protein to vitamins, it is all in nature, you justhave to know where to look. Legumes are rich in proteins, except those ofanimal origin which in fact do not serve the human body; without neglecting theeconomic aspect of the diet: the vegan diet is in fact extremely cheap.Cereals, legumes, and vegetables give the right nutrients to us humans (we arefrugivores) at a lower cost compared to animal foods. If we succeed inproducing part of our food we also have control over what we actually eat!Pollution due to farms:the damage caused is multiple and related to various issues. Waste of resources and inefficiency - The problem of livestock farming from anenvironmental point of view is that they consume much more calories fromvegetables than they produce in the form of meat, milk and eggs: as"machines" (because it is considered in herds) that convert vegetableproteins into animal proteins, are completely ineffective. As a result, muchmore resources are consumed to produce animal food than those needed to producevegetable food. This huge waste of resources is one of the least publicized,but the most devastating consequences of the much-decanted "LivestockRevolution". It is undeniable that this waste of resources causes enormousenvironmental impact on the planet.Soil degradation -Soil degradation is one of the most serious problems that modern agriculturefaces. While serving from 20 to 1000 years for the formation of one centimeterof ground, wind and water erode 1% of the planet's soil each year. It isgenerally not known how animal breeding is one of the factors that contributeto erosion. When a pasture is over-exploited, the livestock compacts the soilwith the hooves and rips the vegetation that holds the soil together, thuscausing erosion. Intensive farming, on the other hand, destroys the groundbecause the cultivation of feed grain, necessary to keep this industry,requires a lot of cultivable land. Consequently, the world's per capita arableland continues to decline steadily. An extreme example of soil degradation isthe phenomenon known as desertification. Agriculture can contribute todesertification either directly, through damaging agricultural practices suchas intensive cultivation, overfishing of pasture land, and endangered use ofwater, also indirectly, when land is deforested to create new cultivable landsor new pastures for livestock.Deforestation- In just ten years (from 1990 to 2000), the Brazilian Amazon has lost a forestarea equivalent to two times the size of Portugal: the vast majority of thisarea has become grazing for cattle, domestic consumption and forest productexports to Europe, Japan, USA. The annual rate of deforestation continued toincrease in the following years and in 2002 it increased by 40%. 10% of thedeforested area is used for the cultivation of soybeans (used as animal feed inintensive breeding), the rest is reserved for pasture; After a few years, thearea is facing an irreversible process of desertification, so it is necessaryto break down a new portion of forest, in a vision circle that degrades theenvironment more and more. Between 1997 and 2003, the volume of bovine exportsfrom Brazil increased by more than five times; 80% of this increase inproduction took place in the Amazon forest.Chemical Pollution - Humans have been farming for more than10,000 years, but over the last 50 years, growers have developed a heavydependence on synthetic chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Harvests actuallyabsorb only one-third to half of the nitrogen applied to the soil asfertilizer: unused chemicals contaminate soil and water. Given that, accordingto FAO statistics, half of cereals and 90% of soya produced in the world areused as animal feed and that these chemicals are mostly used in single cropsfor the production of animal feed, it is clear That the greatest responsibilityfor this enormous use of chemicals is in the practice of livestock farming. Ifland was used to produce food for direct human consumption, sustainably, usingrotational cultivation, much less chemicals would be needed.Energy use - Conversion from fodder cereals involvesa huge loss of energy, especially if cattle are used for conversion. Theaverage amount of fossil fuel required to produce 1 kcal of protein from meatis 25 kcal, or 11 times as much as that needed for wheat production, which isabout 2.2 kcal. The ratio is 57: 1 for lamb meat, 40: 1 for beef, 39: 1 foreggs, 14: 1 for milk and pork.Water Consumption - Water Consumption is one of the majorcauses of environmental impact of livestock farming. Agriculture, mostlydevoted to livestock and feed, consumes more water than any other activity inthe United States, and generally uses 70% of the total water used in the world.The water required to produce various types of vegetable food and forage variesfrom 500 to 2000 liters per kilo of harvested product. Livestock uses only 1.3%of total water used in agriculture; However, if the water required for grainand animal feed is also taken into consideration, the amount of water requiredis considerably higher. Despite the variability, both in the estimates of waterconsumption and in cultivation methods, there is unanimous and wide evidencethat leads to the unmistakable conclusion that the production of animal foodfor human consumption requires 3 to 50 times the amount of 'Water needed toproduce vegetable food.Waste Disposal- When animals are bred with traditional methods, their deerings are consideredto be of great use - a key element in rotating farming systems that produce awide variety of food and maintain healthy and fertile soil. However, as manyanimals are raised in a too small area, the surrounding environment cannotdispose of all the defects produced. This is what happens every day inintensive "groundless" breeding, so widespread in developed countriesand rapidly expanding in developing ones. Liquid and semi-liquid cuts oflivestock contain levels of phosphorus and nitrogen above the norm becauseanimals can absorb only a small portion of the amount of these substancespresent in their feed. When animal excretions filter through watercourses, theexcess nitrogen and phosphorus in them ruins the quality of water and damagesaquatic ecosystems and wetlands. Approximately 70-80% of the nitrogen suppliedto cattle, pigs and laying hens by feeding, and 60% of that given to"meat" chickens is eliminated in stools and urine and ends in divingcourses, water.Global warming andacid rain - Global warming is caused by energy consumption, given that inthe modern world, primary energy sources are high-carbon fuels which, ifburned, emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases. As noted above,livestock breeding is one of the major causes of increased fuel use. Butlivestock also emits greenhouse gases directly, as a by-product of digestion.Cattle emit a significant amount of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, in theair. Research in the United Kingdom indicates that fermentation in the stomachof cattle and sheep is responsible for 95% of methane produced by farms, whilethe remainder is caused by debris. The same study shows that one-third of thecountry's total nitrogen oxide emissions derive from animal leaching, while 39%of ammonia emissions are caused by breeding animals. In addition, the highammonia content of animal waste is one of the main causes of acid rain.3.Ethics: From theethical point of view, eliminating the whole of the flesh, on average, allowsyou to save life and combating the daily holocaust that causes theextermination of 64 billion animals each year to produce meat, eggs andcheeses.I think this analysis is enough torealize the seriousness of the problem.

TAGS:National Anarchist Movement 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

Hot Websites