Letter to the fellow national-anarchists in the National-Anarchist egroup

hi there everybody!

it was troy southgate who find me and my site www.nationale-anarchie.de. We were both happy to see national-anarchists in the other country!

I now subscribed to the national-anarchist egroup. I see that it's the very same kind of discussion on the same things as here in germany! It is not very easy for me to follow really your discussion and I won't really participate.

We have discussions both with (former) leftists and rightists. I met and keep on meeting (former) left wing anarchists, and on the other side, in april this year I had an event at the Nationaldemokratischer Hochschuldbund (the student organisation of the national-democratic party, NPD) on anarchy.

I keep telling my fellow anarchists and nationalists here about you, I give them your adress. It is very interesting for them, and it's good that we know that we are not alone. It's good to know of each other; we should keep contact as close as possible.

Let me just pick out a few points of the discussion at the moment in our forum:

I found that "nation" is much more connected to nation state of the bourgeois-capitalist kind. This is always the result when nationalists explain to open-minded non-nationalists or nation-skepticals the sense of nation and come into a discussion with them. The nation-skeptical anarchists are right, when they refuse the nation-state as human group! On the other side the nation-skeptical anarchists must see the national aspect of each anarchy or community that of course and in deed exists! The capitalist pseudo-humanitarian ideology ("we're all just humans") is a trap! Let's not be "good" (sheeps...)!

Let's build the real nation! The real nation is much more a question of feeling, of togetherness, of speaking the same language/dialect, of close economical relationship, of helping one another, of similar mentality and temper. So the nation has to be small and can not be as big as the bourgeois nation state which was/is imperialist first towards the ethnic groups on the ground where it becomes strong, than towards other people, even on other continents. Nation state and globalisme are only two different manifestation of one thing. First the capitalist class constructed a state, enslaved all other real nations, gave it the name of a nation out of which the most aggressive bourgeois came, eliminated toll etc. Capitalisme exploited the national feelings of the real nations (wales, occitany, saxony for instance) and focussed them on the new pseudo nation (great britain, france, germany). Then - capital is accumulating - these nation states became too small: the beginning of globalisation. So critique of globalism must be critique of nation state, of bourgeois power. This is the lesson, former rightists in the national movement must learn, I find. Their anticapitalism is oftentimes just show.

So, what are the real nations, the real communities? This is a very difficult question, for 6000 years of civilisation have alienated mankind and its natural way of living. The way back to real community, to primal communisme or anarchy, is not a scientist problem, but comes out of our own ("egoist") will and in practice. This is the stirnerian way. This is where the most radical "individualism" goes together with "collectivism". Of course, we can be inspired by some still existing tribes living in anarchy that the white man hasn't killed yet.

What to do with all these people with different origins that came here by capitalist migrationism? I think, since we have lost anyway our real nations during the last 6000 years, we should build new nations, sometimes based on old nations still functioning more or less, that we can anyway rebuild quite easily, but sometimes really new ones. We should stop immediately all imigration but not expulse people living here as we can here from some rightist or national-socialists. Of course, we defend our european libertarian way and will not allow patriarchy from the deserts rule in europe (the dammage is already done...); we'll give an example of a life in freedom to all of them who grew up in patriarchy.

To find out our real community presupposes to find out our real selves. Stop oppression of the children! Let them be themselves! No torture in the families, no emotional deprivation! And let's try to find a way back to ourselves, to heal the emotional injuries. It's a long and hard way, but it is possible. For instance you have in London the London Association of Primal Psychotherapy whose director I know (he was my therapist way back in the early eighties). There are other post-freudian, humanist therapy groups as reichian or gestalt therapy which are opposed to normativism and can help us to find ourselves.

Community vs. society! Society is the result of classes, of power, of domination. The struggle between the social groups is politics. So fuck politics! Let's try to live ourselves, auto-determined, self-responsible and free!

I hail you, comrads!

Heil!

(which means nothings else than wellness and wholeness like "salut!" in french)

national-anarchist greetings!

Peter Toepfer

www.nationale-anarchie.de

peter-toepfer@nationale-anarchie.de

---------------------

> Peter,
>
> RE: "it was troy southgate who find me and my site
> www.nationale-anarchie.de. We were both happy to see national-anarchists
in
> the other country! I now subscribed to the national-anarchist egroup. I
see
> that it's the very same kind of discussion on the same things as here in
> germany! It is not very easy for me to follow really your discussion and I
> won't really participate."
>
> I'm very glad to hear that you have subscribed. However, this message came
> straight to me personally and not the NA list which surprises me. I have
> forwarded your message to the list, and will check whether you have
> subscribed properly.
>
> RE: "We have discussions both with (former) leftists and rightists. I met
> and keep on meeting (former) left wing anarchists, and on the other side,
> in april this year I had an event at the Nationaldemokratischer
> Hochschuldbund (the student organisation of the national-democratic party,
> NPD) on anarchy."
>
> Excellent. That is a very good development.

yeah, I was really surprised when they invited me! But they really seem to
understand! In fact, it's one guy called Arne Schimmer. He is a fan of ernst
juenger which wrote a novell "eumeswil" where he outs himself as
anarch(ist). From that point he came to understand that anarchy is a very
fine thing... Me, I have never read juenger; I tried though but it was no
fun for me, didn't understand anything.... not my kind....

>
> RE: "I keep telling my fellow anarchists and nationalists here about you,
I
> give them your adress. It is very interesting for them, and it's good that
> we know that we are not alone. It's good to know of each other; we should
> keep contact as close as possible."
>
> I agree. And hopefully next time you will be able to attend the Anarchist
> Heretics Fair in England. In three weeks we are having a meeting to decide
> how to take the agenda a step further by forming a front group called
> 'Beyond Left-Right' in London.

please keep me in the picture!

>
> RE: "I found that "nation" is much more connected to nation state of the
> bourgeois-capitalist kind. This is always the result when nationalists
> explain to open-minded non-nationalists or nation-skepticals the sense of
> nation and come into a discussion with them. The nation-skeptical
> anarchists are right, when they refuse the nation-state as human group! On
> the other side the nation-skeptical anarchists must see the national
aspect
> of each anarchy or community that of course and in deed exists! The
> capitalist pseudo-humanitarian ideology ("we're all just humans") is a
> trap! Let's not be "good" (sheeps...)! "
>
> I totally agree. National-Anarchism is not about nation-states at all, it
> is rooted in ethnicity and the organic community.

yeah, but what is "ethnicity and the organic community". This is a point
that you discussed already in that group, it seems to me. And this is
exactly the point where max stirner is getting very interesting. Because if
you say "is rooted in ethnicity and the organic community", there is
suddenly a kind of normativism or a kind of prescription in it. Who tells us
what "organic community" is? Stirner would say: "is rooted in our will..." -
to be a nation or something, or even: " is rooted in me..." - as a part of a
group of people whith whom I'd like to share something. The only thing that
counts is my feeling and my will to be or not to be with someone. That I
than choose perhaps rather europeans... - maybe! Maybe not! This is
autodetermination! I think I read the term "Egotarian" here in some
postings... Maybe it's this what I mean.

>
> RE: "Let's build the real nation! The real nation is much more a question
> of feeling, of togetherness, of speaking the same language/dialect, of
> close economical relationship, of helping one another, of similar
mentality and temper. So the nation has to be small and can not be as big as the
> bourgeois nation state which was/is imperialist first towards the ethnic
> groups on the ground where it becomes strong, than towards other people,
> even on other continents. Nation state and globalisme are only two
> different manifestation of one thing. First the capitalist class
> constructed a state, enslaved all other real nations, gave it the name of
a nation out of which the most aggressive bourgeois came, eliminated toll
> etc. Capitalisme exploited the national feelings of the real nations
> (wales, occitany, saxony for instance) and focussed them on the new pseudo
> nation (great britain, france, germany). Then - capital is accumulating -
> these nation states became too small: the beginning of globalisation. So
> critique of globalism must be critique of nation state, of bourgeois
power.
> This is the lesson, former rightists in the national movement must learn,
I find. Their anticapitalism is oftentimes just show."
>
> Agreed. The nation-states, of course, were only ever interested in profit
> and domination. When internationalism suited their Capitalistic RE:
> "motives they soon changed their approach.

Nation-states were instrument of the ruling class; THIS CLASS, that means
the most greedy, the strongest greedy people, were interested in profit; so
they had to dominate. Yes, internationalism was just the next step on one
way. So their internationalism was there right from the start: we can also
call it intertribalism. I believe the tribes are the real nations, the tribe
is what we feel and mean by saying "nation", I think. We must separate the
capitalist meaning of nation from our meaning.

>
> RE: "So, what are the real nations, the real communities? This is a very
> difficult question, for 6000 years of civilisation have alienated mankind
> and its natural way of living. The way back to real community, to primal
> communisme or anarchy, is not a scientist problem, but comes out of our
own
> ("egoist") will and in practice. This is the stirnerian way. This is where
> the most radical "individualism" goes together with "collectivism". Of
> course, we can be inspired by some still existing tribes living in anarchy
> that the white man hasn't killed yet."
>
> This is a great way of putting it. Luckily we can study existing tribal
> societies in the Third World. I am very interested in Stirner, although I
> have only read one or two small extracts.

there's just one book


> RE: "What to do with all these people with different origins that came
here by capitalist migrationism? I think, since we have lost anyway our real
> nations during the last 6000 years, we should build new nations, sometimes
> based on old nations still functioning more or less, that we can anyway
> rebuild quite easily, but sometimes really new ones. We should stop
> immediately all imigration but not expulse people living here as we can
> here from some rightist or national-socialists. Of course, we defend our
> european libertarian way and will not allow patriarchy from the deserts
> rule in europe (the dammage is already done...); we'll give an example of
a life in freedom to all of them who grew up in patriarchy."
>
> So do you support matriarchy?

yeah but that don't mean domination by women! That is just a word to
describe communities living in peace. They say matriarchy because in a
community with satisfied needs, there were the very first needs that were
satisfied, for BOTH girls & boys. So it is the mother who is in the center
of the kinship group. Her "power" is not forced but acknowledged by
everybody because of thankfulness and love. So it is not to be mixed up with
some feminism which just trys to imitate men and their kind of domination.

>
> RE: "To find out our real community presupposes to find out our real
> selves. Stop oppression of the children! Let them be themselves! No
torture in the families, no emotional deprivation! And let's try to find a way
back to ourselves, to heal the emotional injuries. It's a long and hard way,
but it is possible. For instance you have in London the London Association of
> Primal Psychotherapy whose director I know (he was my therapist way back
in the early eighties). There are other post-freudian, humanist therapy
groups as reichian or gestalt therapy which are opposed to normativism and can
> help us to find ourselves."
> I'm not too well versed in that kind of materiual, but I have read Jung
and agree with a lot of what he says. Also Otto Gross and his interesting
> thoughts on polygamy.

I have read about otto gross, he was an anarchist psychoanalist, very
interesting. the difference betwenn gross, wilhelm reich, arthur janov and
so on with c.g. jung is, that jung is still stuck in the verbal, in symbols
etc. while the others get through to the very biological, that means
existential core! Body, emotions etc. Let's say "primitivism"...

>
> RE: "Community vs. society! Society is the result of classes, of power, of
> domination. The struggle between the social groups is politics. So fuck
> politics! Let's try to live ourselves, auto-determined, self-responsible
> and free!"
>
> Absolutely! Individuals must realise their full potential in natural
> communities, not in the mass society in which identity and freedom are
> completely submerged.
>
> Best wishes,

you too!

>
> TROY.

peter
 

PS: Does anybody know something about national-anarchy in france / frankophone world? I once had a magazine where pagans, anarchists, free speech activists, free thinkers, revisionists etc. write together. I forgot the title of this magazine, the police took it away last house search / confiscation in my apartement. I think, one of these guys is ROGER DUN (pseudonym). Anything known about spanish national-anarchists? Does anybody know something about Nacional-Sindicalismo español or Frente Sindicalista de Liberacin Nacional? Italy?

> Hello,
>
> I've added you to my National-Anarchist group at eGroups, a free,
> easy-to-use email group service. As a member of this group, you
> may send messages to the entire group using just one email address:
> National-Anarchist@egroups.com. eGroups also makes it easy to
> store photos and files, coordinate events, and more.
>
> Here's a description of the group:
>
> A subversive forum established by the National Revolutionary Faction (NRF)
in which members can discuss National-Anarchism and figures such as Michael
Bakunin, Otto & Gregor Strasser, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Otto Paetel, Sergei
Nechayev, Ernst Junger, William Morris, Ernst Niekisch, Richard Hunt,
Francis Parker Yockey, Peter Kropotkin, Alexander Dugin, George Orwell,
Arthur Moeller van den Bruck, Carl Jung, Che Guevara, Walther Darre, Muammar
al-Qathafi, Corneliu Codreanu & Julius Evola. All roads leading
> to political and ideological synthesis begin here.
>
I don't really like to add some other personalities because I believe we
should do our own thing at first and not be occupied by the thoughts of
others. But nevertheless, why not name some that I appreciate, that helped
to go that way: wilhelm reich, max stirner, julien offray de la mettrie,
arthur janov, fritz perls, alexander sutherland neill. So you see: I come
more from the left side, from the radical individual liberation and nihilist
side.
 

>
> I disagree. In our case we need force as a means of crushing Capitalism,
> not in order to take over the State. This is why we are prepared to work
> with anyone to achieve this objective. Furthermore, we do not seek the
> support of the masses in any way. All we want is a revolutionary alliance
> with fellow-minded anti-Capitalists. We must unite to destroy the
> International Ruling Class through violence and subversion and then each
go our own separate ways.

I don't believe that such a alliance can work (at least not for a good
purpose). What I do believe, is, that many of leftists and rightists can
work very good and efficiently together and that they can build a new
movement. (Of course, many leftists and rightists will drop away on both
sides than, because they cannot give up their ideological armour.) These
guys won't never go seperate way again, then. Why should they? The problem,
to build this new movement, is to find an new an common language which won't
be too difficult. The alliance can only succesfuly work (and then it will!),
when both come really together. Maybe these seperate ways thing can work,
but I don't wish that. I believe that we (free people from the right and the
left side) have so much things in common that we can build this new
movement. One thing that seems to seperate us, is "nation". But once we
leave the nation state behind us, there's no problem left, because
nation-skeptical leftists admit quickly that there are human groups with own
language, customs etc. which is the nation; they don't deny that! They just
wanna have nothing to do with thes fucking bourgeois nation states which
abuse and exploit the real nations. The former rightists should dispens with
that nation term which is too bourgeois.

peter toepfer

> Dear Comrade,
> I saw your post on the National Anarchy Mailing
> List where you mentioned that you gave a presentation
> to The NPD regarding Anarchy & Nationalism!! I would
> like to hear more about that, and how the NPD members
> reacted to the National Anarchist ideas they heard?

I have taped the whole event, it will be published soon in the
nA-electro-magazine "auto: -chthon & -nom" (but only in german), can be
read than on www.nationale-anarchie.de If you wanna subscribe:
abo@nationale-anarchie.de As you can imagine, there was no room enough to
have a real and substantial discussion on the real things. But it was the
very first time (to my knowledge) that inside the NPD anarchy was subject,
the first time they innited an anarchist. Then, as you will know, there was
a real interest and a real tolerance and openess towards my ideas. That
means, though, that there is still a big distance to a real understanding
and more to accept and live freedom and responsibility without power or
rule.
The NPD newspaper "Deutsche Stimme" reported with a quite big article of the
event that was organized by the NHB (student org. of the NPD).
Meanwhile, I've learned that there are some other NPD members calling them
anarchists ("Anarchonationalisten"). During the demos organized by Horst
Mahler, I met an anarchist, but didn't see him again; much pressure on him
from his antinational pseudo-anarchist friends...
On may 27th there is the Day of the national Resistance in Passau (Germany)
where I will have national-anarchist stand.
One can also see me live via internet dance with other folk dancers (I think
it's www.npd.net). So you see: there's always a anarchist presence near the
NPD and the national resistance movement in germany.
Some national revolutionaries are interested in anarchy; they are quite
close to anarchy but have some inner resistance... There are some
ideological breaks in their minds. But only some...


> What are the Ideological Differences, if any, between
> the various German Nationalist Political
> Parties(NPD,DVU,REPS)? I know very little about this,
> and would appreciate it if you could tell me more on
> this subject! Thank You!

I don't believe that inside the DVU or the REPs there are people who would
be just interested in anarchy: these parties and their members are very
bourgeois! If ever, you find people close to anarchy in the NPD as I told
you above. But there are many unorganized people in the resistance movement,
former national revolutionaries, that are quite close. Of course there are
many differences in the thinking; let's name only one: they are still very
attached to the nation-state; it's hard for them to realize the real
communities and that the bourgois nation-state is not at all a nation. I
understand nation as the indians: sioux nation etc. The point where we can
come together again is the federalism: all the german nations should build a
nation-federation. So that is no compromise, this is a new thought on which
we can base the next step.
Of course, again they are to my opinion not enough nihilistic, although
their guru nietzsche was. I don't know why they adore him!
I have some good contacts into the non-national scene. I'm sure there will
be some nice and interesting evolutions soon...

Okay, Chris, I hope that was for the first time quite enough.

Best wishes
peter

 

>
> We also plan tpo establish a 'National-Bolshevik Circle' designed to
> research figures such as Niekisch, Junger, Evola, Dugin, Parvulesco and
> others. This will have links with a group in France called Network
> Synarchie.

You know (I told you alreay so), that I'm not really friends with the
national-bolsheviks and the personalities you mention. I'm much more on the
left side, more peacy, beat, hippie, punk... etc. ;-) These guys are to
macho for me. I don't like their pathetic and warrior way for instance. You
know, I'm more a very normal and ordinary man... But of course I will be
there to discuss with them and you and to see what are our common points.

 

> The most effective way of neutralising spies is to not have any secrets,
> anything to hide. This is a 100% effective defense, better than *any*
other
> strategy.

that's exactly it!

 

> Peter,
>
> RE: "we do volkstanz. How do you say in english? - folk dance? You know,
> just these old dances from the peasants. I dream of an pan-european
> folk-festival, but folkish, you know I mean, not this kind of "world
> music"..."
>
> Excellent! I like Folk music very much indeed. Over here in England the
> main form of Folk dancing is performed by groups of Morris Men. This is
> particularly prevalent in Springtime, when groups of dancers turn out in
> the villages and gather around the maypole.

yeah! you know I'm so happy to know that there is still that kind of culture
alive, lively, and that we practice it. It's quite unbelievable that this
culture is still existing, but it really exists!!! Great wonder! It is so
beautiful! To move our bodies, ourselves in such positive vibration (like
bob marley would say, but he himself did not know what it is!), full of
harmony and pride. To look into these shining eyes of the dancing people!
It's so wonderful! You and me, we know exactly what it's about, tribal (or
national) kind of life.

>
> I read about a dance group from Germany once. They sounded very
> interesting, but I forget their name. I think they were some kind of
> Industrial-Metal blend. There must have been about 15-20 members, too.
They
> were recently on tour in England, but unfortunately I missed them.

I don't see what band can it be. Never heard of a band like that. The only
group - industrial-wise - that comes to my mind is les tambour du bronx or
something like that from france, just "drums", old oil barrels. Really not
bad, this one, but not really folkish. (I think they call it proletarian
music.) So this german group is a kind of metal/folk cross over? Please tell
me their name if it comes back to you!

I also
> like German drinking songs, too, performed by those Bavarian bands.

I like that a lot, too. You know, these bavarians are real national
anarchists!!... It's really autochthonous & autonom!

Bye
peter

> I wouldn't dare enter a Bierzelt and tell the blokes they were anything
> like autonomous or anarchist. The best thing that could happen would be a
> rant about academics ("g'studierde") and their "darn foreign words" :)

yeah, fucking intellos!

hey c'mon matthias!... ;-)
I think this is now a matter of the old topic "anarchist - anarch". Okay,
those bavarians sure ain't anarchists in any THEORETICAL meaning, they sure
don't even know anything about bakunin and other holies, but the more you
have "anarchs" down there, selfish and stubborn people. Don't underestimate
that!
but by the way, do you know that popular joke, happening not really by
random in bavaria? Something like "There should be a bit of anarchy!"; the
other: "yes, but with a strong anarch!" Don't remember exactly what the
punch-line was....

>
> regards
> Matthias
 

bye
peter