David Michael has alienated his fellow "national anarchists" at the yahoo group of that name. Here's a post by Troy Southgate, owner of the group and, according to Michael, a founder of National Anarchism. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/National-Anarchist/message/26659 >From arktos-anarch@h... Sun Nov 30 03:03:53 2003 Return-Path:
X-Sender: arktos-anarch@h... X-Apparently-To: National-Anarchist@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 82933 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2003 11:03:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (18.104.22.168) by m18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2003 11:03:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gr-outsmtp1.homechoice.co.uk) (22.214.171.124) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Nov 2003 11:03:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 13755 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2003 11:01:45 -0000 Received: from 81-1-114-73.homechoice.co.uk (HELO homechoice) (126.96.36.199) by 81-1-113-35.homechoice.co.uk with SMTP; 30 Nov 2003 11:01:45 -0000 Message-ID: <009b01c3b731$8702e420$49720151@homechoice> To: References: Subject: DAVID MICHAEL Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:02:53 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 188.8.131.52 From: "Troy Southgate" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=90303497 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Darksphere, The point is - and I've just read David's reply - we are simply not prepared to work with somebody who uses such abusive and patronising language towards people who share many of the same opinions. Just look at the language he used in his most recent message, about being 'a good boy' (as though he really is occupying the moral high ground, rather than accepting that he's the very individual who initiated all this nonsense in the first place). As for the fact that he tried to explain away this behaviour by suggesting that it was nothing more than a bad-tempered blip, that's a blatant lie. It went on far longer than one night and on more than one occasion. And FNF did not lie, either. David called him a liar after he misinterpreted some of the comments made on David's website. There is a vast difference between calculated deceit and simple misinterpretation. I've been involved in this game for eighteen years and have never seen anybody turn on his own kind in such a childish and unprovoked manner. Unless, of course, they are really out to create division and discord. FNF was a fervent supporter of David's work and went out of his way to help David on many occasions. In return, David called him a 'liar' and stated explicitly that FNF was 'no comrade' of his. If this is an example of David's willingness to create an 'alliance formation' then God help us. It's hardly surprising that FNF took him out of the webring, either. Furthermore, we are not prepared to accept David's 'olive branch' so he can wipe that plastic smile off his face and shove it up his own arse for all I care. It may as well be a poisoned chalice. And do people really believe that Michael Lujan was launching an 'attack' on David's website simply by purchasing a domain under the name of National-Anarchism? A name, remember, that we were using before anybody had even heard of David Michael. I think David's extensive list of N-A domains speaks for itself. He is a very frightened and determined man. Furthermore, whilst I have no evidence that David has deliberately set out to disrupt National-Anarchism, his actions resemble those of an agent-provocateur and I am banning him from this list before he causes any more trouble. In my opinion, and that of countless others in this forum, this action is well overdue. I don't like having to do this, but his presence is having a detrimental effect and I won't risk that for anyone. Now to deal with the ideological nature of David's 'national-anarchism'. As many people are aware, I absolutely detest the kind of dogmatism espoused by Marxists, Trotskyists and their pseudo-anarchist bedfellows. So therefore it is not my intention to debate the precise nature of Anarchism that should be applied in National-Anarchist communities at all, but to point out the simple fact that David's seven points (all of which I happen to agree with) do not even mention Anarchism. In other words, what makes David's 'national-anarchism' Anarchist in the first place? The answer is simple. Nothing. Contrary to what David says, it's not about 'true socialism' or 'true anarchism', it's about the absence of Anarchism altogether. David has not evolved towards Anarchist ideas in the way that the NRF was influenced by Richard Hunt and Alternative Green, he simply fell out with his former pals in the BNP and then began calling himself a 'National-Anarchist'. He's simply trying a different tactic. The fact that he now admits to being 'closely involved' with the WNP - which openly supports the police and the Establishment and which many people believe is a State operation to disrupt the equally reactionary BNP - also speaks for itself. Finally, David's remarks about us creating 'significant additional requirements' for National-Anarchism are also incorrect. There are thousands of anarchistic variants out there, but the fact that National-Anarchism came about was due to the racial separaist stance of its adherents. We have no problem with other forms of anarchism or other decentralists, we just want to stress that National-Anarchism is an essential racialist phenomenon. That's what makes it different. Anarchism sui generis, perhaps, but Anarchism all the same. Regards, TROY.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor