Friday, March 19th, 2010

This is an article by some Australia First people commenting on a post by the Australian Nationalist Alternative. To understand the reply by Australia First, please read the article by Nationalist Alternative first (

Now, as a German, my criticism regarding the original article and the reply is that the neither of them actually quantify what the so-called ‘Nazis’ in today’s modern German nationalists movements are.

Wednesday, May 06th, 2009

Political principles which are founded only on a posture of character or a feeling – like “conservative” (i.e., being resistant to political change, especially if that change is of a fundamental nature) and “progressive” (an older term for being inclined towards a liberal or revolutionary political stance) are prone to lose their meaning over time if they are not linked to substantive principles (viz. fundamental principles of politics which do not change over time as objectives of policy). This loss of original meaning has also occurred with the terms “left” and “right” – which are no longer pure concepts, but now hopelessly conceptually skewed and mixed into their opposites, and therefore almost useless for purposes of clarification or analysis. The clear meaning that they once possessed – as they did, at their origin – has long since passed and this has had a negative impact on the understanding of contemporary politics and on what the way forward is for those who want a good society or who want to work towards such a society. However, the course of this progressive confusion of terms can be readily traced.

The origin of the terms (“left” and “right”) was in a specific political and historical context, and an examination of what they meant at their birth can provide us with both the type of character which tends to favour either one and – more importantly – the substantive content which they were meant to embody.

Monday, February 02nd, 2009

anti-wtoAs promised, this second part of the article will talk about more issues in relation to the struggle between Nationalism and globalization. My apologies for the long wait between the first and the second parts of this article. The second part will also attempt to address some comments that have been made about the first part of the article. Readers need to remember that this article is discussing the problem of globalization in relation to how it clashes with Nationalism. Too much talk about economics would lead to this article going on even longer than it already has and go onto never-ending tangents. The issue of globalization is very broad and this article tries to be metapolitical by giving a Nationalist perspective on the topic. The ideology of globalism itself, believes that people are “global citizens” who have no loyalty and cannot identify with any individual group which, is in total contrast to the ideology of Nationalism that believes in indentifying yourself with a specific nation, culture, language, heritage and way of life. When discussing Racial Nationalism (RN) in particular, Ian McKinney states that

‘RN has its foundation in biology and treats economics as an important, but secondary issue. The fact is that RN has no predefined economic philosophy. Economics are viewed primarily as to how the racial well-being of the people is affected. In short, RN rejects both the conservative model of unrestrained capitalism and the massive state-control of Marxism’. [1]


Wednesday, August 27th, 2008

The world of today is insurmountably different to the world of the past. At present people who have the technology can communicate with other people all around the globe making the issue of distance merely a physical obstacle. Vast multi-national companies use their influence to have poorer third-world governments allow them to set up factories in their countries with the promise of (cheap labour) jobs. Companies like Nike etc, create these 3rd World factory “sweat shops” for the reason that they don’t have to pay their workers as much as they would in more advanced Western nations that actually have more rights. In my opinion globalization seeks to destroy the heritage and cultures of ALL the different ethnic groups around the world. Globalization will cause us to mutate into a hodge-podge race of mongrels that wear Adidas clothing, listen to our iPods, watch MTV, eat McDonald’s and drink Starbucks coffee or Coca Cola. The language we will speak will be a bizarre mixture of Americanized English with “ghetto slang” and our writing will be dumbed-down to the level of a mobile text message (Wotz up m8? How r u?). Could this nightmare really happen? It could if we don’t try to fight back against globalization and the evils that it can introduce. It must be acknowledged that the danger of globalization doesn’t just face Nationalists who are of European decent. It affects Nationalists internationally, whether they are Asian, Arab, and African etc. Nationalism is in itself an international ideology, which can be used by ANY people to promote and defend its heritage, culture and way of life.

Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008

Report by somebody who was there with an intro by Welf Herfurth


Finally, here is a report about the National Anarchist Asia Tour 2008. The report was written by one of the participants, and it is purposely written as an eye witness account, without too many political statements. The aim of the report is to give a personal account of the trip.

One of the aims that we tried to achieve with this tour was to show the participants how the native people live. Two of the guys who came with us had never been in Asia and one can say that it was a real eye opener for them. Not only did we see the most amazing cultural sights and landscapes, but we mixed with the people as much as we could: we ate their local food, travelled in their buses and experienced the life they lead.

Tuesday, June 17th, 2008

This article will be examining the nationalist movement from the perspective of the New Right (and that is a metapolitical approach) and the means by which it promotes itself and the imagery and language it uses. As the imagery, language and propaganda used by a movement is the primary means by which it propagates itself, it is imperative that the manner in which any movement or ideology expresses itself can capably and efficiently invoke the desired response and create a perception of the movement in others which was initially intended. Difficulties arise because the means to achieve certain goals quite often contradict each other and there are many compromises which must be taken. For example, in order to create a message which will be reached and understood by a large number of people, a trade off often has to be made with the content of the message by omitting ideas or oversimplifying them. In order to target one particular demographic, issues may need to be addressed which may not be of as much concern to another demographic. Other conflicts can arise when there is a difference between what a particular movement wants to achieve, and with the main concerns of the general public. This often results in attempts to justify the movements aims by attempting to demonstrate how the movements primary concern tie in with the concerns of the general public. Nationalists for instance will argue that their particular style of nationalism will also result in certain economic benefits and will remove other economic and social pressures.

Thursday, May 08th, 2008

This article has been researched and compiled for the purposes of educating New Right and N-A activists in the use of humour as a political weapon. There is a paranoid feeling amongst many on the New Right that the mass media is our greatest enemy. Not so. This article looks at the ways in which activists can use and manipulate the media, rather than the other way around.

As an example: mention the 1932 opening of the Sydney Harbour Bridge to any older Australian, and the first image that will spring to their mind is a man on horseback, galloping forward to slash the ribbon with his sword, before the ‘official’ representative could get to it. The swordsman was a member of a political group called the New Guard. And while this stunt was not especially humorous, it was certainly eye-catching – it remains in the mass mind to this day. In that same city in 2007, the crew of television show The Chaser made world headlines when they infiltrated the APEC forum (one of them dressed as Osama bin Laden), making a complete mockery of the forum’s expensive security measures.

Monday, May 05th, 2008

By a comrade present

The global May Day events by workers the world over stand for the rights of the people to determine their own destiny as workers or students, it also stands against Corporations and Government standing over working families struggling to make a living. To demonstrate our support for a fair go for Australian workers, some local National-Anarchists decided to mobilise in the Melbourne CBD and join the planned march.