Recently an anonymous Left wing commentator had the audacity to compare the attack on me to attacking Hitler before the NSDAP became popular.
In reply to the question “Why attack BANA when they have never attacked anyone?” a person wrote, “Neither had Hitler, when his crew was this small. Later, when it was big enough to go on the offensive, it was too late. There was a time when the entire Nazi party, all seven of them, could have been taken out in a single street fight. Instead, the very people who could have stopped them in their tracks, didn’t act until it was too late. Fifty million people died. What’s better, that seven die or fifty million?”
Needless to say, comparing me to Hitler is a bit melodramatic. However I think with all due modesty it can be shown without any room for doubt that I am clearly far less charismatic than Hitler. That I should die for having the beliefs that I do or dare to think a, if you can excuse my French, idee fatale, is suitably Communist and barbaric.
But what about comparing the hypothetical deaths of me and seven of my comrades that will save 50 million presumed innocents from one of the worlds greatest conflicts? That’s such a ludicrous comment I can chuckle at the thought that my death could be that meaningful. However don’t be fooled by ludicrous comments. The rationale is designed to provide just the little extra subconscious motivation for some nobody store clerk to do something that they will regret for the rest of their life.
I am flattered that I am assumed to be so dangerous that ten armed thugs feels sufficiently brave to try to kill an unarmed man.
However since they were unsuccessful last time and rumors are rife they will try again maybe for the next time I can suggest they should try with a mob numbering in the hundreds.
So I was thinking about this curious anti-Nazi morbidity and it reminded me of some strains of anti-Semitism. If you have been online long enough you’ll have seen the kook who blames the Jews for Facebook deleting their account, the Oil Rig oil spill, or Obama, etc. Anti-Semites can find a Jew “behind every woodpile” and anti-Nazis must have their “cornpone Nazi” to crucify on behalf of all the wrongs in the world. As you can probably expect neither type of personality creates a wholesome atmosphere. I hope everyone has a hard limit of about sixty seconds tolerating discussions of the ubiquitous but invisible Jew/Nazis from Planet 9 in control of the Rothschilds and racism and there is absolutely nothing anybody can do about it. It can be quite a buzz kill and as a community we actually have a lot of meaningful discussions that need to take place that has nothing to do with Jews or Nazis. Especially when the “idee fixe” for these topics create structurally identical solutions in the pogrom, an activity that has never solved anything and never will.
For example another “tolerance monger” wrote that really I have two futures ahead of me:
“The best, quickest, and most sure way to do this would be to stomp these assholes in public. Show our fellow workers which side we’re really on. The second best choice of action would be to corner Yeoman and his crew somewhere private, where we wont be interrupted, and make them an offer they can’t refuse…”
Since I have already had one of those happen I can’t pretend to be clueless as to what will happen if I’m not so lucky.
By this train of thought I can only surmise that Anti-Nazism is the new Anti-Semitism.
In light of last weekends events I have come to some remarkable conclusions in the last week including a profound appreciation of the Founding Fathers who enshrined in this land the allowance for people to express their views without fear and the role of impartial defenders of public safety. I certainly don’t want to live in a land ruled where the mere political views of the opposition, preference for economic theories, religion, or institutional racism against my or any people is suitable cause for pogroms.
Before the protest I joked that it was going to be 10 of us versus 10,000 communists and that they don’t stand a chance. It turned out to be 5 of us against 2,000 communists and true to part they turned out to give us better publicity for our cause than they could for their own. I still say they don’t stand a chance: not with a mob of hundreds, or thousands, or millions. We will prevail.
Please excuse my French earlier, it must be the concussion.
You have chosen a very difficult course of action – to behave with civilized dignity in the face of provocation that I would find intolerable.
Either way, you will be an asset to your cause. If you succeed, then the less civilized radicals will be able to salute you and say, “What great good fortune that such a man carried the day with calm dignity, and our coarse brutishness was not called for.” If you fail, then the less civilized will be able to point to you and say, “They crucified Yeoman – they will not spare us.”
The article is an example of the forced deepening of logic taking place among us. A good doctor, one that is more than just politically correct good, knows when to turn away from emotions. A doctor may come across a situation with a patient where there is tremendous emotions, danger, terror, risk. But still, at some point, the doctor must put all this aside and look logically at what is purely physically going on with the patient, viewing the patient, for the moment, as nothing but a machine. If the doctor can’t do this, then they are worthless as a doctor.
I don’t mean to compare Andrew Yeoman to anything as exalted as a doctor, although maybe he is, or maybe we all are to degrees, or maybe we all are being forced to be, to degrees. Nevertheless, it is getting obvious that extremist elements on the other side literally want to kill us, and are free to openly think about it, urge it, plan it out. The government will do little if anything to protect us. This is dangerous, frightening, terrifying. Yet in spite of our emotions of fear, we still, at times, can look purely logically at our situation and try to purely logically analyze, what is going on, just like analyzing, say a machine of social forces at work, and that analysis includes the ideas in people’s heads.
One last comment. The extremists on the other side can say, today, out in the open, the most violent threats against people on our side, for instance, in relation to the Germans and World War II. But they are silent (?blind) on making similar statements about the Bolshevist forces in the Russian revolution and the number of deaths that could be attributed to that. (For a statement about the number of deaths, without mentioning the Jewish issue, see, I am pretty sure, “Mao, the Untold Story,” by Jung Jang and Jon Halliday – maybe even on the back cover.) Our government is failing. It gives us no protection at all, but instead, vast opprobrium is visited on our heads for the slightest verbal pipsqueak of resistance, while people on the other side are allowed, out in the open, to directly urge killing us. There is nothing imaginary about this being very scary.
Andy…Andy…Andy….maybe if you shed the “anarchist” mask, because it really doesn’t describe your position well and it has made you a target by the actual anarchist collectives.
From what I gather, your position is a lot closer to that of Ian Stewart than Emma Goldman or Alexander Berkman.
You’re a skinhead, period, end of story.
Stop with the fancy political false labeling and insipid whining every time you get your butt kicked, because, getting your butt kicked is part of being a skinhead.
Suck it up, you made your own choice to be what you are, now deal with it like a man!
Andy,
you are a great and noble man, with courage and idealism in a fallen world.
I think the national anarchist program is a very good one, just don’t think dark age forces will give it or you a fair shake.
Do the Chinese government, Han Chinese give the people in Tibet a fair shake?
What’s fair about PC San Francisco?
Consider making the movie to Kalispel Montana, maybe making some minor changes in dress and what you call your group – “anarchist” brings to mind the unwashed, nihilistic mobs that assaulted you for regular Whites in Montana.
If you want to stay in the Bay Area and continue your NA activism – I suggest you find a way to arm yourself with a gun and be armed and ready to defend yourself and your people with 2nd amendment rights.
These other anarchists do not play or fight fair.
Sending you my complete 100% support.
[quote]But what about comparing the hypothetical deaths of me and seven of my comrades that will save 50 million presumed innocents from one of the worlds greatest conflicts?[/quote]
Considering communists killed far more “workers” than Nazis the same logic can easily be harnessed advocating removal of left wingers.
At the end of the day, all of this really means nothing unless you put your boots on the street and hand out some literature.
Brother, I suggest you take screen shots and any other records of threats to kill you, make copies give them to trusted friends and family, make a formal police report to the local authorities and the FBI, because the people that are threatening your life should fall under hate crime stipulations.
Then I would get your concealed carry permit and the next time something like this occurs by all means defend yourself.
The antis have a very Manichean view — EVERYBODY who is politically involved, and not on our side, is a GENOCIDAL NAZI. Even Republicans. Even Democrats.. Note the Daryl Jenkins attack on the Tea Party folks.
That’s a very good thing. It shows that the antis have a very unsophisticated worldview. They don’t even think through what their goals are; they just want their coke-rush of self-righteous violence.
The irony is that all their efforts will end up serving our ends. They actually are a force multiplier, FOR US! Yee ha!
GOP- Yes, Stalin was a horrid dictator and a stain in the history of humanity in many ways, but, he is not a representative nor a hero to the majority of the left.
I have no issue in denouncing him and to the face of misguided leftists who carry around his face, usually to incite a reaction.
The problem with Andy and his labels, tactics and actions, is that they denote irresponsibility in the guise of martyrdom and posturing.
Take a look at Andy’s cries for attention compared to Hunter’s actual reporting.
Hunter goes to a pro-immigration rally of hundreds of thousands, does he dress up like a wannabe “anarchist” in a black hoodie and try to storm them with 4 other people?
No, he behaves like an effective journalist and grown up.
He uses his camera to record and report, doesn’t try challenge thousands of people with insults, goes home and has actual footage to report on this blog.
Now, Hunter and I are on opposite sides of the political spectrum, but, I can at least respect his understanding of public conduct.
Andy, on the other hand, carries himself like another Bill White styled drama queen.
He stupidly charges his pathetically small numbers of comrades into thousands in a suicide action, gets his butt kicked, and is donned a hero by those of you who are easily impressed.
And may I drop this one more reminder to all of you, Bill White ALSO considered himself an ANARCHIST!
“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”…GEORGE SANTAYANA
@8
“Andy, on the other hand, carries himself like another Bill White styled drama queen.”
“And may I drop this one more reminder to all of you, Bill White ALSO considered himself an ANARCHIST!”
🙂 LOL.
“You’re a skinhead, period, end of story.”
An unproven assertion without evidence proving your claim is referred to as a “rhetorical fallacy.”
Spock- “Yes, Stalin was a horrid dictator and a stain in the history of humanity in many ways, but, he is not a representative nor a hero to the majority of the left.
I have no issue in denouncing him and to the face of misguided leftists who carry around his face, usually to incite a reaction.”
No, no, no. All you leftist scum are Stalins, Maos and Pol Pots just waiting the opportunity to pounce on humanity in the name of “the workers” and add to the mountains of dead that has been the left’s work on planet earth thus far. In order to save a future 200 million souls that your kind murdered in the very recent past acts of sanitation should be performed!
See how easy your own creed of “justifiable” violence can be turned around?
Andy- Okay, I’ll take your challenge!
Definition of “Anarchist” from Alexander Berkman’s ABC’s of Anarchism:
“Anarchism means that you should be free; that no one should enslave you, boss you, rob you, or impose upon you.
It means that you should be free to do the things you want to do; and that you should not be compelled to do what you don’t want to do.
It means that you should have a chance to choose the kind of a life you want to live, and live it without anybody interfering.
It means that the next fellow should have the same freedom as you, that every one should have the same rights and liberties.
***It means that all men are brothers, and that they should live like brothers, in peace and harmony.***
That is to say, that there should be no war, no violence used by one set of men against another, no monopoly and no poverty, no oppression, no taking advantage of your fellow-man.
***In short, Anarchism means a condition or society where all men and women are free, and where all enjoy equally the benefits of an ordered and sensible life.”***
Therefore, it is ANTI-Anarchist to condone borders, immigration laws and the nationalist styled race based fascism you stamp your little feet for attention over.
You, kid, are NOT an Anarchist!
Now, let’s take a look at the definition of skinhead from the Maryland State Skinheads website:
“WHERE WE STAND
We believe that there needs to be a positive scene for white youth in Maryland. One free from drugs, homosexuality, race mixing, anti-white propaganda, or any of the other Zionist controlled filth that is so prevalent in the media and most of today’s popular culture. By always striving to be a strong reliable organization we have been able to offer our members a firm sense of camaraderie and dependibility. Free from gossip and infighting, two problems which can cause more trouble than any informer or ZOG agent.
It is our desire to work with other pro-white groups. In doing so both organizations can develop a mutually beneficial relationship that will aid both groups in achieving their objectives.
In selecting other groups or organizations to work with we do not discriminate due to affiliation. That would be a hindrance to every one of us. We all may hold somewhat deferring views on a variety of matters, religion, history, how we should move forward as a race, etc. But the fact is that we must put such matters aside for now and work together for our common goal. A continued existence of our people and prosperous future for the white race.
GOALS
Our goals are simple- Bring a ***Nationalist unity*** to state of Maryland.To show white youth a better way of life and teach them a sense of racial awareness and pride. Also to do our utmost to educate and encourage as many people as possible to get involved in the white racialist movement so that we can have a better tomorrow.”
So, Andy, I would say you are the latter rather than the former of those two definitions.
Any honest person reading this would agree!
Stop playing games, you aren’t fooling anyone except for the few who easily conned by your antics.
Dear lord, nothing is more boring than listening to latte lefties blather on about “true anarchism” and the like. It’s virtually the same thing as religious types arguing over theology – just words with no application to the real world.
No wars! Brotherhood of man! Peace and harmony!
And everyone gets a pony!
VVD- LOL!!!! I hate to admit it, but I agree with you!!!
I personally don’t agree with physical violence against Andrew, but, I can make him suffer via true leftist rhetoric.
He himself mislabeled himself an “Anarchist”, therefore, he needs to take the rhetorical leftie blather!
First of all, Berkman’s definition is his own and not mine. I also believe that both he and Goldman’s ideas about anarchism are obsolete for today’s world just as Bakunin and Proudhon are obsolete. However as a free man I can choose to whom I offer my support and for what reasons. I have decided that materialist interpretations of history that Berkman’s anarcho-communism (e.g., class warfare) takes its cue from is less important to my anarchy than folkish kinship based on tribes. That is why I call myself a tribalist or Tribal Anarchist, ideas that would be as utterly foreign to Berkman and Goldman as they were foreign to America.
Just as Indian Nations who had no state yet clearly defined borders, so can I with my Tribal Land have boundaries demarcating areas of control or influence by the space we occupy. I concur with Lenin that the State “is a weapon” and until hegemony over it can be achieved should be used as disinterestedly as possible. I am on the record for being in favor of voter based initiatives and that anarchy does not mean chaos or “no rules.”
The anarchist movement does itself a great disservice when it favors destruction over violence. It’s a symptom of uncreative solutions to problems.
Although to use the State is less preferable than deputizing the citizenry to allow the nations warrior class to confirm immigration status, I feel that decentralizing political decision making away from the Federal overlords is a fantastic step in the right direction and closer to a direct democratic approach to the problem illegal immigrants have placed in all fifty American States.
Andrew:
So, if you succeed in abolishing the government in San Francisco and California you will be left part of a weak, hated, preyed upon minority: whites. How will you advance your nationalist goals at that point? I too don’t really see how they two conflicting ideological systems you want to mashup result in anything except a cacophany of contradictions.
“Nationalism”, whether White, Chinese, German Socialist, or American starts with a simple premise: we are a nation. We shall run our nation for our own good. We shall exclude those who are not of our nation. All forms of Nationalism start with this premise.
You bio indicates that FIRST you were an Anarchist and THEN you (somewhat) embraced Nationalism. Let me reverse my first question, where I assumed the “Anarchism first” position. Let’s say you implement the Nationalism part of your platform first. Do you see you nation (or tribe as you often refer to it) as being ethnically based?
I shall assume for the sake of disccusion you do. (And, it’s an important question you should answer, because if the answer is “no” they I’m really wondering what solidarity you have with most of us here).
So Yoeman’s AN revolution begins with the ejection (using kinder, gentler Anarchist methods!) of all of the non-Whites in the Bay Area. With that unpleasant task behind you, you now go about setting up a wonderful tribal utopia on the bay, complete with bike paths and hanging gardens on the Bay Bridge, renewable energy systems on the salt ponds and eagles nesting in the top 10 floors of Transamerican building converted to a giant birdhouse.
But all is not well. Down in San Jose the vatos don’t have it so good, Holmes. La Raza decides to make a run to the Anartopia of Frisco, in that raiding low-rider style they are so famous for …
Who ‘ya gonna call? Ghostbusters?? So, I guess you can have a Peoples Volunteer Anarchist Militia or something…
sounds kiinda Statist though.
I still don’t get the synthesis you are trying to pull off. Obviously neither do a few others here. Time for another article.
Note: I have been empowered to moderate comments and I will snip rude comments on my articles. I don’t care if you disagree with or dislike me, me and my ideas are completely available to criticize, but uncivil commentary is not acceptable on my watch. Thanks.
OK, I like Kievski’s point, the right should confuse and confound with misappropriate of beloved leftist labels whenever we feel like it.
Having said that, let me dive into Anonymous’s posting.
I am on the record for being in favor of voter based initiatives and that anarchy does not mean chaos or “no rules.”
Voter based = Democracy
No rules = Anarchy
You can’t smash these together. The society we live in has (nominally) voted for all our rules. Speed limits, prison sentences, fiat money, representatives in Congress….
So are we living in the “Anarchy” you propose? It’s “voter based” and it has “rules”. If you just disagree with some of the rules you are just another faction in the democracy. Tea Party faction objects to tax rules, La Raza faction objects to immigration rules, Dem faction objects to healthcare rules, etc.
LOL @ Veni Vidi Dixi!
Jackson,
Excellent commentary and I have ideas regarding the complex task of what we are doing but I have some simple solutions I hope to write about another time.
First regarding the nation. A nation is based upon a nationality, not a nation-state. The Kurds are a modern example of a nation without a nation-state. I believe that the nation-states of the diverse European and American peoples are designed to oppress their host population with providing as many luxuries (and consequences for not complying) as possible. As the white American people no longer have control of the government that is supposed to serve them white Americans are a nation without a nation-state. As I view the agenda of the nation-state as ulterior to the well being of my nationality I must act defensively against the the agenda of the State. Furthermore as their exists irreconcilable political differences within the nation I subdivide the nation that I am interested in into various Tribes based upon the personal relationships between various groups and their values.
Furthermore I don’t believe in ejecting people by race or religion from the region will ever be justifiable except in the case of violent criminals and gangs. For the defense of the community I advocate the Swiss model of national defense whereby all able bodied males are trained and ranked into a suitable (nonprofessional) organization for community public safety. Such a system could be based on an expanded version of existing institutions under revolutionary leadership but I think further elaborations on this train of thought really requires a separate article.
Spock, go spend the rest of the weekend with your favorite laxative.
Comparing this guy to Bill White is something that even the antifa retards would be embarrassed to try and get away with.
Jackson,
I believe you are not familiar with the anarchist movement and how it has come to pass in its various guises over time. Direct democracy is inherit to the anarchist movement and a reliance on an overly dictionary based critique of anarchy is uninformed. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_Spain for more information.
OK, sorry about my rude comment to Spock, Andrew. I respect your moderation and keeping it classy.
@Spock
“Yes, Stalin was a horrid dictator ”
And Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Svedlov were a horrid committee, implementing Red Terror before Stalin had consolidated personal power.
Stalin-as-scapegoat is an old leftist trick, designed to let the rest of the blood-stained Leninists off the hook.
Andrew, pardon me for bringing this up, but why is it that these topics always bring about more meaningless dialogue on what it means to be an ‘Anarchist,’ and how that term is contradictory to pro-White, Western civilization?
The only real issues and questions I see are:
Why are you only traveling with 5-10 people in a very hostile environment?
— You should always have at least 2 independent, “unattached” guys as backup, and filming any encounter with non-White crowds.
Where is the intelligence arm that supports any and all pro-White groups who decide to make themselves public?
— Technically, this is a little out of your realm, but it’s an area that is sorely lacking. They know who you are, where you live, when and where you network, etc. They move around freely with little worry about you knowing much about them, and what their next move is…couple this with the fact that they’re pulling 10-1 odds, and it’s no wonder why they think they’re untouchable. That combination will make any sissy feel like a Hulk.
I’m not asking these questions to belittle the efforts you’ve made; I’m asking because I see no progress attained when the same things are rehashed. You’re pro-White – it really doesn’t even matter what the fuck you wish to claim in addition to that.
TI
Good question
Many of the posts to this thread were completely inappropriate. If they are not brought to a halt, several of you will be banned.
The person posting some of the most egregious comments (#3,#9, #13, #15) is an anti-racist troll, associated with this blog:
http://ladylibertyslamp.wordpress.com/
This person is actively engaged in targeting White activists, so they have been banned. I have left the posts up, so that this post makes sense (I think it’s important to expose these machinations), but my fellow mods (including Andrew) are free to delete anything that distracts from productive and relevant discussion.
Lucien Rebatet, the french fascist, once said that anarchism and aristocratism were the only two choices left for those who wish to reject the “equalising shit”.
Deep-seated contradictions are inherent in any kind of anarchism. Absolute anarchy is an impossible thing. If the anarchist is somebody who doesnt want to either rule somebody or be ruled by somebody, he will only succeed as long as he stands just for himself. Once a larger responsibility is taken and communities are formed, they naturally divide into rulers and ruled. And even the most peacefull anarchist will find sooner or later, that he will not be left alone, there will always be somebody desiring to rule over him. There is no escape, the world is the will the power…
If democracy is defined as the tyranny of the mass over the individual, then anarchism stands opposed to democracy.
Andrew Yeoman is a dedicated, hard-working activist for his people. Whether or not you agree with National Anarchist ideology is largely irrelevant; his valuable contributions to our common Cause are commendable, and they easily exceed the contributions of most others here, including mine.
As all of you know, Andrew has spilled blood for our struggle within the last month. While attempting to peaceably exercise his right to free speech during a public and legal demonstration, he found himself on the receiving end of a mob assault, which was perpetrated by reds wielding mace and brass knuckles.
Andrew is out on the streets building a tribe and courageously working for the survival of our people with boots on the ground and fire in his belly; a man such as he has no obligation to cater to the whim of ignoble internet trolls who do nothing but split hairs on the internet, aligning themselves with anti-racists like “Spock” in order to denigrate a good man like Andrew, and I will not allow such people to cast aspersions on him.
I sent Andrew several invitations before he agreed to begin blogging here, and we are very happy to have him. I expect everyone to treat him with civility, and if you can’t control yourself, then you’re out of here.
Any comments posted to the blog should be on-topic and civil. If you want to discuss something off-topic, use the proper venue to start a relevant topic. We re-opened the OD forum so that readers can pursue the sort of off-topic banter that so often breaks out in the comments, without disrupting the flow of the blog, and we expect readers to use that forum for such discussions.
Every time Andrew posts something here, some of our readers feel compelled to attack his world-view, excoriating the notion of National Anarchism itself, usually from either a shallow rightist (“they’re filthy anarchists with black hoodies!) or leftist (“they’re not true anarchists!”) perspective. This is unacceptable and I am going to delete it in the future.
I’m sure Andrew has no problem explaining his positions to those who are truly interested, but most of you are just stirring the pot for amusement. If you truly wish to discuss the National Anarchist creed, start a thread on the forum and discuss it to your heart’s content.
If you really want to understand National Anarchism, I recommend starting with the infamous Red Book of Troy, as it’s called in Kurtagic’s novel, Mister. Its actual title is Tradition and Revolution and it’s available from Integral Tradition/Arktos Publishing. I also recommend the writings of Welf Herfurth. Welf has many informative essays online, as does Troy Southgate, whose excellent web site is a perfect place to start researching National Anarchism:
http://www.rosenoire.org/
Note: I am not a National Anarchist myself, but I have studied it with enthusiasm, and much of it resonates with me. Moreover, the National Anarchists I have come across are good, folkish men. Troy Southgate is a fine example.
I like the concept of National Anarchism… as opposed to “democracy”.
im a Canadian,new to ur website ive been in this movement for 25 years. Going out onto the street to be harrassed,beaten ,spat on and photographed for posterity is downright stupid and has always helped our enemies.Sure,you may gain 5 members but your well financed enemies will gain 500.Remember Robert Miles,revered White Leader who spoke out against this and Metzger,etc….How many times must we do the least intelligent things.Time and time again.Keep your heads down and ur mouths shut .Be invisible and effective.