This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1. KK Warslut is racist, sexist and homophobic. He’s friends with Joel and Leigh of Wurm, an Australian metal band that’s on the Smashing Rainbows CD. The CD is a compilation dedicated to homophobia. Joel plays drums and has a Death’s Head tattoo on his arm. He once worked at the Northcote Antisocial Club in 2008, but lost his job because of his jacket that has an eagle clutching a swastika. He also threw two decapitated pigs’ heads into a childcare centre, a place where I worked. Now where’s that old Japanese proverb you posted once? If you are unsure of a man’s character, look at the company that he keeps.
   The following lyrics are from the song A Thousand Plagues on the album Defiance by Destroyer 666:

   Christians and Zionist Jews, Crescent Moon peasants,
   Marxist tyrants and childless hypocrites,
   Tell me where the truth lies,
   And I’ll tell you which lie is truth,
   Another fucking cliché to misconstrue!

   Men of usury, count your coin – you’d do better to count your days,
   Women of perjury – you’ll rue the night you gave yourself away,
   Narcotic child; come, you’ll see –
   I fear not for your soul has fled from thee.

   When I spoke to Leigh about Destroyer 666’s racist beliefs, he said that they were just hypocrites because they’re into drugs. Supposedly, Keith uses alcohol and cocaine. On the Nuclear War Now forum, there’s a discussion about Keith asking a member of Blasphemy (Can) the following question, ‘Why do you have a nigger in the band?’ The member of the band responded by breaking Keith’s nose. No-one has claimed that this story’s bullshit and one person who claims to represent Invictus Productions, a record label that sells music by Gospel of the Horns, says that he witnessed it happen.
   As you pointed out ages ago, if Destroyer 666 and other similar bands were open about their beliefs, they wouldn’t be able to move units.
   ‘Unleash the poodles!’ – Slackbastard

2. Nigel Brown lives in Europe because dangerous people in Australia would like to get their hands on him due to his involvement in drug dealing . Also funny that he’s singing white power tunes again after years of hanging out with Middle Eastern drug dealers .

3. Wow, Death/Black/Thrash Metal band is Anti-religious and misogynistic you say?
   How insightful Andy, you really have a knack for uncovering deep dark secrets.

   What’s next video games are violent? Muslims are misogynistic? (Oh wait there is no way you would say that about Muslims here, being very strongly pro Islam.)

   You’re saying that a band called Destroyer 666, with a lead singer called Warslut, are not misandrist (Lol, my spell checker doesn’t even recognise misandrist as a word, strange that…) teddy bears?

   Wow, Who would of thought? Thanks for clearing that up for me…

   Good to see another anarchist story that is Pro-religion from you mate… Anarchist are not what they used to be apparently…

   “As you pointed out ages ago, if Destroyer 666 and other similar bands were open about their beliefs, they wouldn’t be able to move units.” Lol, there called Destroyer 666 ffs… How much more open can you be?

   As a Swedish prosecutor pointed out this week its not hate speech if you hate everyone – (“Islamic State flag is legal in Sweden, prosecutor rules” – 16th Oct 2016)

4. @Destroyer 666: the best blackened glam metal band in the world:

   Heh. Cheers. I came across the story about K’s broken nose. V funny if true.

   @nigelbrownisajunkie:

   I did not know that.

   @Sossle:

   Briefly:

   D666 is more anti-Christian and anti-Jewish than anti-religious, though anti-Muslim has been thrown into the mix. Also White supremacist. And no, not all metalheads are meatheads.
   What I’m saying is what I’ve written. You’ve chosen not to address it, which is par for the course.
   The name ‘Destroyer 666’ tells you xacly nothing about the band’s history, perspectives, recordings, which is the territory I’ve covered. Thus the material ‘Destroyer 666: the best blackened glam metal band in the world’ refs to is something Keith would rather not be widely publicised, just as he seeks to downplay his participation in a neo-Nazi rekording projekt.

5. Sounds of Hate
   Tzvi Fleischer
   AIJAC Review
   August 2000

   … Record store owners and record companies are generally savvy enough to exclude overtly racist music from their shelves. However, there still exists a fuzzy borderline where some metal bands overlap and flirt with the skinhead scene, possibly serving as an entree for some individual into overt neo-Nazism.

   A good example is the Melbourne death metal band Destroyer 666. You can buy their music in record stores and there is nothing overtly racist about their lyrics. Boneheads regularly attend their appearances, though this may be beyond the control of the band, and the band’s management denies that they are Nazi or racist. Yet the band members clearly socialise with people on the bonehead scene and see nothing wrong with them or their music. In their acknowledgments on their albums, they specifically mention and thank Fortress and Spear of Longinus and British Nazi bands Squadron and Brutal Attack. One of the members of Destroyer 666 also made a mini-CD with members of Fortress and Brutal Attack in 1996. This was an overtly racist album available only through the usual sellers of racist CDs. Furthermore, when asked to name some Australian bonehead bands in an interview, the members of the Sydney nazi band Blood Oath named Destroyer 666 as an example of a band with an “Odinist/WP [White Power] following.” Furthermore, the band clearly has an affinity for Nazi symbolism, designating some of their gigs as “Holocaust nights” and terming one tour they made the “Genocidal Eastern Holo-coastal tour.” Another band which may fall into the same category is Melbourne’s Bestial Warlust, also cited by Blood Oath as a band with a bonehead following …

6. @Andy

   Considering that the very foundation and beginnings of Black Metal are from the Nordic countries where Christianity is by far the most dominant organised religion, it would stand to reason that being anti-religious in this context would mean being primarily being anti-Christian and by extension against all of the Abrahamic religions as a whole.

   The anti-religious overtones of Black Metal tend to stem from a longing by some for a more primal and pagan time of old. A time long before Christianity and other religions had attempted to mercilessly eliminate the followers of the old ways from history, through the widespread spilling of blood, burning and torture. In the Black Metal culture Christianity is seen as the main perpetrator of these acts and therefore the enemy of paganism and of free men. Many religious groups have throughout history persecuted and slaughtered those of what are called the pagan faiths or even persecuted the splinter groups of their own faiths. The amount of blood on the hands of the Abrahamic sects is rather stunning when looked at over the scope of history and from what I can see have behaved in ways that would even make the most despotic of white supremacist fascists look like a saint. Check the Holy Roman Empires persecution of pagans, the Spanish Inquisition, Saudi Arabia, ethnic and religious cleansing by IS, Sunni Vs Shia. Malleus Maleficarum. Do I need to go on and on and on?

   In a way Black metal is at heart based on an ideal that is purely anti-establishment. We are told as a whole to accept the order of the world and love everyone even when they clearly intend to steam roll over your rights or seek to undermine the foundations of your culture and traditions. Black metal generally seeks to violently reject these notions and furthermore present them as being primarily religious tools that have at heart been used to corrupted humanity and are being used to subvert people into controllable masses. Most people can see that organised religion is primarily about control of large populations, no matter the basis or belief system employed to enforce it. At heart its intent is of turning lions into sheep. Persecution of other religions or splinter sects is generally about maintaining existent power structures or establishing new ones within a religious order. Black metal always existed outside of mainstream culture and is pretty much anti-social in nature. It strives to exist without adhering to any authority whether imparted from government or religious sources.

   Most of what you have written in this article could actually be construed as an attack on the quasi-religious ideals associated with Black metal and even on anyone that is pagan or as far out as anyone that is anti establishment in thinking. It’s a sad fact that we live in an era where being proud to be white, means you’re a Nazi or a white supremacist, being proud to be male makes you a misogynist. And being proud of your culture and homeland makes you a bigot and racist. This article twists half truths to paint a picture that you are seeking to represent as the reality of things which is as you have said “par for the course” for this site. But in my opinion widely misses the mark that it aimed at and is primarily disinformation or propaganda.

   As this mentality that you’re a part of pedaling gains more momentum in our societies, it’s no surprise to see that many white males are more and more flocking to an ideal of a glorious masculine fiction where they’re actually able to be the hero of the story and not the villain that society continues to attempt to depict them as, to be able to stand as a proud warrior sword in hand and defend their homeland from vicious raiders and spend their lives seeking glory through acts of valour and bravery. The striving for the right to reject subjugation by king, religion or foreign conqueror. A fantasy that centres around the want they have to have a place in today’s modern society as a proud, strong male and not as a subjugant. This primal want materialises in the modern world as a stand against a system that seeks to make them nothing more than another cog in a giant machine. A system designed to beat them down, emasculate them and absorb them. It is not a concept founded in racism or misogyny but about being a proud and free individual. A right that we all should have no matter the race, sexuality, creed or gender. A right that really is worth fighting for. To be honest I do see many similarities in the way this site and anarchists operate that directly correlates with this Black metal ideal. Sadly anarchism seems more and more to be losing focus of what it actually stands for and is becoming a tool for some pretty strange concepts.

   This article like many of your others smells of a witch hunt mentality and draws on many rather biased or retracted sources. It adds up to being nothing more than a direct attack on anyone that doesn’t share your pro-feminist, pro-Islamic and anti-free speech rhetoric. And clearly puts on display your own intolerance, racism and prejudice for the ideals of others and their way of life, if you find those beliefs or ideals differ from your own or what you understand.

7. Considering that the very foundation and beginnings of Black Metal are from the Nordic countries where Christianity is by far the most dominant organised religion, it would stand to reason that being anti-religious in this context would mean being primarily being anti-Christian and by extension against all of the Abrahamic religions as a whole.

   Criticism of a majority religion is one thing, while the same criticisms directed at a minority religion are quite different. When the adherents of that religion are being persecuted (although it must be admitted that the persecution is as yet pretty light by Saudi Arabian standards), criticism of that religion will function to accentuate the persecution of its adherents unless strong countervailing factors are present (e.g. a strongly advanced commitment to unrestricted freedom of conscience).

   In a way Black metal is at heart based on an ideal that is purely anti-establishment.

   We’ll believe that, boyo, when we see Black metal bands fulminating against the ABCC, Victoria Police and the Border Force.

   Black metal generally seeks to violently reject these notions …

   Does it also seek to violently split infinitives?

   It’s a sad fact that we live in an era where being proud to be white, means you’re a Nazi or a white supremacist, being proud to be male makes you a misogynist. And being proud of your culture and homeland makes you a bigot and racist.

   It’s a sad fact that to be proud of a racist culture makes one a racist. It’s also a sad fact that to be proud of a misogynist definition of masculinity makes one a misogynist. If the cap fits, wear it.

   As this mentality that you’re a part of pedaling …

   The only people who do “pedaling” are American cyclists. Here, we do pedalling. Apart from spelling correctly, we ride on the correct side of the road. And people who sell things are doing peddling.

   … gains more momentum in our societies, it’s no surprise to see that many white males are more and more flocking to an ideal of a glorious masculine fiction where they’re actually able to be the hero of the story and not the villain that society continues to attempt to depict them as, to be able to stand as a proud warrior sword in hand and defend their homeland from vicious raiders and spend their lives seeking glory through acts of valour and bravery.

   Well, that’s one way of looking at it. To start with, I’m glad Sossle recognises it as fiction. On the other hand, I don’t think refugees or even people looking for decent paying jobs qualify as “vicious raiders” to be dealt with through swords and other Viking paraphernalia.

   The striving for the right to reject subjugation by king, religion or foreign conqueror. A fantasy that centres around the want they have to have a place in today’s modern society as a proud, strong male and not as a subjugant. This primal want materialises in the modern world as a stand against a system that seeks to make them nothing more than another cog in a giant machine. A system designed to beat them down, emasculate them and absorb them. It is not a concept founded in racism or misogyny but about being a proud and free individual.

   The extreme Right likes to talk about its members being proud males refusing subjugation for one reason only – they think they’re the ones who should be doing the subjugating. In their view, the freedom of the elite few is bought at the price of the subjugation of the many. Anarchists have a different perspective. We believe in co-operation, in a society where there are neither masters nor slaves, where men and women are equal, where “race” has been abolished and where people are free to wander across the spectrum of human sexuality (with consenting parties) if they so wish. B1 bombers will be smelted into ploughshares, though I’d be happy for blunt swords to be used in historical re-enactments for those who like that sort of thing. We’re prepared to use reasonable force in self defence and we know who our enemies are – and though they include some of the people Sossle would count as enemies, they also include most of those Sossle would count as friends.

8. “Criticism of a majority religion is one thing, while the same criticisms directed at a minority religion are quite different. When the adherents of that religion are being persecuted (although it must be admitted that the persecution is as yet pretty light by Saudi Arabian standards), criticism of that religion will function to accentuate the persecution of its adherents unless strong countervailing factors are present (e.g. a strongly advanced commitment to unrestricted freedom of conscience).”

   So this applies to Satanic Cults that practice paedophilia and human sacrifice, the KKK and Odinists groups that have extreme far right mentalities and religious undertones? What about the Japanese Supreme Truth cult who believed in mass murder by deploying Sarin on a subway train? All minority religious groups that need protecting from the persecuting masses right? No? Or are you really just talking of a setup such as we want laws to protect our allies and persecute our enemies… “unrestricted freedom of conscience” you forgot to add that as long as it is socialist ideologically aligned conscience, anything else should be crushed with violence and zero tolerance. Hypocrisy and deluded thought at its best.

   “We’ll believe that, boyo, when we see Black metal bands fulminating against the ABCC, Victoria Police and the Border Force.”

   These are not the establishment, these are just examples of what Anarcho-socialists use to misdirect the naive into thinking that they are fighting the establishment. Another example of socialists accepting freedom of conscious by encouraging violence on public institutions. There are other ways of accomplishing a goal then just following the socialist/leftist path of blowing things up or punching anyone in the face that doesn’t agree with them. Not everyone has the subtle appreciation of “unrestricted freedom of conscience” that you guys do… Some prefer to write a song or paint a picture.

   “The only people who do “pedaling” are American cyclists. Here, we do pedalling. Apart from spelling correctly, we ride on the correct side of the road. And people who sell things are doing peddling.”

   So who is the Nazi now?

   “Well, that’s one way of looking at it. To start with, I’m glad Sossle recognises it as fiction. On the other hand, I don’t think refugees or even people looking for decent paying jobs qualify as “vicious raiders” to be dealt with through swords and other Viking paraphernalia.”

   What about 1000 years of armed conflict, slavery and occupation? Speaking of swords, ever heard of the sword verse in the Koran? A system of Caliphate, widespread religious and social freedom suppression must be a small price to pay when making bargains to turn society on its in head for the ends of a few right? I guess these things don’t matter because the socialists have found an ally in their struggle to topple the west from the evil white capitalists.

   “The extreme Right likes to talk about its members being proud males refusing subjugation for one reason only – they think they’re the ones who should be doing the subjugating. In their view, the freedom of the elite few is bought at the price of the subjugation of the many.”

   And the left will just assimilate you as long as you fit their mould, if not I guess its incarceration or death by mob. I know talk of individual motivation or pride makes a socialist ready to put someone in chains. Again, I suspect a little racism in your comment here, if I wrote the same statement as I did but applied it to the rights of African-Americans against slavery or the right of indigenous Australians to native title you would have no issue with it, but if it describes Caucasians you are immediately against it and prescribe it to extreme right thinking. Again what happened to unrestricted freedom of conscience? Really why not just come out and say it the left and socialism has strong issue with Caucasoids? Especially proud free caucasoids, with rights such as unrestricted freedom of conscience. I wonder why @ndy has mentioned countless times over the years this one particular Caucasian Metal band. When you have a multitude of Rap and hip hop artists that incite violence, spread misogyny and include racist lyrics in their music? Often in a way more obvious manner, @ndy has had a hard-on for this band for over a decade and this is the total of evidence he can find to make a case against them? It’s kinda pathetic really. Strangely he seems to have no issue with artists like Jay-Z being an ardent member of the 5% nation? Of course not, Jay Z is an African American, he is free to have unrestricted freedom of conscience…

   “Anarchists have a different perspective. We believe in co-operation, in a society where there are neither masters nor slaves, where men and women are equal, where “race” has been abolished and where people are free to wander across the spectrum of human sexuality (with consenting parties) if they so wish. B1 bombers will be smelted into ploughshares, though I’d be happy for blunt swords to be used in historical re-enactments for those who like that sort of thing. ”

   Anarchists believe in co-operation? Lol, with each other maybe, everyone else gets a punch in the face, in the “Struggle unto death against all authority” right? And you are going to achieve all of this by allying yourselves with Muslims right? Achieve this by violently suppressing others that don’t agree with a socialist ideology? Here is a challenge for you maybe if you can convince all of your allies to adopt these principles, then maybe its could be believable that it’s achievable in a real world scenario or for a large diverse free population. To me it smacks of Utopian fantasy masturbation. Socialism and Anarchy both have been and are subsisted of primarily dualistic thinking (Us vs Them) and a tendency to extreme violence to achieve an apparent end. Anarchy and socialism are no more an ideology of peace than Islam is a religion of the same. Believing your own propaganda is a very dangerous thing.

   “We’re prepared to use reasonable force in self defence and we know who our enemies are – and though they include some of the people Sossle would count as enemies, they also include most of those Sossle would count as friends.”

   I’m afraid you have it the wrong way around we have many common enemies but you have a lot of friends that I also see as enemies to a free and equal society. Anarcho-communists seem to have no issue aligning themselves with anyone or any ideal to accomplish there goals of destabilising the west to allow anarchy to ensue. No issue with dismantling ideas like free speech and maybe even as far as attempting to dismantle free thought. I don’t think smelting ploughs will be the first order of business for any new socialist regime. Somehow a reality like 1984 more comes to mind…

   You see I don’t have any political ideology to force on others, I believe we are all inherently different and deserve a right to express our differences as long as it does no physical injury to others or wrongly impinges on their rights to live a life of freedom with an entitlement to the same right. I don’t believe in a greater good of one mind or single ideology seeking to win an ultimate battle that give itself total reign over the rights of all others. Our strength as a species is quite often in our actual differences and most general truths often found somewhere in the middle of many opposing ideologies. Chaos is the natural order of things and life is about the journey, not an arrival to any particular destination that includes the wants and wills of the some, establishing order according to its own vision of reality, and sees as a necessity the need to suppress the others in order to maintain itself and its new self imposed authority.

   A punk has just as much value in society as a politician, a police officer as vital as paediatrician. An Alt right Black metal musician as vital as a left wing meditation Guru. I leave the spreading of hate and division to aliases like @ndy in his own misguided attempt to sanitise the world for us all with his own specialised form of racism and persecution.

9. “I wonder why @ndy has mentioned countless times over the years this one particular Caucasian Metal band. When you have a multitude of Rap and hip hop artists that incite violence, spread misogyny and include racist lyrics in their music? Often in a way more obvious manner, @ndy has had a hard-on for this band for over a decade and this is the total of evidence he can find to make a case against them? It’s kinda pathetic really. Strangely he seems to have no issue with artists like Jay-Z being an ardent member of the 5% nation? Of course not, Jay Z is an African American, he is free to have unrestricted freedom of conscience…”

   Briefly:

   1) As of this date (October 29, 2016), I’ve published 3,554 posts on my blog. Precisely 9 posts make reference to D666. That’s 0.25%; or, to put it another way, 99.75% of my posts make no reference to D666.

   2) One focus of my blog is fascism and the far right, especially contemporary fascist and far right activism in Australia. I’m not aware of any hip hop groups in Australia who espouse fascism and far right politics, but if they exist I might take note.

10. Lol @ @ndy 🙂

    My point was your blog seems to attack groups and individuals with a single minded direction of pushing a hard left socialist agenda only. And displays outright bias and intolerance based on the political affiliation, race or ethnic group of your targets i.e. racism and bigotry.

    You often describe people as being homophobic or anti-LGBT if they are in your target group. Yet you don’t have a single mention in 3500 posts of how the ten countries in the world who still have the death penalty for homosexuality are all Muslim majority countries? It seems your comments are used more as a slur and are more about vilification of your target, then any real concern for the welfare of LGBT communities.

    You appear to have strong issue with D666’s misogynist lyrics, yet no issue with similar language used in Afro-American rap music? Is that due to D666 being Caucasian and right leaning? Of course it is. Hello racism and bigotry! Also you seem to have no issue, counter to the article above, with violent and racist lyrics in Afro-American rap culture, or at least not enough to blog about it. This would seem also to be primarily racially motivated or is it simply bigoted? It’s hard to tell.

    Similarly with religion, your persecution of groups seems to be somewhat biased with no greater sense of justice than your own political agenda. How many times have you mentioned paedophilia in your blog and every single time it’s either targeted at specific religious groups or right wingers. Yet somehow not a single story regarding Muslim child brides in Australia? Why is that? Why do you feel the need to shout if from the rooftops when a Catholic priest is prosecuted for paedophilia, but not a sound when 100s of Muslim Australian teenage girls, as young as 9 years old, are systematically groomed and shipped abroad to be married with no regards to their human rights. Religious intolerance maybe?

    Doesn’t this all add up to this blog being pretty bigoted and racist in nature, with a dash of hypocrisy thrown in for good measure?

11. Also you state:

    “2) One focus of my blog is fascism and the far right, especially contemporary fascist and far right activism in Australia. I’m not aware of any hip hop groups in Australia who espouse fascism and far right politics, but if they exist I might take note.”

    What does “Australia” have to do with it?

    I thought the Left believed in the dismantling of borders and such. Isn’t nationalism one of the major tenets of Fascism? I also thought Anarcho-socialists were against ideas such as the Nation. “National borders exist to maximise profits.” “The central mechanism of control over the movement of labor is the nation-state.” Burning Australian flags and all that? So which is it?

    Given your concern is primarily being with political outcomes or leanings on a national level, I guess in some contexts I could say you’re a national socialist then? 😉

12. @Sossle:

    1)

    My point was your blog seems to attack groups and individuals with a single minded direction of pushing a hard left socialist agenda only. And displays outright bias and intolerance based on the political affiliation, race or ethnic group of your targets i.e. racism and bigotry.

    You wrote that ‘@ndy has mentioned countless times over the years this one particular Caucasian Metal band.’ As I pointed out, this was a wild exaggeration; I’ve also never described them as ‘Caucasian’. Otherwise, I write from an anarchist perspective; I regard racism as stoopid and wrogn; I don’t agree that writing about racism and the far right is the political equivalent of advocating racism or bigotry.

    You often describe people as being homophobic or anti-LGBT if they are in your target group. Yet you don’t have a single mention in 3500 posts of how the ten countries in the world who still have the death penalty for homosexuality are all Muslim majority countries? It seems your comments are used more as a slur and are more about vilification of your target, then any real concern for the welfare of LGBT communities.

    While not uniform — some fascists are gay, for example — homophobia is a fairly standard feature on the far right, yes, including in Australia: my principal point of focus. No, I’ve not written about the death penalty as it applies to homosexuality in other countries, ie, Yemen, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan and UAE (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13/here-are-the-10-countries-where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death-2/), nor the 70+ countries which have criminal laws against sexual activity by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex people (LGBTIs). My blog is not dedicated to covering such issues, obviously, nor is it intended to provide the reader an even semi-comprehensive list of All The Bad Things. It doesn’t follow that I should not take note of homophobic sentiment on the part of local actors on the far right.

    You appear to have strong issue with D666’s misogynist lyrics, yet no issue with similar language used in Afro-American rap music? Is that due to D666 being Caucasian and right leaning? Of course it is. Hello racism and bigotry! Also you seem to have no issue, counter to the article above, with violent and racist lyrics in Afro-American rap culture, or at least not enough to blog about it. This would seem also to be primarily racially motivated or is it simply bigoted? It’s hard to tell.

    I think misogyny is wrogn and stoopid, whether it’s expressed by Kevin The Aussie Black Metaller or Kevin The Afro-American Rapper. Again: one, principal focus of my writing is not American musicology but the far right, especially its activities in Australia. In other words, you’ve got it arse-backwards: I examine the far right in Australia, including those occasions upon which it happens to intersect with The Wonderful World of Music; my blog is not intended to be an examination of World Music and its political expressions.

    Similarly with religion, your persecution of groups seems to be somewhat biased with no greater sense of justice than your own political agenda. How many times have you mentioned paedophilia in your blog and every single time it’s either targeted at specific religious groups or right wingers. Yet somehow not a single story regarding Muslim child brides in Australia? Why is that? Why do you feel the need to shout if from the rooftops when a Catholic priest is prosecuted for paedophilia, but not a sound when 100s of Muslim Australian teenage girls, as young as 9 years old, are systematically groomed and shipped abroad to be married with no regards to their human rights. Religious intolerance maybe? Doesn’t this all add up to this blog being pretty bigoted and racist in nature, with a dash of hypocrisy thrown in for good measure?

    If you want to know how many times the term ‘paedophilia’ appears on my blog, why don’t you actually take a look? You haven’t because you’re a lazy thinker. In any case, for the record, the term ‘paedophilia’ occurs ten times on my blog; the term ‘pedophilia’ five times (one post contains both spellings). Anyone who’s interested in reading about Muslim child brides in Australia need look no further than the mass media: as just one example, in the last year, The Daily Telegraph has published several articles decrying the practice, most recently Peta Credlin: It sickens me when you can’t condemn the horror of child brides (September 25, 2016) and ‘Tsunami’ of child brides being taken overseas (September 19, 2016). In terms of state media, another example is Radio National: Child marriage: A closer look at the story behind the headlines (September 26, 2016). There are many, many other examples.

    I’ve written about the child sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church on several occasions (around 10 or 12 posts directly concern the matter), with the earliest posts appearing in 2008/9 and most around the period 2010-2012, ie, the period in which the Victorian state inquiry was conducted and the possibility of a Royal Commission was first mooted. Why is the child sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church especially noteworthy? For several reasons. One, its scale: tens of thousands of Catholic boys and girls have been raped and sexually assaulted by Catholic priests and clergymen in Australia. Secondly, its cover-up: there’s ample evidence to support the contention that Church authorities knew that Catholic children were being raped and sexually assaulted by Catholic clergy but rather than assist victims or report these crimes to police, the Church hierarchy either turned a blind eye or actively concealed these crimes. After years of campaigning by groups such as Broken Rites, these facts have only recently come to light, and for anyone who’s concerned by child abuse, whether in Australia or Ireland or the United States or elsewhere, it’s an appalling tale. Beyond that, the Catholic church in Australia is both the largest Christian denomination and most numerous of all religious faiths, with about 1/4 of census respondents declaring themselves to be, at least nominally, Catholic. It’s the largest private employer in the country with enormous assets: it’s estimated that it owns more than A$100billion worth of properties and other assets and makes A$15billion a year from its businesses (particularly education, health and welfare services) and receives hundreds of millions of dollars each year by way of donations from parishioners.

    The scandal is the biggest crisis the Catholic church has faced in centuries: forgive me for paying attention.

    2)

    Me: One focus of my blog is fascism and the far right, especially contemporary fascist and far right activism in Australia. I’m not aware of any hip hop groups in Australia who espouse fascism and far right politics, but if they exist I might take note.

    You: What does “Australia” have to do with it? I thought the Left believed in the dismantling of borders and such. Isn’t nationalism one of the major tenets of Fascism? I also thought Anarcho-socialists were against ideas such as the Nation. “National borders exist to maximise profits.” “The central mechanism of control over the movement of labor is the nation-state.” Burning Australian flags and all that? So which is it? Given your concern is primarily being with political outcomes or leanings on a national level, I guess in some contexts I could say you’re a national socialist then?

    ‘The Left’ believes all kinds of things. Some leftists, including Australian leftists, embrace nationalism: they simply have a different understanding of what that entails. “National borders exist to maximise profits” is a quote lifted from an article by the SPGB (http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/capitalism-is-built-on-lies.html); “The central mechanism of control over the movement of labor is the nation-state” from an article by the ISO (http://socialistworker.org/2006-1/585/585_07_Capitalism.shtml). The SPGB and ISO are both socialist organisations, from different countries and different political traditions. I don’t know why you’ve selected these two quotes in particular, but the relationship between socialism and nationalism is a long and complex story. Regarding burning Australian flags, I don’t have a great attachment to it, so I don’t really care. Finally, the reason I write mostly about Australian politics and current affairs (with a particular emphasis upon Melbourne) is because that’s where I live, that’s the time and place I’m most familiar with, and where I can have the greatest impact.

    PS. Read a book.

13. “I regard racism as stoopid and wrogn; I don’t agree that writing about racism and the far right is the political equivalent of advocating racism or bigotry.”

    I’m not suggesting you are advocating racism or bigotry. I am saying you are actively participating in racism and bigotry through your blog and Facebook pages. It’s pretty clear within a few minutes for anyone what the theme is throughout. The extent of your own prejudice and tendencies to incite others to hatred, intolerance and violence for your own political agenda is clearly demonstrated again and again. And the common specific racial characteristics of your targets is equally as obvious on both your Facebook page and blog. I think I gave up after seeing consecutively the pictures of around 30 ‘White Devils’ on your Facebook page posts. The colour of your target’s skin seems to be the overall common characteristic in your selected targets.

    The fact that you see a discernible difference between paedophilia in the Catholic Church and paedophilia in general clearly displays your bigotry. 250 million girls alive today were forcibly and legally married below the age of 15 in the Muslim world. And all you can see is “The scandal is the biggest crisis the Catholic church has faced in centuries”. You’re stating that finding media coverage of Muslim child brides is easy, well it’s far easier still to find stories regarding the Catholic church and child abuse. In fact there is around 500,000 more stories available online, nearly a third as many again. So you’re hardly breaking anything new but are clearly cherry picking targets based on your own political leanings and agenda.

    I think you should also peruse a certain book, when you have the chance, for the definitions of racism and bigotry. As it’s clear you somehow missed their actual definitions when you dedicated yourself to fighting against them.

    The key to fighting evil is in not becoming evil yourself in the process. I think you are failing pretty miserably there… The reason why people hate Nazism is that at its core is a profound intolerance of others and the leaning to assert their might through violent means and fear. Your blog shares this same basic intolerance, originating from your own stagnant political affiliations. What you represent is no better than Nazism, just the other side of the same coin.

14. Speaking of reading books.

    Let’s not forget that Nazism grew from a workers party with a foundation in pushing for communalisation of assets, aged welfare, division of profits of heavy industry, protection from foreign work forces mixed with a healthy dose of intolerance thrown in. How did this happen? Mainly by declaring elements of society as an Enemy to the communal society as a whole and then moving to remove them from that society in a ruthless and organised fashion. The closest book to Mein Kampf in widespread use today is most likely the Koran/Qur’an. Ideas of Racial purity, subhuman races, ruling by fear, hatred of Jews, global domination by violent means etc, etc. abound within both books.

    So please tell me Slack Bastard.

    Are you for mass immigration of foreign workers into the country or against it?

    Seems that you would either be pro-union and a little bit racist with nationalist tendencies or against the unions for a free humanity with no establishment defined economic borders? I would be very interested to know how you can be both pro-union and also for a free planet that doesn’t discriminate against others no matter there place of birth?

    Or is this one of those things that Anarcho-socialists just don’t want to talk about?

15. I’m not suggesting you are advocating racism or bigotry. I am saying you are actively participating in racism and bigotry through your blog and Facebook pages.

    If there’s a difference between ‘advocating racism and bigotry’ on the one hand and ‘participating in racism and bigotry’ on the other, I fail to see it. In any case, I reject it.

    It’s pretty clear within a few minutes for anyone what the theme is throughout. The extent of your own prejudice and tendencies to incite others to hatred, intolerance and violence for your own political agenda is clearly demonstrated again and again. And the common specific racial characteristics of your targets is equally as obvious on both your Facebook page and blog. I think I gave up after seeing consecutively the pictures of around 30 ‘White Devils’ on your Facebook page posts. The colour of your target’s skin seems to be the overall common characteristic in your selected targets.

    If you want to make an argument, you need to create a structure for it and then produce evidence to support it. You’ve not done so.

    The fact that you see a discernible difference between paedophilia in the Catholic Church and paedophilia in general clearly displays your bigotry. 250 million girls alive today were forcibly and legally married below the age of 15 in the Muslim world. And all you can see is “The scandal is the biggest crisis the Catholic church has faced in centuries”. You’re stating that finding media coverage of Muslim child brides is easy, well it’s far easier still to find stories regarding the Catholic church and child abuse. In fact there is around 500,000 more stories available online, nearly a third as many again. So you’re hardly breaking anything new but are clearly cherry picking targets based on your own political leanings and agenda.

    I’ve written nothing about the relationship between ‘paedophilia in the Catholic Church’ and ‘paedophilia in general’; re child marriage, I dunno where you got that figure from, but UNICEF reckons that worldwide ‘more than 700 million women alive today were married as children. More than 1 in 3 – or some 250 million – were married before 15’. Further, according to UNICEF (http://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/child-marriage/):

    ‘Many factors interact to place a girl at risk of marriage, including poverty, the perception that marriage will provide ‘protection’, family honour, social norms, customary or religious laws that condone the practice, an inadequate legislative framework and the state of a country’s civil registration system. Child marriage often compromises a girl’s development by resulting in early pregnancy and social isolation, interrupting her schooling, limiting her opportunities for career and vocational advancement and placing her at increased risk of domestic violence. Child marriage also affects boys, but to a lesser degree than girls.’

    One key to addressing child marriage is addressing poverty, especially rural poverty.

    Finally, re media coverage of stories re ‘Catholic church and child sexual abuse’ and ‘Muslim child brides’, again, I dunno where you got those figures from, but my point was that I’ve written a dozen or so posts on the former subject (in Australia), for reasons I’ve already elaborated, and that doing so does not obscure the fact that as of September 2016, eg, according to ‘Family and Community Services (FACS) Minister Brad Hazzard … there have been around 70 cases of girls being forced to marry overseas reported to the FACS telephone hotline since July 2014’ (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-20/tsumani-of-young-girls-forced-to-marry-overseas-nsw-says/7860670). It’s reasonable to assume that there are a number of cases yet to be made public. In any event, the practice is unlawful in Australia — ‘In 2013, the federal parliament passed legislation making the coercing of someone into marriage a serious crime, punishable by up to seven years in prison.’ — and is not confined to local Muslim communities.

    Otherwise:

    People have many reasons for rejecting Nazism, neo-Nazism, and fascism;
    The Nazi Party’s history is complex, but feel free to recommend those books you’ve read on the subject that you think are especially relevant;
    I’m neither ‘for’ nor ‘against’ immigration — my concerns lie elsewhere;
    I’m sympathetic to unions as a form of worker organisation but favour revolutionary industrial as opposed to, say, reformist trades unionism;
    Anarchists have produced a vast literature on labour organising which you’re free to read or to ignore.

16. How about more relevantly providing some quotes on why Fascism and Socialism are inherently linked and are part of the same organism, an organism that seems to directly oppose Anarchism fundamentally. Both Fascism and Socialism centre around removing individual rights for the common good. The definition of Fascism has been so tainted over time, if the meaning ever was clear, that it basically has no real meaning beyond its uses in socialist propaganda. Its current meaning has been pretty much reduced to “An enemy identified by a Socialist” eg You are either with the Socialists or with the Fascists. Sound familiar? It could be argued that modern “Fascism” is nothing more than a control mechanism utilised by Socialist/Communist/Anarcho-Commie movements to drum up support for their own totalitarian agenda.

    “It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.”

    “But Fascism is also a political and economic system. Why, then, cannot we have a clear and generally accepted definition of it? Alas! we shall not get one — not yet, anyway. To say why would take too long, but basically it is because it is impossible to define Fascism satisfactorily without making admissions which neither the Fascists themselves, nor the Conservatives, nor Socialists of any colour, are willing to make. All one can do for the moment is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done, degrade it to the level of a swearword.”

    “I have seen the words ‘Fascist in sympathy’, or ‘of Fascist tendency’, or just plain ‘Fascist’, applied in all seriousness to the following bodies of people:”

    “Socialists: Defenders of old-style capitalism (example, Sir Ernest Benn) maintain that Socialism and Fascism are the same thing. Some Catholic journalists maintain that Socialists have been the principal collaborators in the Nazi-occupied countries. The same accusation is made from a different angle by the Communist party during its ultra-Left phases. In the period 1930-35 the Daily Worker habitually referred to the Labour Party as the Labour Fascists. This is echoed by other Left extremists such as Anarchists. Some Indian Nationalists consider the British trade unions to be Fascist organizations.

    Communists: A considerable school of thought (examples, Rauschning, Peter Drucker, James Burnham, F. A. Voigt) refuses to recognize a difference between the Nazi and Soviet régimes, and holds that all Fascists and Communists are aiming at approximately the same thing and are even to some extent the same people. Leaders in The Times (pre-war) have referred to the U.S.S.R. as a ‘Fascist country’. Again from a different angle this is echoed by Anarchists and Trotskyists.

    Trotskyists: Communists charge the Trotskyists proper, i.e. Trotsky’s own organization, with being a crypto-Fascist organization in Nazi pay. This was widely believed on the Left during the Popular Front period. In their ultra-Right phases the Communists tend to apply the same accusation to all factions to the Left of themselves, e.g. Common Wealth or the I.L.P.”

    http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc – Orwell 1944 on ‘What is Fascism?’

    Sound familiar?

    Who do you think said this an Anarcho-Communist writer or the founder of the Right Wing Fascist system of National Socialism?

    “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”

    – Adolf Hitler, Hitler’s speech on May 1, 1927. Cited in: Toland, John (1992). Adolf Hitler. Anchor Books. pp. 224–225.

    “For many decades, the leftists have been propagating the false dichotomy that the choice confronting the world is only: communism or fascism—a dictatorship of the left or of an alleged right—with the possibility of a free society, of capitalism, dismissed and obliterated, as if it had never existed.”

    “The political origin of that notion is more shameful than the “moderates” would care publicly to admit. Mussolini came to power by claiming that that was the only choice confronting Italy. Hitler came to power by claiming that that was the only choice confronting Germany. It is a matter of record that in the German election of 1933, the Communist Party was ordered by its leaders to vote for the Nazis—with the explanation that they could later fight the Nazis for power, but first they had to help destroy their common enemy: capitalism and its parliamentary form of government.”

    “It is obvious what the fraudulent issue of fascism versus communism accomplishes: it sets up, as opposites, two variants of the same political system; it eliminates the possibility of considering capitalism; it switches the choice of “Freedom or dictatorship?” into “Which kind of dictatorship?”—thus establishing dictatorship as an inevitable fact and offering only a choice of rulers. The choice—according to the proponents of that fraud—is: a dictatorship of the rich (fascism) or a dictatorship of the poor (communism).”

    “That fraud collapsed in the 1940’s, in the aftermath of World War II. It is too obvious, too easily demonstrable that fascism and communism are not two opposites, but two rival gangs fighting over the same territory—that both are variants of statism, based on the collectivist principle that man is the rightless slave of the state—that both are socialistic, in theory, in practice, and in the explicit statements of their leaders—that under both systems, the poor are enslaved and the rich are expropriated in favor of a ruling clique—that fascism is not the product of the political “right,” but of the “left”—that the basic issue is not “rich versus poor,” but man versus the state, or: individual rights versus totalitarian government—which means: capitalism versus socialism.”

    “The Presidential Candidates 1968,” The Objectivist, June 1968.

    It’s hard to believe that any true Anarchist could be a subscriber to such primitive control mechanisms used against humanity. But I guess defining “Anarchism” is almost as hard as defining “Fascism” these days, Maybe Anti-Capitalist? Akin with the Neo Nazi type movements, anyone ready to raise a fist and wave a red and black flag can join the group to help push on humanity an antiquated political system that seeks nothing more than to enslave us all in the name of freedom. In the name of Anti-Capitalism… speaking of poverty.

    I love your push that ideas need constant validation by quotation from books to be of any relevance. Maybe it’s time you tried a book from somewhere other than the Anarchist book shop as it appears your suffering to tell the difference between wisdom and propaganda anymore. Just as important as reading is what you read and trying to read broadly. Not just continually reaffirming what you want to hear over and over again. Nor just cherry picking mainstream media to feed Facebook hysteria like some kind of digital demagogue.

17. I wrote:

    ‘The Nazi Party’s history is complex, but feel free to recommend those books you’ve read on the subject that you think are especially relevant.’

    Given yr silence, I assume that either a) you’ve not actually read any books on the party or b) have too many favourites to choose from. I suspect the former is the case. Otherwise:

    Yes, fascism is a contested term. In general, I think Roger Griffin’s formulation is worthwhile. As a student of fascism, I assume yr familiar with it so won’t bother reiterating it here.

    I’ve written on the subject of anarchism, its meaning and application. English-language materials on the anarchist struggle against fascism in the 1920s, ’30s and ’40s is not as extensive as that in FRE or GER or ITA but there is some. You’re free to read it or ignore it as is yr wont.

18. lol, you are too much @ndy.

    I’m neither directly a student of Fascism nor of National Socialism. And I do not claim to be, unlike yourself.

    But I will admit my bullshit detector is pretty good, and anytime I go near this site, all I see is a wolf in sheep’s clothing who is claiming love and unicorns for all of ‘human’ kind but instead is doing little more than inspiring hatred and the outright oppression of others. And seems to be championing its own fascist culture in disguise. Seeking its own form of national rebirth built from the ashes of burnt Australian flags and the squealings of a new regime. Socialism lives and breathes from the revolution of societies, the rebirth of nations, in a dangerous glorification of a grand socialist fiction that has led countless times to little more than merciless warfare, widespread poverty, mass murder and extreme fascist dictators. The daily dedication of yourself/yourselves to attacking the democratic fabric of modern society, which is the mark of a true neo-fascist, one hidden behind a smiley face and a ‘Say No to Racism’ sign.

    Let me guess, it’s time now for a deluge of anti Trump rhetoric? How predictable. All I can say is keep on doing what your doing, it sure is working so well. The way you guys are going, in less then ten years from now, our reigning PM will be Pauline Hanson and it will be the direct result of a lot of your own actions. Actions that are polarising the people and forcing them to further and further extremes, caused by the left denying others of their voices by aggressive, divisive labelling and constant shouting them down. We are witnessing the creation of Australia’s own silent majority voting block, I hope you guys are ready to tackle this monster you are creating day by day.

    Just keep pushing that hate guys, its winning you loads of friends the entire world over. More and more are joining your cause day by day.

    But I guess that is how the socialist left handles public communication, tell them how it is and if they don’t like it, believe it or want it, scream fascist/racist/sexist and start digging the mass graves to hold at the very least the remains of democratic rights and values.

    Telling others to “Go read a book” smack of nothing more than elitism @ndy. But really that doesn’t surprise me coming from yourself/yourselves. As Anarchism seems to returning to it’s old elitist roots more and more with each passing day.

    You’d make Proudhon proud. The ‘father of Anarchism’ a proud Anglophobe, Anti-Semite and Sexist. How did he phrase it so well in his diaries back then, oh that’s right something like “The Jew is the enemy of the human race. This race must be sent back to Asia, or exterminated.” “Abolish synagogues and not admit them (Jews) to any employment.”

    Anarchists must be so proud of their roots. And all nearly a 100 years before Hitlers National Socialists, what a progressive Proudhon was.

    Different side, same coin.

19. @Sossle:

    Briefly:

    Ostensibly, this discussion centred on D666. You claimed that I’d written about the band ‘countless times over the years’. I pointed out that, in that other place called reality, 9 of 3,554 posts contain refs to D666; further, that my attention was drawn to the band because of its proximity to, and occasional direct engagement with, neo-Nazism and fascist politics.

    You wrote that my understanding of Nazi Germany, and of fascism generally, was fundamentally flawed, and asserted that Nazism ‘grew from a workers party with a foundation in pushing for communalisation of assets, aged welfare, division of profits of heavy industry, protection from foreign work forces mixed with a healthy dose of intolerance thrown in. How did this happen? Mainly by declaring elements of society as an Enemy to the communal society as a whole and then moving to remove them from that society in a ruthless and organised fashion.’

    Maybe. Maybe not. Given the imprecision of your account — Are you referring to the DAP? Is ‘communalisation’ synonymous with state control? Which profits from heavy industry were divided? When? Where? How? What does ‘protection from foreign work forces mean’? Etc. — it’s difficult to say. I would suggest that understanding Nazi Germany and the NSDAP actually requires study. For example, what was the Nazi Party’s industrial policy and how did it evolve? In this context, a student might want to examine Nazi policy with regards both bosses and workers. Why was it that one of the first and principal targets of Nazi Germany was the labour movement? By the same token, why did industrialists support Nazi rule? Why, over the course of the 1920s, did an earlier programmatic commitment to land redistribution fall by the wayside? How did popular investments in the Führerprinzip impact upon the Party’s appeal and program? And so on and so on.

    You prefaced these claims with a reference to ‘reading books’. Which books? On what do you rely upon for your understanding of Nazi Germany? By the same token, what informs your understanding of anarchism? Are you aware of the distinction between anarchism and Proudhonism? Is reading and thinking about things really the exclusive property of ill-defined elites? I’d suggest not. I’d also suggest that, if yr srs, you would bother not only to make assertions but to provide evidence for them in a logically-structured manner. You don’t. Therefore, yr hardly srs in yr commentary.

20. “Ostensibly, this discussion centred on D666. You claimed that I’d written about the band ‘countless times over the years’. I pointed out that, in that other place called reality, 9 of 3,554 posts contain refs to D666; further, that my attention was drawn to the band because of its proximity to, and occasional direct engagement with, neo-Nazism and fascist politics.”

    Semantics. And statistical absurdism.

    “You prefaced these claims with a reference to ‘reading books’. Which books?”

    Er, no I did not. You were the one who raised “books” in this conversation with the derogatory phrase: @ndy said at November 1, 2016 at 8:44 pm “PS. Read a book.”

    “Is reading and thinking about things really the exclusive property of ill-defined elites?”

    No clearly not, but disqualifying ideas based on how well read, in one’s own opinion, someone is, is very much the realm of the elites. As in a statement like ‘Slackbastard’s raving have no merit because he didn’t attend a great university, so his mind must be an inferior formulation based on stagnant premises which will only [bear] the bitter fruit of division and incitement of others to hatred’. Or using a a phrase like “PS. Read a book.” to close out a comment.

    “I’d also suggest that, if yr srs, you would bother not only to make assertions but to provide evidence for them in a logically-structured manner.”

    Pot===>Kettle … Kettle===>Pot
    Ref: Slackbastard.anarchobase.com

    Anarchism and Proudhonism… Lol as easy as that hey? The first Anarchist isn’t really an “Anarchist” at all. He clearly had little to do with the Anarchist movement, even though the book “What is Property?” basically defined Anarchism in its day and coined the term “Anarchist”. I think it would be easier to argue that Proudhonism is the basis of Anarchism and what you refer to as Anarchism, simply is not Anarchism, if you see it as separate from Proudhonism. Basically you’re lifting/stealing the name “Anarchist” from Proudhon, making you a Pseudo-Anarchist?

    What is Property? Proudhon 1840 https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/property

    You do realise how daft that statement/question sounds right? Oh no, that’s clearly Hitlerism, which is very, very different from what we believe and has nothing to do with our group at all. The Aryan Republic Socialist Enclave or A.R.S.E. has nothing to do with Hitlerism. We just want Unicorns and Butterflies for everyone and we have moved on and discarded Hitlerism. Hitlerism is basically all the bad stuff in National Socialism. So chances are if you have issue with it, it’s to do with Hitlerism and not us. Right…

    Lol and of course Marx was in no way racist or an Anti-Semite…

    July 30th, 1862 in a letter to Engels, Marx said about La-Salle:
    “The Jewish nigger Lassalle who, I’m glad to say, is leaving at the end of this week, has happily lost another 5,000 talers in an ill-judged speculation.”

    and

    “It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow’s importunity is also nigger-like.”

    http://marxists.anu.edu.au/archive/marx/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.htm

    “Jewish nigger” clearly a term of endearment there from Marx… But we all know that Marx clearly enjoyed using the work “nigger” as a racial slur, but of course different times, different times… Marx abhorred racism, right…

    What about this little Marx comment, about his opinion on the proud Mexican people, maybe you should share it in your latest Trump story?

    “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it.” Karl Marx – July 1862 letter to Engel

    “Lazy Mexicans!” ffs… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K99E-KDLiUE

    Of course there are no other examples of outright racism or hypocrisy in Anarchist or the socialist founders literature. LOL. Sorry, passed out from lack of oxygen… Maybe you should do stand up comedy, man?

    I’ll await your thrifty, short, witty, personal attack in response as per usual… 😉

21. @Sossle:

    Briefly:

    Re D666. You claimed that I’d written about the band ‘countless times over the years’. I pointed out that, in that other place called reality, 9 of 3,554 posts contain refs to D666; further, that my attention was drawn to the band because of its proximity to, and occasional direct engagement with, neo-Nazism and fascist politics. That’s not semantics or statistical absurdity. That’s just the facts.

    With regards books, you wrote: ‘Speaking of reading books. Let’s not forget that Nazism …’ and proceeded to provide a sketch of what you think constituted the essence of Nazism: a) it grew from a workers party; b) it embarked upon a ‘communalisation of assets’ (whatever that means); c) it instituted social welfare measures for the aged; d) it had something to do with the (re-)distribution of profits derived from heavy industry and e) the protection (of Germany?) from foreign workers and finally; f) it was intolerant. (You further claimed that Nazism arose thru the identification of enemies and their removal from German society and that the nearest ideological equivalent of Mein Kampf ‘in widespread use today’ is the Koran/Qur’an as both texts express racialism, anti-Semitism and dreams of global domination.)

    I asked you which texts you recommended as providing a useful account of Nazism but you failed to nominate any: this is because you’ve not actually read any. You appear to disagree, but I think it’s important to offer evidence when making an argument, including one to do with the nature of the Nazi party, ideology and rule.

    Re anarchism and Proudhonism: yes, a distinction can, has and should be made between Proudhon’s views and anarchism. As I wrote 9 years ago, ‘I would maintain that ‘anarchism’ has been subjected to all kinds of (mis-)interpretations, ever since the mid-1800s, and Proudhon’s adoption of the then purely pejorative moniker of ‘anarchist’.’ Proudhon’s significance lies both in this fact and in his elaboration of a critique of capitalist property relations and the state; his ideas were adopted by a range of political actors, including but not limited to anarchists. His anti-Semitism and patriarchal attitudes are rejected by anarchists. Further, I identify as an anarchist, not a Proudhonist.

    On Proudhon’s anti-Semitism, you can read an anarchist account on Anarchist Writers here: http://anarchism.pageabode.com/pjproudhon/proudhon-sexism-and-racism. It argues that his anti-Semitism is troubling — ie, is repulsive, but does not in fact render his contributions to anarchist thought and political thought generally worthless — but less so than his patriarchal vision: ‘As for the sexism, that is more problematic simply because his defence of patriarchy and marriage is consistent and repeated.’ With reference to Proudhon, I reject his anti-Semitism, obviously, but find some of his (other) writings worthwhile, eg, his reflections on the emergent capitalist industrial society. That’s not necessarily because I think he was correct in his analyses but for what it reveals about the period and examining his analyses helps us to understand how his views informed the development of anarchism, both then and as it matured (especially but not only in parts of France). As a social movement, anarchism in France began to assume a more coherent and organised form in the 1860s, from which point it expanded far beyond any strict or even partial adherence to Chairman Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Thought. Nevertheless, in terms of re-appraisal, I think his political philosophy is, like many others, both interesting and lacking, that his anti-Semitism is not central to it, and that the political programs he advocated seem free of any such taint. (It should also be noted that Proudhon’s antipathy to Jews was given its fullest expression in his private diaries, which remained unpublished until many years after his death.)

    The same general considerations apply to Marx.

22. On Nazism, this article is useful:

    https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-supermanagerial-reich

    ‘POPULAR CULTURE IS REPLETE with cartoonish depictions of Nazism. Hitler seems to emerge suddenly, as if he had been waiting in the wings as a fait accompli. One moment it’s Weimar decadence, really good art, and Stormtroopers and communists fighting in the streets. The next, Hindenburg is handing Adolf the keys to the kingdom and it’s all torchlight parades, Triumph of the Will, and plaintive Itzhak Perlman violins. Hitler rises above a reborn Reich as a kind of totalitarian god. All aspects of life come under his control through the Nazi party’s complete domination of German life. Of course, this is not really how it worked.’

23. Sossle:

    “Anarchism and Proudhonism… Lol as easy as that hey? The first Anarchist isn’t really an “Anarchist” at all. He clearly had little to do with the Anarchist movement, even though the book “What is Property?” basically defined Anarchism in its day and coined the term “Anarchist”. I think it would be easier to argue that Proudhonism is the basis of Anarchism and what you refer to as Anarchism, simply is not Anarchism, if you see it as separate from Proudhonism. Basically you’re lifting/stealing the name “Anarchist” from Proudhon, making you a Pseudo-Anarchist?”

    All people are people of their times and subject, to a greater or lesser extent, to their limitations. While Proudhon’s anti-Semitism and sexism were, as Andy says, deplorable, in assessing the value of Proudhon’s thought, considerably more weight should be given to those aspects on which he departed from the reigning ideology of the day than to those aspects on which he adhered to it. It is therefore the innovations in economic & political thought for which Proudhon is responsible that should be the focus of evaluation. He achieved these despite his intellectually lazy prejudices, and it could be argued that he would have broken even more ground in his economic & political thought if he had not carried the baggage of sexism & anti-Semitism with him.

    Two other points are worth making:

    1. The Anarchist movement has its name, rather than being called “Proudhonist”, “Bakuninist” or “Kropotkinist”, because it has surpassed all its famous intellectuals. Bakunin joined the International as a partisan of Marx in his arguments against Proudhon around the usefulness and educative value of strikes in the workers’ movement. Proudhon had been adhering to orthodox economic theory, which held to the “Iron Law of Wages” and asserted that wage increases won by strikes were immediately dissipated by price rises, thus rendering the struggle over wages pointless. Marx strongly argued against that, and Bakunin took his side on that topic.

    Similarly, Bakunin had a very conspiratorial attitude to revolutionary organisation. He saw a dichotomy between on the one hand, the burning need for a thorough revolution in order to transform society and remove all injustices, and on the other, the heavy weight of reactionary ideology on the masses. He sought to resolve that contradiction by having a secret elite of incorruptible revolutionaries steering events from behind the scenes. Marx argued against that, maintaining that the revolutionary struggle itself was the way for the working class to rise above “the muck of ages” and become fit to live ungoverned in a free society. After the split in the International and Bakunin’s retirement from major political life, the Anarchists adopted Marx’s position on the question – while never conceding to his positions on centralised organisation or running for elections.

    And finally, in 1914, Kropotkin blew away his position as a giant of the Anarchist movement, by supporting the Triple Entente in the First World War against the Central Powers. Most Marxist organisations had fallen into line behind their own ruling classes, leading to the collapse of the Second International, with the Bolsheviks being one of the few sections to resist the war. In the Anarchist movement, far more organisations held the line against the patriotic mania that swept Europe and the movement as a whole preserved its integrity, even after Kropotkin abandoned his.

    2. What distinguished Hitler from the other political actors of his day was the extent of his anti-Semitic obsessions and the way he combined it with the most modern technological approaches, culminating in what had never before been attempted – taking anti-Semitism to its genocidal conclusions. It should also be noted that, though all European countries were affected to some degree or another by anti-Semitism, it was far less severe in German society than in countries to its East, like Poland and Hungary. Hitler’s anti-Semitism is therefore far more central to any evaluation of his legacy than Proudhon’s is to his.

24. True, ablokeimet, Germany prior to the rise of fascism was considered one of the European countries to have most eroded the hegemony of anti-Semitism, and viewed as such by Jews who found German cities relatively safe at a time when there was no shortage of violent anti-Semitism in other European countries. In fact, during World War One the German military had its own rabbis to cater to the spiritual needs of Jews in the military – rabbis who would also assist when the army occupied territory with significant Jewish populations, helping with local welfare needs and helping Jews create sometimes the first local Jewish newspapers, announcing the German military and German state as a force of liberation as the against the oppressively institutionalised anti-Semitism of other European countries (so let’s have no resistance to the German army while we’re here being the clear message). These tactics were usable in efforts to prevent resistance to military occupation precisely because Germany was widely seen as a safe haven in which many many Jews lived as German citizens, giving some degree of plausibility to notions of potential liberation.

25. One of my ancient friends has a firehouse nozzle stuck in his ass