Jonas Nilsson - Anarcho-Fascism: Nature Reborn

Anarcho-Fascism

anarcho-fascism

Nature Reborn

by

Jonas Nilsson

Originally published as Anarko-fascism: Naturen terfdd (2017)
Cover Design: Andreas Nilsson

ISBN: 978-91-88667-19-9

2017 Logik Frlag

Box 22120, 250 23 Helsingborg, Sweden
www.logik.se | www.logikpub.com

kontakt@logik.se

Contents

Foreword

The idea for this book, and the concept of anarcho-fascism as a label for this line of thought, was born when I wrote my graduation thesis in political science, Libertarianism meets authoritarianism The union of fascism and anarchy.

The investigative study of the thesis was built on an analysis of ideas, which offered a deeper and more understandable explanation for why so many so-called extremist right-wing fascists and freedom-loving anarcho-capitalists both supported Donald Trumps bid for the presidency. In the thesis, I asserted that this convergence was an expression of what might be labeled anarcho-fascism. The two political ideological universes were united in their efforts to preserve the worldview and way of life of each. To the political anarchist, freedom must be obtained at the expense of said freedom; the limiting of interaction with non-compatible externals ensures that the in-group can live freely without being devoured by a hostile authoritarian collective that lacks Western values. To the fascist, on the other hand, freedom must be ensured internally, within the in-group, in order to become a vital and competitive unit against these external forces.

It makes sense when a marketing optimization perspective is applied to the political providing that the political is recognized as operator-based, the source of the relationship. A relationship that may be harmonious as well as antagonistic.

From this perspective, state formation must be as small and as large as possible at the same time. There is a link here to the Founding Fathers of the United States, who were also the authors of the Constitution. The state apparatus needs to be small enough that the citizens can overthrow it, should it become tyrannical, while also being large enough to be able to defend itself against and guaranteeing freedom from hostile external agents.

Political theories use contemporary times as a jumping-off point, and can only be fully understood in that context. Politics offers something, a solution to an observed problem politics is the means, the course of action through which the in-groups interests are met. Thus, political theories build on a contemporary need for reform Thomas Hobbes using Leviathan as a counterweight to the civil war, to prevent a war of all against all. John Locke promoted the idea of limited government involvement, in order to free the citizens from the rule of arbitrary leadership. Ayn Rands philosophy emerged as a counter to the utterly unnatural communist ideology.

It is possible that all these people were considered extreme by their contemporaries because they sought to move society in the opposite direction of its current course. They paved the way, or at least tried to pave the way, for the societal pendulum to swing full force in the other direction, as far away as possible from what they identified as the biggest problems of their time. One might want to consider that the further away from the harmful starting point we get, the more difficult it will become to revive that which needed to die.

This book is also presented as a reaction against a system that cannot possibly, by principal, sustain itself, and thus lacks any raison dtre. The political ideas presented in this book must therefore be put into a contemporary societal context to be fully understood, even though the book also implicitly uses anthropology as a starting point.

All political theories move from the abstract to the factual, when the philosophical foundation manages to shape and influence peoples lives, a process that in turn affects society as a whole. Political theory/philosophy has always preceded major changes in society, where the existing belief systems have been razed and replaced by new ones.

All human beings live by their belief system, their philosophy, whether they know it or not, and whether they want to or not. This determines how we view ourselves and the world around us, and the belief system is the instrument by which we choose our direction in life. It makes us act or remain passive, to do one thing or another. The belief system differentiates right from wrong, separates good and evil. The way in which social values are shaped and reshaped, and the way governing bodies should be structured, also rests on a philosophical foundation that transcends politics. Anthropology and the human aspect form the basis for the issues of political theories, which, implicitly or explicitly, question whether human beings are fundamentally good or evil, dangerous or harmless.

It is not just about the opposing anthropological viewpoints on whether man is a potentially hazardous creature that must be controlled for his own good, or, if man must be set free in order to flourish. It is more multidimensional than that. Human beings are, in many ways, a uniform species, where everyone can gather around the least common denominator, but mankind is also comprised of a multitude of races and sexes. The right answer for one person may not be right for another. However, this does not mean that every political entity can construct its own reality; it simply stipulates the way in which they need to relate to reality in order not just to survive, but also be competitive. Only the perception of reality can be constructed, and the dissonance between that which has been constructed and factual reality determines how successful and enduring the culture or civilization will be over time, and in connection with external parties. The survival ratio of the political entity depends on the fusion of biology and culture, adapted to the groups external environment. The optimization is not just in the general compliance, but also depends on the adaptability of the unit when unforeseen changes occur, which will unavoidably happen at some point. To that end, structural flexibility as well as general alertness is required. This book was written primarily for these reasons, because it is disclosure by way of flexibility that can deliver the answers needed to deal with sudden events.

And this is where our current societal problems lie the older generation, which is the cause of our current situation, is voluntarily blind to the new circumstances that have arisen due to the answers they have delivered. These answers are harmful to us, because they make up a theory that does not harmonize with its actual execution. The seriousness of the consequences remains to be seen, depending on the magnitude and impact of the false theory.

A faulty realm of thought imposed with blind conviction is inherently evil, because it poses a danger to society and puts us all at risk. One is reminded of the Norse god Odin, and his advice to mortals for virtuous living: When you come upon misdeeds, speak out against them, and give your enemies no peace .

The book is divided into three parts: What is false (chapter The Lie), what will the consequences of this be (chapter War), and how can society be reorganized to make sure this does not happen again (chapter The State).

Jonas Nilsson

April, 2017

THE LIE

Adolf Hitler warned about what he called the big lie in Mein Kampf :

All this was inspired by the principlewhich is quite true within itselfthat in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.