Various Authors

“The Protocols of the Elders of Sion had thus become one of the holy books, the Apocalypse of the new Aryan faith. In this, Hitlerism only imitated bolshevism, which despite its materialism and atheism, had become, by way of totalitarian dictatorship, a religion with its ceremonies and rites, its dogmas and heresies, its inquisition and its in pace, its prophets, its evangelists and even its Apocalypse — wherein are found the signs which presage the catastrophe which precedes the world triumph of the chosen people the proletarians — and their accession to eternal well being.

Henri Rollin, L’Apocalypse de Notre Temps, (1939)

The evolution of apocalyptical thought has continued since Henri Rollin presented this analysis on the eve of the Second World-War. In the post war years we were offered a nuclear holocaust as an apocalypse. However this has since been superseded by the Green Apocalypse. For a while this change was mediated by the nuclear winter scenario, whereby nuclear war ushered in ecological collapse.

Apocalyptical thinking involves placing the turning point of history, a final resolution of the struggle between good and evil, in the immanent future. Fear and an elitist desire to become part of a transcendental history are lures to draw the naive into this way of thinking. Bolstered by centuries of Christian propaganda, the apocalypse has become a recurrent emblem in European culture.

In Civilisation or Barbarism (1981), Cheikh Anta Diop has traced its origin to the volcanic eruption which took place in 1420 BC on the Island of Santorini in the Aegean. Diop compares this event to the Krakatoa eruption of 1883, which produced tidal waves 35 metre high. Diop describes the catastrophe: “The initial cloud composed of volcanic ash, dust, gas and fumes covered the entire south of the Aegean sea, probably resulting in total darkness for several consecutive days, during which time the tidal wave (tsunami) destroyed the coastline and extinguished lamps, setting fire to towns while the gas and fumes poisoned the population, causing illnesses such as conjunctivitis, angina, bronchitis and digestive disorders.” (p. 71–2). Diop poses this real event as the spur to the development of monotheism under the Pharaoh Akhenaten, the cause of the collapse of the Minoan civilisation and the diffusion of Minoan culture in mainland Greece by refugees, the origins of the myth of Atlantis and possibly the so-called ‘Aryan’ migration to India.

This real natural catastrophe became a model for the Apocalypse, taken up by Jewish prophets influenced by Egyptian monotheism. The cultural legacy of this trauma has remained a feature of European and Islamic culture to this day. Its effect has always been reactionary, in that it burdens down any proposal for social change with the role of this transcendental resolution of conflict, which is posed as being eternal at one and the same time as being located in the immediate future — i.e. it provides a basis in fear and psychological intoxication whereby the practical resolution of real problems gets absorbed in a monocultural, monotheistic totalitarianism.

In the last decade of the second Christian millennium, ecological survival has been pushed forward as the apocalyptical question. Rooted in real concerns about the commodification of the environment, it distracts the process of developing a strategy against such depredation with a mythic green crusade based on moral elitism rooted in universal justification. In fact, closer attention to capitalist environmentalism reveals not that we are on the verge of ecological disaster, but that control over decent air to breath, water to drink, food to eat, will become another element of social control. For U.K. inhabitant: this can be seen in the way that falling standards in water treatment has led those that can afford it to drink bottled water. A science fiction future where breathable air is a commodity is starting to sound less odd to us, certainly less odd than the idea that the land could be carved up as private property sounded to the Amerindians.

In this pamphlet, two pieces submitted by the Neoist Alliance are accompanied by a book review and a collection of documents. They chronicle an ugly dispute between Green Anarchist and the Neoist Alliance. We hope that it serves to extend the debate beyond the tiresome level which GA and Larry O’Hara wish to keep it. They avoid developing an analysis of the state, but instead seek to reveal a new mole every three months. When pressed on their false accusation that Stewart Home had links with Skrewdriver, they refer to texts which do not mention him and then rhetorically ask whether he is an asset of the state. Such a bizarre suggestion can be readily understood by anyone who has taken the trouble to farniliarise themselves with Hitler’s critique of the Schonerer’s Austrian panGerman movement:

*“It belongs to the great leader to make even adversaries far removed from one another seem to belong to a single category, because in weak and uncertain characters the knowledge of having different enemies can only too readily lead to the beginning of doubt in their own right.

“Once the wavering mass sees itself in a struggle against too many enemies, objectivity will put in an appearance, throwing open the question whether all the others are really in the wrong and only their own people or their own movement are in the right.

“And this brings about the first paralysis of their own power. hence a multiplicity of different adversaries must always be combined so that in the eyes of the masses of one’s own supporters the struggle is directed against only one enemy. This strengthens their faith in their own right and enhances their bitterness against those who attack it.”*

(Mein Kampf. p. 108)

In response we can only repeat a watchword of the revolutionary movement: Belief is the Enemy.

Richard Essex

The Sucking Pit: How Green Anarchism Accelerates the Process of Decomposition Within the Swamp

The Search for Shamballah

During the eighties a theory of anti-capitalist primitivism was developed in the pages of the Detroit based paper Fifth Estate by a variety of theorists including George Bradford. Slightly amended versions of two of Bradford’s contributions to the Fifth Estate were later republished under the title How Deep Is Deep Ecology? With an Essay-Review on Woman’s Freedom (Times Change Press, California 1989). This book received a glowing review in Green Anarchist 31 (Autumn 92, p. 19): ‘...an excellent critique of “Deep Ecologists” with their belief in over population, with starvation and AIDS as its solution. Its narrow wilderness stance, general Social Darwinism, racist views on border controls and failure to question imperialism, technology, capitalism and destruction of the planet. He explains Malthusian views were used to justify industrialisation... Deep Ecologists view of wilderness protection as the salvation of the biosphere, in Bradford’s view, is very shallow as it doesn’t answer questions of technology, capital or the State... Bradford sides with Kropotkin in his theory for social and ecological transformation. Like Bookchin, he is an ecologist on the side of humanity. Though we created the problem, we’re also the only ones to put it right. Recommended to anyone with a view on the Eco Crisis.’

One of the issues we will address in the present text is the extent to which Green Anarchist has created a rhetorical shield out of Bradford’s arguments, behind which they can continue to propagate a number of the delusions he attacks. As Jacques Camatte observed in Against Domestication (Falling Sky Books, Ontario 1981, p. 1–2): ‘The time we are now living through is without doubt the most critical period capitalist society has ever known... Social relations and traditional consciousness are decomposing all around us, while at the same time each institution in society proceeds to ensure its survival by recuperating the movement which opposes it. (An obvious example here is the Catholic Church, which has lost count of all the “modernisations” it has embraced)... For a considerable time, human beings have, strictly speaking, been outstripped by the movement of capital which they are no longer able to control. This explains why some people think that the only solution is flight into the past, as with the fashionable preoccupation with mysticism, Zen, yoga and tantraism in the U.S. Others would rather take refuge in the old myths which reject the total and all-pervading tyranny of science and technology... We now come to the category of people who feel that they have to “do something:” they are now having to realise that their understanding of the situation is totally inadequate, and their efforts to conceal this fact only makes their powerlessness more obvious.’

Green Anarchist certainly feel they have to ‘do something,’ and in order to project an image of themselves as a ‘revolutionary’ force, they draw heavily on their superficial acquaintance with many strands of Anglo-American ‘radicalism.’ Influences from elsewhere, such as France, are only taken on board secondhand; GA’s ‘knowledge’ of the Debordist faction of the Situationist International is clearly mediated through a very shallow reading of George Bradford, Fredy Perlman, John Zerzan et al. As such, it is not unfair to describe GA’s writing on the SI as a form of ‘historical revisionism.’ In this, GA have much in common with those other historical revisionists, the neo-Nazi ‘intellectuals’ who deny that the Holocaust took place, and who are notorious for their peek-a-boo attitude towards the death camps. Historical revisionists use euphemisms to allude to the victims of Hitler’s genocidal policies; their texts are littered with references to ‘rootless cosmopolitan elements,’ ‘bankers’ and ‘Zionists;’ they seem to gain a pornographic satisfaction when they finally come out and state what it is they really mean. The rhetoric of these historical revisionists has remarkable parallels with the ‘now you see it, now you don’t’ stance Green Anarchist has taken on population reduction.

The editorial in Green Anarchist 38 (Summer 95, p. 21) contains the following statement: ‘When we discussed population in GA 28, we argued current population levels aren’t a problem but if they were, women’s control over their own fertility would sort it , well eco-fascist, eh?’ This statement jars with the gloating comments to be found on page 17 of the same issue of Green Anarchist: ‘Forget about necrotising fascitis, the flesh eater, Ebola is the biggy , a virus as contagious as flu with a 90% mortality rate and no cure, no treatment. We don’t really have a datum to compare it with but the Black Death wiped out a third of Europe, 1346–9. If Ebola gets out into a major conurbation and is spread around the world through airliners, all our over population problems will be over...’

Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences by PNR (Alder Valley Anarchists, Camberley n.d.), the text of a lecture given by Paul Rogers on 24/11/92, further highlights the contradictory message sent out by Green Anarchist on the issue of population. Discussing feminist reaction to a pamphlet by Richard Hunt, Paul Rogers states (page 5): ‘the cover illustration of the first edition of The Natural Society showed men out in the fields driving tractors while the women were shown as remaining indoors preparing tea and sandwiches! He also argued that in order to maintain the cultural integrity of the small communities he advocated , necessary to keep order in the community on an informal, face-to-face basis , they would have to practice “xenophobia.” Hunt maintains this term was used in its root meaning, a ‘fear of strangers,’ but many felt his choice of terms was as ill considered as his choice of cover illustration. To his credit, though, Hunt did not echo the typical reductionist environmentalist line on population. On grounds of population density , the most important factor in determining whether there will be enough land available for those on it to live self-sufficiently , he argued that the UK was one of the nations most in need of reduced population levels.’

Green Anarchist’s public proclamations on population reduction, sexism and xenophobia, are schizophrenic. The editorial in Green Anarchist 38 claims Hunt’s ‘ideas took a reactionary turn during the Gulf War.’ This statement implies that the current membership of the Green Anarchist Network don’t consider the sexism and xenophobia of The Natural Society: A Basis for Green Anarchism (1976) to be reactionary since it was written before the Gulf War. It appears that Paul Rogers feels Hunt’s displays of sexism and xenophobia were ill considered because they led people to criticise the concept of Green Anarchism, but Rogers is remarkably reluctant to condemn these traits in Hunt’s thinking, traits which apparently reflect his own views. Of course, Green Anarchist claims to be against ‘bigotry,’ but then so did the official National Front prior to its disintegration. Likewise, it is interesting that GA should choose to cite what they had to say on population in Green Anarchist 28, the issue which immediately proceeded Hunt’s break with the group and contained his notorious article in favour of the Gulf War, since Hunt takes a firm Malthusian line in his current publication Alternative Green.

In our leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed, we stated that: ‘with its anti-urban ideology and utopian vision of small autonomous communities, Green Anarchist has yet to face the problem of how it plans to “dispose” of a huge “surplus” population...’ The statements quoted above prove that we were correct in making this assessment. In the end it doesn’t matter how many contradictory statements Green Anarchist makes about its position on population reduction, GA’s ideological opposition to mass society and technology necessitates a reduction in population levels if it is to be meaningfully implemented — and neo-Malthusianism is, to use GA’s own words, ‘well eco-fascist.’ In our leaflet, we observed that ‘Green Anarchist does not know what fascism is, and it is therefore incapable of recognising itself as fascist.’ Of course, we are quite happy to acknowledge that GA projects an image of itself as being actively opposed the BNP, but as our leaflet made clear, we view fascism as an evolving ideology and would be surprised if its more ‘sophisticated’ strands didn’t verbally condemn those forms of reaction that have become utterly discredited in the eyes of potential supporters. Even Ian Andrson, chair of what remains of the National Front (the rump Anderson still leads recently changed its name to the National Democratic Party), got in on the act earlier this summer when, on the Richard Littlejohn tv show, he denounced the BNP as ‘thugs.’

BABEL

However, we do not wish to limit ourselves to criticising Green Anarchist’s inability to identify or understand right-wing ideologies. Returning to Green Anarchist’s neat little formula for dealing with the issue of Malthusianism: ‘current population levels aren’t a problem but if they were, women’s control over their own fertility would sort it.’ GA appear to have come up with this verbal trick after reading George Bradford’s review of Reproductive Rights And Wrongs: The Global Politics of Population Control and Contraceptive Choice by Betsy Hartmann (Harper & Row, New York 1987) which is reproduced under the title Woman’s Freedom: Key to the Population Question in his book How Deep Is Deep Ecology? For our present purposes, it isn’t important who developed the insights Bradford was propagating in his text, what matters is the fact that they became completely deformed in Green Anarchist’s hands; we are no longer dealing with the burning issue of human emancipation, GA seem to think that simply giving women access to birth control and/or abortion will sort out any population problems that might potentially exist. This is, in fact, an inversion of Bradford’s argument, he states (p. 68): ‘The salvation of the marvellous green planet, our Mother Earth, depends on the liberation of women , and children and men , from social domination, exploitation and hierarchy. They must go together. Neither a radical political vision nor a profound ecological vision can exist without this fundamental dimension.’

On page 73, Bradford criticises the way in which the population-control establishment ‘avoids any discussion of the social context within which reproductive decisions are made (or not made),’ an argument that is equally applicable to Green Anarchist’s rhetorical trick. Bradford makes this point even more explicitly on page 82: ‘The question, of course, goes beyond population control and family planning. Women’s reproductive choice depends on their role in society as a whole, and their lack of choice is directly linked to their lack of autonomy and personhood as well as to their economic domination... Women’s freedom and well-being are at the centre of the resolution to the population problem, and that can only be faced within the larger social context.’ Clearly, GA’s claim that ‘women’s control over their own fertility would sort it,’ is more than just reductionist rhetoric, it destroys the logic of Bradford’s argument.

GA realise that they cannot simply dodge Bradford’s critique, although how conscious they are of the fact that they are recuperating it is unclear. Paul Rogers in Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences (p.20) states: ‘A key problem for deep ecologists is that, being human beings themselves, they will always understand “nature” anthropocentrically... The anti-humanism of their conclusions provoked such vigorous attacks on Earth First! from social ecologist Murray Bookchin and George Bradford, the editor of Fifth Estate, that it split the movement in 1990.’ By page 25 Rogers ludicrously claims that: ‘After reviewing their literature, the GA editorial group set about integrating the North American anarchist green traditions with the groundwork laid down by Hunt and the more radical elements of British green thought. As a result, the editorial in GA 29, the issue published immediately following Hunt’s resignation, noted that Green Anarchist was now “free to promote a more pro-situ, primitivist perspective.” ‘ Clearly, Green Anarchism as a form of ideological recuperation conforms to Guy Debord’s description of this phenomena in thesis 212 of Society Of The Spectacle (Black & Red, Detroit 1977): ‘Ideological facts were never a simple chimera, but rather a deformed consciousness of realities, and in this form they have been real factors which set in motion real deforming acts.’

Under the utterly bizarre general heading of American Anarchist Green Traditions and the equally misconceived subheading of Primitivism, Paul Rogers in Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences, has the following to say about the Situationist International (page 22): ‘Turning Marx on his head, they focused on his analysis of alienation, which argued that as the working class did not own what it produced, its sense of identity was undermined. Situationists argued that in an attempt to recover this identity, workers were forced to consume what they produced and to work producing more commodities to pay for that consumption.’ Of course, the SI did NOT turn Marx on his head, but no doubt Rogers feels compelled to make this claim because ‘anti-marxism’ is a touch stone of GA’s ideology. GA do not consciously oppose marxism, indeed they do not seem to know what it is, rather they attack an image of marxism propagated by both America and Russia (and their respective satellites) during the cold war.

In his Comments On The Society Of The Spectacle (Verso, London 1990, p. 13–14), Guy Debord observed that: ‘Spectacular domination’s first priority was to eradicate historical knowledge in general; beginning with just about all rational information and commentary on the most recent past. The evidence for this is so glaring it hardly needs further explanation. With consummate skill the spectacle organises ignorance of what is about to happen and, immediately afterwards, the forgetting of whatever has nevertheless been understood.’ Similarly, in an unsigned article in Internationale Situationiste 8 (Paris 1963) entitled The Avant-Garde Of Presence (English translation from Situationist International Anthology edited by Ken Knabb, Bureau of Public Secrets, Berkeley 1981, p. 109) the SI state: ‘The dialectic of history is such that the Situationist International’s theoretical victory is already forcing its adversaries to disguise themselves as situationists. There are now two tendencies in close struggle against us: those who proclaim themselves situationists without having any idea what they’re talking about... and those who, conversely, decide to adopt a few situationist ideas minus the situationists and without mentioning the SI.’

Likewise, in The Veritable Split In The International: Public Circular Of The Situationist International (Piranha, London 1974), Guy Debord and Gianfranco Sanguinetti express the utter contempt they felt towards people like Paul Rogers and the Green Anarchist editorial board, although it is unlikely they foresaw a future in which individuals openly proclaimed themselves to have adopted a pro-situ stance! Thesis 28 (page 36) reads as follows: ‘The pro-situs did not see in the SI a determined critico-practical activity explaining or advancing the social struggles of an epoch, but simply extremist ideas; and not so much extremist ideas as the idea of extremism; and in the last analysis not so much the idea of extremism as the image of extremist heroes collected together in a triumphant community. In “the work of the negative,” the pro-situs doubt the negative, and also the work. After having plebiscited the thought of history, they remain dry because they do not understand history, nor thought either. To accede to the affirmation, which tempts them strongly, of an autonomous personality, they only lack autonomy, personality, and the talent to affirm whatever it may be.’

SPELLS, CURSES AND DEMONS

In a tract ludicrously entitled Neoist Leaflet Attacking Paul Rogers And Green Anarchist (Paul Rogers isn’t mentioned in our leaflet about GA), the Lancaster Bomber (part of the Green Anarchist Network) conclude with a section headlined Action: ‘The thing is, with GA’s emphasis on @ction and people getting up off their bums and doing something, the Neoists aren’t in a position to argue with that. We invite everyone to judge us by our results. The state certainly thinks Green Anarchist is a magazine worth raiding, a magazine worth suppressing.’ This is delusional thinking, members of the British National Party and Combat 18 also get off their bums and do ‘something,’ but even GA appear to agree with us about the fact that just because an unreconstructed neo-Nazi thug is also an activist, this does not raise him or her beyond reproach. Likewise, if the state wanted to suppress Green Anarchist, it could do so with far less effort than it put into the completely successful suppression of the British Union of Fascists and the Imperial Fascist League after the outbreak of the Second World War. While the British state usually turns a blind eye to anarchist journals, it has, on occasion, suppressed publications; for example, Johann Most’s London based paper Die Frieheit was raided and suppressed by Scotland Yard in 1881. The state has never experienced any problems suppressing sects and the fact of the matter is, only openly organised struggle on the part of vast majorities can go beyond a mere coup d’état and thereby achieve the fundamental aims of communism, that is to say the abolition of alienation as the only possible means of attaining real human emancipation on a global scale.

The fact that an issue of Green Anarchist appeared after the production of the Lancaster Bomber leaflet proved conclusively that the state was NOT interested in suppressing GA, since it is ludicrous to suggest that GA is capable of resisting suppression by the state. GA’s whinging on this subject is a clear indication that they suffer from all the usual democratic illusions and do NOT believe their own propaganda about the evils of statism; liberal regimes have demonstrated time and again that they are more than willing to let the mask of ‘accountability’ slip when they deem this necessary, GA need look no further than the attack on the Rainbow Warrior and the murder of Hilda Murrell if they still require proof of this banality. Lots of people have had their collars felt but this is no litmus test of their revolutionary credentials. Likewise, it is absurd for the Lancaster Bomber to ask us to judge them on their results, when this is, in fact, what we’ve been doing all along.

We have found Green Anarchist wanting precisely because those whose personalities are deformed by an activist mentality are doomed to repeat the mistakes of previous generations of swamp inhabitants. To cite just one example, Green Anarchist have learnt nothing from the total failure of the White Panther movement, whose founder John Sinclair wrote in his book Guitar Army (Douglas Book Corporation, New York 1972. p. 51) that: ‘isolation from the people drove us straight into the arms of the government in its various incarnations, and instead of being alarmed by this we glorified in it, because it was all the proof we needed that we were “really revolutionary,” you know? We fell into the trap... of letting the established order define the terms of our lives, and we not only let ourselves get caught in it but we even revelled in it, thinking that we had decisively proved ourselves as a threat to the system we hated so much. When I was dragged off to the penitentiary on the 25^th of July, 1969, where I’ve been ever since, we felt that we had really accomplished something...’

The victimisers see themselves as the passive victims of their own victim, and they see their victim as supremely active, eminently capable of destroying them. The scapegoat always appears to be a more powerful agent, a more powerful cause than he really is.

IGNATUS LOYOA A THE BARICADES

The activist disease, or swamp fever as it’s commonly known, can be traced back at least as far as Mikhail Bakunin, the founding ‘father’ of ‘revolutionary’ anarchism. In August 1848, prior to succumbing to the skeletal embrace of anarchism, and therefore at a time when he still supported Pan-Slavism, Bakunin asserted in a letter to the German poet Georg Herwegh that ‘revolution is instinct rather than thought; it acts and spreads as instinct, and as instinct it wages its first battles...’ (cited by Aileen Kelly in Mikhail Bakunin: A Study in the Psychology and Politics of Utopianism, Yale University Press, New Haven 1987, p. 134). In this way, political activism functions in an analogous fashion to the mind control techniques of religious cults, whose members are kept busy from dawn until dusk precisely to prevent them reflecting on the efficacy of whatever it is they are supposed to be doing. From the point of view of a religious or political ‘guru’ this is a highly desirable state of affairs, since it makes their disciples very easy to control and prevents them finding time in which to think about breaking with the sect.

Max Nomad in the book Apostles Of Revolution (Secker and Warburg, London 1939, p 180) illustrates the influence of the Jesuits on Bakunin’s thinking by quoting from a letter the ‘revolutionary’ wrote on 7/2/1870, at the very height of his ‘anarchist’ activity: ‘Did you ever ponder over the principal reason for the power and vitality of the Jesuit Order? Shall I tell you the reason? Well, it consists in the absolute extinction of the individual in the will, the organisation, and the action of the community. And I am asking you: is this so great a sacrifice for a really strong, passionate and earnest man? It means the sacrifice of appearance for the sake of reality, of the empty halo for the sake of real power, of the word for the sake of action. This is the sacrifice which I demand from all our friends, and in which I am always ready to set the first example. I do not want to be I, I want to be We. For, I repeat it a thousand times, only on this condition will we win, will our idea win. Well, this victory is my only passion.’

This is the real doctrine of the founding father of anarchist activism, beneath all his fine rhetoric about ‘freedom’ and ‘individuality,’ he is utterly contemptuous of both. By demanding a choice between ‘thought’ and ‘action,’ the various groups and individuals infected with swamp fever are promoting a false dichotomy. Clearly, the material unfolding of the class struggle leads the proletariat to self-consciousness, and therefore to a unity of theory and practice, something swamp inhabitants rail against precisely because they don’t operate from a proletarian perspective. As a pole of regroupment for ‘revolutionary’ anarchism, Green Anarchist is thoroughly Bakuninist in both its incoherent theorising and its reactionary activist practice. The Situationist Guy Debord, whose thought GA ludicrously claims to have synthesised into Green Anarchism, observed in Society Of The Spectacle (thesis 92): ‘The viewpoint which fuses all partial desires has given anarchism the merit of representing the rejection of existing conditions in favour of the whole of life, and not of a privileged critical specialisation; but this fusion is considered in the absolute, according to individual caprice, before its actual realisation, thus condemning anarchism to an incoherence too easily seen through. Anarchism has merely to repeat and to replay the same simple, total conclusion in every single struggle, because this first conclusion was from the beginning identified with the entire outcome of the movement. Thus Bakunin could write in 1873, when he left the Fédération Jurassience: “During the past nine years, more ideas have been developed within the International than would be needed to save the world, if ideas alone could save it, and I challenge anyone to invent a new one. It is no longer the time for ideas, but for facts and acts.” There is no doubt that this conception retains an element of the historical thought of the proletariat, the certainty that ideas must become practice, but it leaves the historical terrain by assuming that the adequate forms for this passage to practice have already been found and will never change.’

In an article entitled Anarchism Or Communism (International Review 79, Brussels Winter 1994), the International Communist Current quote a passage from Bakunin’s Statism and Anarchy about ‘chaotic and destructive’ ‘negative passion’ in which ‘the masses are always ready to sacrifice themselves’ before commenting that: ‘Such passages not only confirm Bakunin’s non-proletarian outlook in general; they also enable us to understand why he never broke with an élitist view of the role of the revolutionary organisation. Whereas for marxism the revolutionary vanguard is the product of a class becoming conscious of itself, for Bakunin the popular masses can never go beyond the level of instinctive and chaotic rebellion: consequently, if anything more than this is to be achieved, it requires the work of a “general staff” acting behind the scenes. In short, it’s the old idealist notion of a Holy Spirit descending into unconscious matter. The anarchists who never fail to attack Lenin’s mistaken formulation about revolutionary consciousness being introduced into the proletariat from outside are curiously silent about Bakunin’s version of the same notion.’

The texts that document historical atrocities — the judicial records of witch-hunts, for instance — offer the same fantastic charges as myths, the same indifference to concrete evidence, and the same unexamined and massive conviction that everything is true, a conviction often voiced, if not actually shared, by the scapegoats themselves.

EROS AND THE MYSTERIES OF LOVE

The work Lenin As Philosopher by the council communist Anton Pannekoek was first published in Amsterdam as long ago as 1938. In this book, Pannekoek demonstrated conclusively that Lenin was NOT a marxist. By quoting from pages 95 to 97 of the British edition (Merlin Press, London 1975), we can provide a sketch of a much more detailed argument: ‘As a fight against absolutism, landed property, and clergy, the fight in Russia was very similar to the former fight of the bourgeoisie and intellectuals in Western Europe; so the thoughts and fundamental ideas of Lenin must be similar to what had been propagated in middle-class materialism, and his sympathies went to its spokesmen. In Russia, however, it was the working class who had to wage the fight... Hence Lenin gave to his materialism the name and garb of Marxism... There is a widespread opinion that the bolshevist party was marxist, and that it was only for practical reasons that Lenin, the great scholar and leader of Marxism, gave to the revolution another direction than what Western workers called communism , thereby showing his realistic marxian insight. The critical opposition to the Russian and C.P. politics tries indeed to oppose the despotic practice of the present Russian government , termed Stalinism , to the “true” Marxist principles of Lenin and old bolshevism. Wrongly so. Not only because in practice these politics were inaugurated already by Lenin. But also because the alleged Marxism of Lenin and the bolshevist party is nothing but a legend. Lenin never knew real Marxism. Whence should he have taken it? Capitalism he knew only as colonial capitalism; social revolution he knew only as the annihilation of big land ownership and Czarist despotism. Russian bolshevism cannot be reproached for having abandoned the way of Marxism, for it was never on that way. Every page of Lenin’s philosophical work is there to prove it; and Marxism itself, by its thesis that theoretical opinions are determined by social relations and necessities, makes clear that it could not be otherwise.’

As Aileen Kelly points out in her book on Bakunin (page 267), Lenin expressed admiration for the doctrine of Bakunin’s disciple Sergei Nechaev, who took his mentor’s ideas about the ‘invisible dictatorship’ to a logically murderous conclusion. Indeed, Lenin’s ideological debt to anarchism and related currents of Russian populism, is readily evident in the fact that he gave one of his tracts the title What Is To Be Done? (the name of a famous nineteenth-century novel by the nihilist Nikolai Chernyshevsky). While anarchists are willing to reprint both Nechaev’s Catechism Of The Revolutionist and suitably doctored versions Bakunin’s Revolutionary Catechism (the English translation in Sam Dolgoff’s selection of Bakunin’s writing bizarrely omits the first point), they show little willingness to assist in the dissemination of works such as Bakunin’s Catechism Of A Freemason, which might offer the proletariat valuable insights into the exact nature of their plans for an ‘invisible dictatorship.’ At this point, we would like to make it clear that we consider early Freemasonry to have played a progressive role in consolidating bourgeois rule and thereby assisting in the liquidation of feudal social relations. However, while we thoroughly condemn the reactionary anti-Masonic movements led by adventurers such as Henry Dana Ward, William Wirt, Nesta Webster et al, and forcefully reject the idea that there has ever been an international Masonic conspiracy, we cannot ignore the fact that Freemasonry is an instrument of bourgeois rule, albeit one of minor significance in Northern Europe and North America.

Returning to Nechaev, he initially created a mystique around himself by going into hiding after spreading a false rumour that he’d been imprisoned in the Peter and Paul fortress. Sometime later, he reappeared and pretended he’d escaped from this impregnable prison. These are the tactics of the conman rather than the revolutionary, but they nevertheless impressed the extraordinarily credulous Bakunin. Kelly (page 263) describes how Bakunin’s career as a professional ‘revolutionary’ reached its sordid peak when he provided Nechaev with ‘a document declaring him to be an accredited representative of the Russian section of the “World Revolutionary Alliance” (an organisation invented on the spot by Bakunin) and, on the strength of the authority which this bestowed on him, founded a new secret society in Moscow, called The People’s Revenge... Little is known about the organisation, but it seems never to have consisted of more than a few dozen members... Nechaev... demanded unquestioning obedience from his group in the name of the Alliance which he purported to represent. When one member of the group, a student named Ivanov, became suspicious of Nechaev’s credentials, the later, on the pretext that Ivanov intended to betray the organisation, induced the three other members to collaborate with him in Ivanov’s murder, which took place in November 1869. There was no evidence for Nechaev’s accusation against Ivanov, the aim of the murder was apparently to cement the society by complicity in crime. The discovery of Ivanov’s body by the police led to the uncovering of the secret society... The People’s Revenge was destroyed.’

A more detailed account of Nechaev’s career can be found in Nomad’s Apostles Of Revolution. Paul Thomas in Karl Marx And The Anarchists (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1980, p. 293) observes that: ‘The Nechaev episode shows that Bakunin’s pre-occupation with reckless, marginal, déclassé elements in society was no mere abstract, doctrinaire commitment but one which he actually tried to put into practice, with dire and sinister results that did much to discredit Bakuninism in the International. Nechaev, who was made famous by Bakunin, himself practised what he preached, thus catching Bakunin short; he is best regarded, perhaps, as Bakunin’s Bakunin , the protégé or disciple who becomes plus royaliste que le roi and reveals to his mentor the unwelcome logic of his own position. As such Nechaev might serve as the nemesis for Bakunin...’ Of course, Bakunin was so indifferent about the social consequences of his doctrine that he didn’t even bother breaking with Nechaev after the truth about the murder of Ivanov was revealed to him, and it was proven beyond any doubt that the vast conspiratorial organisation his protégé claimed to head was a chimera; the rupture finally came when the father of ‘revolutionary’ anarchism realised he’d been conned out of a considerable sum of money by his disciple, and that various incriminating documents had been stolen, most probably for the purpose of blackmail.

THE SYMBOLS ANO THE TEACHINES

As populists, Green Anarchist, like Bakunin before them, throw the ideological justification for their activity together willy-nilly, anything is grist to the activists mill and they appear completely indifferent about the consequences of their actions; perhaps they don’t believe there are any consequences to what they do. In Green Anarchist 38 (page 7) there is an article entitled Back To Basics? which attacks marxism, beneath this there is a more sophisticated piece of garbage by-lined to John Moore (a lecturer in the School of Creative, Cultural and Social Studies at Thames Valley University) about so called ‘anarcho-primitivism’ (are there any anarchist doctrines that aren’t thoroughly primitive in their failure to unite theory and practice?). While Moore’s piece clearly isn’t marxist, it draws very heavily on the forms of marxism taken up by Fredy Perlman, that is to say the left communist tradition of Camatte and Bordiga. The anarchist Guy Aldred in his pamphlet Pioneers Of Anti-Parliamentarism (Bakunin Press, Glasgow 1940) admits: ‘Bakunin was unquestionably inferior to Marx as a political economist. His economics are Marxist, and he subscribed enthusiastically to Marx’s theory of surplus value and dissection of the Capitalist system. Bakunin believed in the materialist conception of history even more thoroughly than Marx.’ Likewise, George Woodcock, another ‘libertarian,’ states in his Anarchism (Pelican, London 1963, p. 135) that Bakunin’s ‘best essays are short pieces produced for special occasions, with all the weaknesses of topical literature. Nor are the ideas one can cull from his writings very original, except when he talks of the organisation of revolutions; otherwise he says little that is not derived in some way from Hegel or Marx, from Comte or Proudhon.’ Paul Thomas in Karl Marx And The Anarchists (p. 296) cites an unnamed document of 1871 in which Bakunin states: ‘as far as learning was concerned, Marx was, and still is, incomparably more advanced than I.’ Recently some swamp inhabitants have been talking about constructing a political theory by uniting the best of Marx with the best of Bakunin, but since anything within Bakunin’s ‘anti-system’ that isn’t thoroughly rotten is lifted straight from Marx, this is an utterly pointless exercise.

Bakunin’s concept of the ‘invisible dictatorship’ found its practical realisation in Stalinism and Maoism (beneath a democratic facade, the secret police hold the real power in this type of totalitarian state), therefore it comes as no surprise that Green Anarchist is attracted to these models. Discussing Richard Hunt’s ideological evolution in Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences (p. 13), Paul Rogers writes that: ‘Pacifism was rife in the Ecology Party and Hunt was unfamiliar with Maoist doctrines of guerrilla warfare. If it had not been for these limitations, Hunt would have undoubtedly concluded Who’s Starving Them? by noting that his idea of revolution on the periphery had elevated Mao’s “war of the flea” to the level of a strategy for global economic and social transformation.’ From Max Nomad’s discussion of Bakunin’s Revolutionary Catechism of 1866 in Apostles Of Revolution, it is more than apparent that Rogers fails to trace Hunt’s ideas back through Maoism to the common source of both these doctrines in the shape of the founding ‘father’ of ‘revolutionary’ anarchism (Nomad p. 177): ‘In short, the whole political and economic organisation was to be built up “from the bottom to the top and from the periphery to the centre according to the principle of free association and federation.” ‘ From here, Nomad proceeds to discuss the influence of Bakuninism on Leninism (p. 178–9): ‘The document called Organisation is to a certain extent even more revealing than the Revolutionary Catechism. It deals with the organisation of the revolutionary forces and distinguishes two different organisations: “The International Family properly speaking, and the National Families, the latter to be organised everywhere in such a way as to remain always subordinated to the absolute guidance of the International Family.”

‘The International Family was to consist of “International Brothers,” of whom, in turn, there were two categories , “Honorary Brothers” and “Active Brothers.” The Honorary Brothers were what nowadays would be called “angels,” while the Active Brothers were the militants. The organisation was secret, and all members were subject to strict discipline. However, it was the duty of the secret organisation to build up open organisations wherever this was possible, the task of the latter being to win sympathisers.

‘The International Brothers constituted the higher aristocracy among the conspirators of Bakunin’s organisation. They were, so to speak, the “Bakuninists of the first rank” in the terminology of the Blanquist societies of the same period. Bakunin believed that about one hundred International Brothers would suffice for organising the world revolution. The “second rank” consisted of National Families, which “constitute a degree of apprenticeship as compared with the great International Family. The object of this subordinate organisation is, as far as possible, to connect the revolutionary elements available everywhere with the universal enterprise of the International Brothers.” Moreover, “The National Family of each country is formed in such a way as to be subject to absolute and exclusive control by the International Society.” Furthermore, “All members of the national Junta owes absolute obedience in all cases.” Thus obedience, discipline, subordination, and penalties for infractions of the rules constitute the leitmotiv of this famous classic of... Anarchism.

‘It so happens that all of these methods and principles now form the basis of the organisation of the Russian Communist Party and particularly of the Communist International. The complete subservience of all the national Communist Parties to the Executive Committee of the Communist International in Moscow; the arbitrary changes in party leadership by orders from Moscow; the nomination of all local party officials from above and not by election, it is all part and parcel of a preposterous paradox: that the unheard-of tyranny now exercised by the leadership of the Russian Communist Party is the intellectual child of a man who has gone down in history as the great enemy of all authority. (In fact the Bolshevik historian Steklov, admits that Bakunin’s insistence upon the importance of a body of professional revolutionists was a sort of anticipation of Lenin’s methods of organisation.)’

THE METAPHXSICAL HISTORY OF THE MACROCOSM AND MICROCOSM

Like the flea, Bakuninism is a parasite that lives on the blood of real social movements. This is why Green Anarchism takes on board anything it thinks will appeal to potential supporters. There is no depth to Green Anarchism, its ideologists don’t care whether or not their doctrine is coherent, what they’re trying to project is an image that people will ‘buy.’ It is precisely because Green Anarchism has no substance that its handful of adherents become hysterical if anyone ‘dares’ to criticism them. In Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences (p. 17), Paul Rogers writes that he: ‘attempted to build links with the media to raise GA’s profile, much as Class War had done throughout the 1980s... This strategy met with small success. Following the 1990 riot in Trafalgar Square against the introduction of the poll tax, GA’s editorial group were interviewed as part of a general media overview of the British anarchist movement. Later in that year, they were interviewed again after expressing their support for the attempted assassinations of the vivisectors Margaret Baskerville and Max Headley by anonymous animal rights militants.’ Despite courting the media in this fashion, Green Anarchist 36 was dedicated to the theme ‘the media sucks.’

Recently, Green Anarchist have attempted to build their reputation within the swamp on the back of the claim that the security services are trying to destroy them by spreading disinformation about Green Anarchism through the national press and other media outlets. As we have already pointed out, if the British state wishes to destroy Green Anarchist, it is perfectly capable of doing so. It would be tedious to examine every claim Green Anarchist has made about media misrepresentation, but those we have looked at don’t hold any water whatsoever. The editorial in Green Anarchist 37 (page 21) claimed that the article Organised Chaos in the Independent of 25/10/94 contained an ‘insinuation that GA is still associated with Richard Hunt,’ when it actually stressed the desire of the current membership of GA to distance themselves from their ideological architect Richard Hunt.

Similarly, the editorial in Green Anarchist 38 disingenuously quoted the satirical leaflet Green And Brown Anarchist, which used humour to make a series of points, as if it was a piece of disinformation. In the same editorial, criticism of an anti-tax poster was distorted into being ‘laughable’ criticism of an anti-poll tax poster. The item in question doesn’t mention the poll tax, and it would be bizarre indeed if Green Anarchist were still disseminating propaganda material on this issue long after the community charge had been abolished (as we stated in our leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed ‘anti-tax agitation is a favoured tactic of the extreme right, since it diverts attention away from the root cause of alienation and instead attacks a by-product of capitalist relations’). As a campaigning issue, anti-tax agitation receives more attention from broad swathes of the American far-Right than any other topic; US extremists claim that liberal politicians tax the rural middle class and then spend the money on the inner cities in order to ‘buy’ the votes of the urban poor (the racial content of this argument is made more or less explicit depending to how close the groups and individuals utilising it are to the conservative mainstream). On the other hand, the fierce resistance to the poll tax in Britain arose precisely because it was a way of taking money from the deprived inner cities and redistributing it to suburban and rural toffs. The fact that Green Anarchist are seeking to confuse the sharp class distinctions between those who agitated against poll tax, and the ongoing campaign by far-Right extremists against tax as an alleged subsidy for the poor, demonstrates the way in which they create an ideological vortex or sucking pit.

The scapegoat genesis requires an awareness of the non-conscious dimension of scapegoating. The one thing we must not expect from a scapegoat-generated myth is a recognition that the victim is a SCAPEGOAT in the ritual or Frazerian sense, or, in other words, a recognition that the choice of the victim is arbitrary, that the causal link between the victim and whatever disaster is ascribed to him is not real. We expect no such thing from medieval or modern persecutors.

THE ORGANISATION OF THE CULT

Since their ideology is completely incoherent, Green Anarchist are incapable of engaging in open debate, and instead demonise anyone who ‘dares’ to criticise them. Just as other fascists use code words such as ‘bankers’ to describe the non-existent conspiracy that they allege has been orchestrated against them, so Green Anarchist resort to smearing critics to their left as ‘assets’ of M15 or Special Branch. Green Anarchist’s response to criticism is remarkably similar to that of their ‘spiritual’ father Bakunin, whose anti-semitic tirades eventually destroyed the First International. Kelly (page 231) quotes a typical example of Bakunin’s contentless polemic: ‘ridiculous inventions, falsification of principles and of facts, odious insinuations, cynical lies, infamous calumnies... a botched-up collection of all the dirty and absurd inventions that the German and Russian Jews, their friends, their agents, their disciples, with their wicked malice... have spread against us all...’

Given this propensity for empty rhetoric, it will not surprise anyone that Bakuninism in its more ‘open’ ‘anarchist’ (as opposed to its ‘disguised’ Leninist) forms has been a fraud and a sham in practice. As the ‘libertarian’ George Woodcock observes in his book Anarchism (p. 136), Bakunin’s: ‘admirers, admitting the thinness of his literary and theoretical claims, have usually countered with the contention that Bakunin was really significant as a man of action. Yet even his actions, dramatic as they were, often seem singularly ineffectual. He was involved in more pointless plots and more forlorn hopes than most other revolutionaries in an age peculiarly given to such ventures. He arrived too late for the active phase of the only successful uprising of his life, the February Revolution of 1848 in Paris; the five other insurrections, spread over the map of Europe, in which he took a leading part, were all either heroic disasters or comic fiascos. The secret societies he loved to invent were stillborn or expired early from internal dissensions. And at the end of it all he died a lonely man, out of the struggle to which he had devoted his life and deserted by his own anarchist followers.’

Bakunin was a fantasist who repeatedly claimed to head various vast international conspiracies, when in reality the secret societies he actually established never contained more than a handful of deluded members. Green Anarchist works in an analogous fashion, while its contacts list is made up of more than thirty addresses, we estimate that the Green Anarchist Network consists of approximately half a dozen individuals. We spoke to the Cambridge Anarchists who are listed by the Green Anarchist Network as its East Anglia co-ordinator, and they said they didn’t really have anything to do with GA (although they were happy to be included on the contacts list). The Buckfastleigh address GA give as that of their South West England co-ordinator is also the national address for the Anarchist Communist Federation. Likewise, many other addresses on the GA contacts list actually belong to separate organisations. The Green Anarchist Network might look impressive on paper but in reality, like so many other Bakuninist fantasies, it doesn’t really exist. GA wants to project itself as ‘the invisible pilot at the centre of the popular storm’ (the phrase is from Bakunin’s notorious letter of 1870 to Albert Richard in which he details his conspiratorial methods), which is why it invites readers to send in details of ‘political’ actions, and these are then listed in tedious thumbnail outlines on page after page of the paper. These lists give GA the appearance of being the co-ordinating power behind this activity and in this fashion, their federalism is revealed as a form of centralism.

However, this is not to say that Bakuninism doesn’t pose a real threat to the proletariat on the rare occasions it reaches any kind of critical mass. Engels in The Bakuninists At Work (written in 1873, quoted here from the pamphlet of the same name issued by Progress Publishers, Moscow 1976, p.26) concludes a detailed commentary by observing: ‘As soon as they were confronted with a serious revolutionary situation, the Bakuninists were compelled to throw their whole previous programme overboard. To begin with they sacrificed their dogma of political, and above all electoral, abstention. Then came the turn of anarchy, the abolition of the State, instead of abolishing the State, they tried, on the contrary to set up a number of new small states. They went on to abandon their principle that the workers must not participate in any revolution that did not have as its aim the immediate and complete emancipation of the proletariat, and took part in a movement whose purely bourgeois character was patently evident. Finally, they trampled underfoot the principle they themselves had only just proclaimed , that the establishment of a revolutionary government is but a new deception and a new betrayal of the working class , by comfortably installing themselves in the government juntas of the separate towns, moreover almost always as an impotent minority, paralysed and politically exploited by the bourgeoisie.’ As the ICC made crystal clear in International Review 79, ‘Engels acerbic comments are indeed almost a prediction of what the anarchists were to do in Spain in 1936, albeit in a different historical context.’

In its desperate, but to date spectacularly unsuccessful, attempts to attain critical mass, Green Anarchist tries to suck all other swamp inhabitants into its depths, thus accelerating the process of decomposition. We have already mentioned the fact that the Anarchist Communist Federation share their national address with GA; the ACF openly tout their Bakuninism in the pamphlets Anarchism: As We See It and Basic Bakunin. While we are highly critical of the ACF’s Bakuninism, on the basis of the article Overpopulation , Or A Bit Rich? (Organise! 38, April-June 1995, p. 10–12), we view their position on population as being both acceptable and utterly distinct from that of Green Anarchist; if Malthusianism is viewed as one of the tests of ‘eco-fascism,’ then GA and the ACF fall on opposite sides of the dividing line. We therefore find it strange that GA and the ACF should share an address. Apart from its PO Box in Buckfastleigh, the ACF simultaneously operates out of a mailing address in London provided by Freedom; and in this manner, the Kropotkinists are also sucked into the vortex of Green Anarchism. The Manchester based group Subversion collaborate with the ACF, although in their defence it must be admitted that they have issued public statements saying there are problems with Bakunin; since Subversion denounce Class War as leftists for supporting Republicanism, we don’t understand why they think the ACF are acceptable. John Moore, whose work has been published in Green Anarchist, is closely associated with both the Bulletin Of Anarchist Research and the journal Anarchist Studies.

Likewise, the pro-situ Michel Prigent foolishly allowed himself to be taken in by GA’s empty rhetoric and penned a letter to Freedom (27/5/95) in which he attacked the satirical leaflet Green And Brown Anarchist for containing the slogan ‘long live death.’ Although Prigent correctly identifies this slogan as something chanted by the Spanish fascists, he failed to understand the suitability of its use in this satirical context. The slogan ‘long live death’ was coined by Bakunin’s close associate Aleksandr Herzen; the slogan is cited with accreditation to Herzen by Guy Aldred in his pamphlet Bakunin (Bakunin Press, Glasgow 1940, p. 29). As Richard Essex pointed out in his response to Prigent’s epistle, (Freedom 10/6/95): ‘It is perhaps a sad irony that someone who has dedicated much of their life to preserving the mythology of a movement which placed itself on the terrain of the game and the combination of humour with the serious business of overthrowing the state, should react in such a way.’

In article 19 of the second section of Catechism Of The Revolutionist (written in 1869, AK Press edition, Stirling 1989, p. 8), Nechaev announces under the general heading of The Attitude Of The Revolutionary Towards Society that: ‘The fourth category consists of politically ambitious persons and liberals of various hues. With them we can conspire according to their own programmes, pretending that we are blindly following them, while in fact we are taking control of them, rooting out all their secrets and compromising them to the utmost, so that they are irreversibly implicated...’ Although it does not appear to be a conscious policy on GA’s part, this is exactly the effect association with GA is having on large swathes of the green and anarchist milieus. This is the central mechanism by which Green Anarchist’s activities are accelerating the process of decomposition within the swamp, making it clear that sustained outbreaks of intransigent Bakuninism create a sucking pit from a vortex of baseless fantasies and outright lies. Having made this discovery with very little effort on our own part, we are left wondering why the ICC has failed to mention this phenomena in recent articles such as Anarchism Fails The Tests Of War And Revolution (World Revolution 177, December 93/January 94) or Breaking With Anarchism And The Swamp (World Revolution 185, June 95).

Even in our world, scapegoating is not totally without effects. Even if the scapegoat is really an insider, the threat transforms him into an outsider, and the remaining insiders feel united as they never did before. They form a new and tighter inside. The alien threat displaces everything else; internal quarrels are forgotten. A new unity and comradeship prevails among those who, feeling attacked as a group, also feel they must defend themselves as a group.

THE REIGN OF QUANTITY

Robin Ramsay in a piece entitled New Threats For Old? in Lobster 28 (December 1994, p.17–20) makes some interesting points about the conspiracy theories being peddled by Green Anarchist and their close associate Larry O’Hara; these concern the alleged fabrication of an eco-terrorist animal rights ‘threat’ by the security services and the national media: ‘it isn’t all being fabricated , or even amplified. If anything, the scale of the attacks , terrorism by most lights , by animal rights activists is being under reported. The state and the media appear to me to be colluding, not in the amplification or fabrication of an animal rights ‘threat,’ but in denying the animal rights ‘guerrillas’ publicity. This is certainly the impression you get if you read , and take literally , the “Diary Of Actions” printed in Green Anarchist.... Take the issue of Spring 1994. On page 2 they print half a page of such “actions” ranging from bombs sent, to “re-decorating” someone’s house, and claim that there are 1800 of such “actions” annually, offering half a page as a “round-up” of some they know about. Little of this reaches the major media.’

The most important words in the quote from Ramsay are ‘take literally,’ since we have already demonstrated that GA cannot be trusted to supply reliable information about themselves or anyone else. As we have shown, swamp inhabitants are prone to grossly exaggerating the size and importance of their organisations and ‘their’ activities. While we do NOT believe that greens or anarchists are involved in any form of ‘terrorist’ activity at the time of writing, there is a danger that one or a small number of adventurers will become so excited by the dynamic being set up in the pages of Green Anarchist, that they will attempt to take up this extreme form of counter-revolutionary struggle; we can be certain that anyone who does so will have learnt nothing from the ignoble failures of the Weather faction of the SDS, who went ‘underground’ as a ‘counter-cultural’ ‘vanguard’ at the end of the sixties.

As Gianfranco Sanguinetti observes in On Terrorism And The State (Chronos, London 1982, p. 100): ‘It is certainly not a question of “disagreeing” with terrorism in a stupid and abstract manner, like the militants of Lotta Continua do, and still less of admiring the “comrades who made mistakes” like the so called Autonomes do , who thus give the infamous Stalinists a pretext for preaching systematic deletion , but it is a matter of judging it purely on its results, of seeing who benefits from it, of clearly saying who practices terrorism, and what use the spectacle makes of it , and then it is a matter of drawing conclusions once and for all.

‘Obliging everyone to continually take a position for or against mysterious and obscure incidents, prefabricated in reality for this precise end, this is the real terrorism, to continually compel the entire working class to declare itself against such and such attack, which everyone, excepting the parallel services, has no part in. This is what allows power to maintain the general passivity and the contemplation of this indecent spectacle, this is what permits trade union bureaucrats to reunite, under their anti-working class directives, the workers of each factory in struggle where a boss regularly gets shot in the legs.’

Right now the mysterious incidents are on the whole taking place in the deformed imaginations of Green Anarchist and Larry O’Hara. These creeps talk about spooks, security and Searchlight as if we hadn’t heard it all before. Anarchy 36 (2^nd series, summer 1983, p. 23–25) contains the article Sniper which, a dozen years ago, created a sensation in the swamp: ‘Sniper shines the searchlight on Gerry Gable and illuminates some disturbing facts... Not only has Gable admitted, as part of his defence in the 1963/4 burglary trial, that he hoped to supply information to Special Branch on David Irving, but a confidential memorandum written by him to his producers in London Weekend Television... on 2 May 1977 gave clear, hard, evidence that he has also engaged in a two-way traffic of information with the security services of several countries, and acted as a conduit of misinformation for M15 against fellow journalists, and socialists.’

It appears that swamp inhabitants have no memory and no sense of history; this information was widely distributed and yet, for several years now, Larry O’Hara and GA have been whipping up hysteria among greens and anarchists by presenting it to them all over again. The same information has also been touted as the fruit of research by the National Front Security and Information Department, their version of it can be found in the pamphlet The Other Face Of Searchlight: Thuggery, Buggery, Arson and Whores (National Front Security and Information Department, London 1989). As we said in our leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed: ‘Since Searchlight has never claimed to be a revolutionary organisation, it is absurd for Green Anarchist and O’Hara to expect it to behave like one. They might just as well attack the Spectator or the Daily Telegraph for the same reason, or rail against a horse because it isn’t a zebra.’ The logic of this argument also applies to the hysterical prose of Sniper, the National Front Security and Information Department and the anonymous author of White Lies: A Conspiracy to Promote Violence in the City of Leeds (Leeds Nationalist Council, 1995). Green Anarchist 38 (p. 12–14) provided Larry O’Hara with a forum for what basically amounted to an extended advert (including address and other ordering details) for the latter document, which ludicrously depicts Leeds BNP and their friends as a drinking club of ‘decent folk’ who are being persecuted by leftists and Special Branch.

Returning to Anarchy 36, pages 7 to 15 are taken up with A Wink, A Nod... Or A Shake Of The Hand, an exposé of Freemasonry by the hardcore Bakuninist Stuart Christie. This is followed by a hilarious, but unfortunately unattributed, article entitled The Frankfurt Bombings: Setting the Record Straight (p.16–18): ‘Too late to make any changes as Anarchy 35 went to press, we learned that three of the bomb attacks against US military targets included in our report from West Germany (RZ , Bombing On!) were the work of a neo-Nazi cell based in Frankfurt. This sort of mistake (as Black Flag, who kindly pointed out that we should check our sources, well knows) is an occupational hazard for any publication rushing to meet a deadline. The US military has been a central target for the armed resistance of the German Left since the formation of the Red Army Faction in 1970. Confusion is bound to arise when the extreme Right begins to jump on the bandwagon of ‘anti-imperialism,’ even to the extent of using the same rhetoric. The Frankfurt bombings mark a new point of departure for the neo-Nazi para-militaries in Germany... They are symptomatic of the ‘Third Position’ (Nationalist Revolutionary) style of fascism currently enjoying popularity with the Nazi international...’ History repeats itself, the first time as farce, the second as tragedy. No doubt the rush of deadlines also accounts for Larry O’Hara and Green Anarchist misidentifying individuals as spooks, the right as the left, the top as the bottom, and the centre as the periphery.

THE WAY OF INITIATION

In a review of Hakim Bey’s Radio Sermonettes in Green Anarchist 38 (p. 18), GA state that: ‘His Tong is one of the best chapters on how and why secret societies may be the most useful form for revolutionary anarchist groups.’ Here we see the old Bakuninist fantasy of the ‘invisible dictatorship’ being openly circulated once again; the Tong were actually one of a number of secret societies involved in the bloody suppression of the workers movement in China, the most notorious incidents taking place in Shanghai in 1927. The ICC in an article entitled A Link In the Chain Of Imperialist War (International Review 81, Summer 1995, p.14–19) comment that: ‘On the 12^th of April a massive and bloody repression organised by Chiang was unleashed in Shanghai. Gangs of lumpenproletarians from the secret societies who had always played the role of strike-breakers were let loose against the workers. The troops of the Guomindang , the supposed “allies” of the workers , were directly employed to disarm and arrest the proletarian militias. The proletariat tried to respond on the following day by declaring a general strike, but contingents of demonstrators were intercepted by troops, leading to numerous victims. Martial law was immediately imposed and all workers’ organisations were banned. In a few days, five thousand workers were killed...’ The usefulness of this in many ways commendable article, is limited by the ICC’s failure to address the issue of how the Chinese anarchist movement responded to the repression. Arif Dirlik in Anarchism In The Chinese Revolution (University Of California Press, Berkeley 1991, p. 260–1) glosses over what he clearly considers to be an embarrassing episode with the comment that: ‘It may be no coincidence that the meeting in Shanghai at which anarchists drew up their plans for activity within the Guomindang followed shortly on the heels of Chiang Kai-shek’s suppression of communism, followed by a massacre not only of Communists but of Shanghai laborers as well.’

Equally disturbing is the way in which Green Anarchism appears to be reviving in a coded form, and probably quite unconsciously on the part of its activists, an aspect of Bakunin’s ideology which has been dropped like a hot potato by most of his more recent apologists, that is to say his anti-semitism. As Norman Cohn notes in his book Warrant For Genocide: The Myth Of The Jewish World Conspiracy And The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion (Pelican Books, London 1970, page 56): ‘the latter-day revival of anti-semitism expressed above all the protest of traditional, rural society against the forces of modernity.’ Ruralist ideology all to easily degenerates into tirades against ‘city dwellers’ and ‘rootless cosmopolitan elements.’ This type of sloganeering lay at the heart of Nazism, as is clear enough from formulations such as ‘blood and soil.’ Of course, in a post-capitalist society the relationship between the town and the countryside will be completely transformed, but this transformation will necessarily entail a widespread understanding of the practical tasks ahead, and will NOT reduce either the urban, the agricultural or any other landscape, to the status of abstract rhetorical categories of the type propagated by hate groups like Green Anarchist.

The fact that GA has no understanding of what the city or the countryside might be is readily evident in productions such as Neoist Leaflet Attacking Paul Rogers And Green Anarchist. Here, the Lancaster Bomber claim: ‘Not living in cities, being quite close to the sea and the environment, we can see how nature is being really fucked up...’ The logical implication of this assertion is that there is no environment in the city (according to GA, not living in the city places you ‘close to the environment’), this is an absurdity because if cities lacked an environment, they would not be able to support life forms such as men and women; let alone a wide variety of wild life such as foxes, who thrive in environments where they are not threatened by the scum who pursue blood sports. Likewise, Lancaster Bomber claims: ‘the cities themselves are seized with a kind of madness. (Have you ever stood on a motorway bridge and watched the cars rushing by?)’ Rather than being a feature of cities, motorways run between cities, which is why the beginning (or end if you prefer) of the M1 is in the north London suburbs, miles away from the centre of town. As Jacques Camatte observes in Against Domestication (p.16): ‘Today humanity can launch its battle against capital not in the city, nor in the countryside, but outside of both... The old opposition between city and country clearly no longer exists. Capital has urbanised the planet. Nature has become mineralised (made inorganic).’

The way in which Green Anarchist is creating a new variety of fascism, which projects itself as having emerged from the left, but actually has its roots in the right, can be seen most clearly in the ‘novel’ City-Death by Stephen Booth (Green Anarchist Books, Oxford, n.d., p. 205–7): ‘Barrett saw that the city had to die. The city was the cancer which was killing all of humanity, and not just humanity, but all living things. He saw how the animals, the trees, the streams, the grass: All had a right to life, and did not deserve to be exploited. The city could only see the value of things in money, and even this in the end became worthless. The value of humanity had been disregarded. The value of growing things had been ignored. Life itself had been made to vanish inside the bottomless black felt top hat of politicians. Barrett knew that all the politicians had was that vacant smile and empty rhetoric. The value of the earth and all it contained had been split like the atom, or ground down and broken by The Machine. The callousness of their consumption world was plainly shown towards all living things standing in the path of their maniac regression. Progress! Progress! Even the words describing their obsession with destruction and consumption became empty. Value. Growth. The pigmy-people, squashed between their cramped-in, identical boxes could no longer vocalise their oppression. They became fish in the television goldfish-bowl, unable to see the water. The oppression became an integral part of their conceptual background. They became as empty as the city, they became void, dead behind the eyes. THE CITY HAS TO DIE!... He thought about the cold emptiness of the streets, the dull grey cityscape of those dreadful tower blocks, the sucked out meanness of the people. He thought about their constant poverty, the unhealthiness of it all. Their relentless thievery, their violence. THE CITY HAS TO DIE! The whole city was an act of theft, an act of violence against people everywhere. Why should we be forced, why should we be coerced, why should we be herded together like that? Cramped conditions bring about squashed and stilted people. They had never breathed free air, never turned over their own soil with a spade... Barrett thought about the glorious disconnectedness of Weston. It did not depend on anybody outside itself, and would defend itself against all-comers. It had no leaders, for We bow to no one and no outsiders could tell the people here what to do. All Trespassers will be shot... He could see the settlement a hundred years from now. It would be much the same, and the people in it would be similar. They would be free.’

Booth identifies the city with the working class and, like all hate propagandists, he dehumanises his victims because when they are no longer considered human, they can be disposed of with a ‘clean conscience.’ The people promised freedom are the petit-bourgeoisie, who will become a new peasantry totally in tune with the earth, and since their descendants are described as ‘similar’ to those currently working the ‘settlement,’ it seems logical to deduce from this that they are a racially homogenous group. Above all else this is a despotic community, xenophobia is its ideal: ‘All Trespassers will be shot... ‘ There is to be no free association, no federation, and since everything outside this tiny community is considered hostile and alien, there will be no freedom. Booth is describing a static society, a notion which is intrinsically totalitarian. Although Green Anarchist present themselves to the public as ‘radicals,’ their ideology is a virulent and deeply conservative strain of xenophobia.

Booth doesn’t seem to realise that his ideal community already exists, he could have found it on the David Koresh Branch Davidian ranch in Wacco; he could still find it in the compounds of the far-Right American militia movement. Booth’s formulations are at times remarkably close to those of Nazi agriculture minister R. W. Darré in The Peasantry As The Life Source Of The Nordic Race (English translation from Nazi Ideology Before 1933: A Documentation introduced and translated by Barbara Miller Lane and Leila J. Rupp, Manchester University Press 1978, p. 103–4): ‘To be a peasant means to be free... Back where the Nordic race began its characteristic single-household settlement, the herd instinct, probably natural in itself, was overcome, and from then on people evolved who were self-dependent and relied on their own abilities... To be a peasant means to know one’s craft. The peasant must master every aspect of farm work... To be a peasant means to work on the farm, not to sit on it as a parasite...’

The similarities and differences between Booth’s work and the ideas propounded in the Yesterday & Tomorrow: Roots of the National-Revolution anthology (Rising Press, London n.d., p.20), anonymously edited by members of the political soldier faction of the National Front, are also instructive. For example, the introduction to the political soldiers’ selection of Viscount Lymington reads as follows: ‘Lymington saw that modern farming techniques, using large quantities of artificial fertiliser and pesticides, are harmful to man and the entire environment. Furthermore, since most of the chemicals are imported, he realised that capitalist farming undermines Britain’s self-sufficiency in food production, thus threatening famine in the event of war or economic blockade. Lymington was also worried by the effect of bad nutrition and pollution on the people of our cities, and by the appalling effects of mass Jewish immigration. In order to combat these dangers, Lymington proposed a back-to-the-land movement, aimed at making Britain self-sufficient in food produced on small farms owned by free and prosperous yeoman farmers.’

THE SECRET DOCTRINE

While GA claim to be ‘pro-situ,’ Booth appears to know nothing about the Situationists desire to realise and suppress art (let alone how to transcend the SI’s rather limited formulation). In City-Death he comes out with the usual reactionary clap-trap about culture (p. 202–3): ‘The Subverted Image... did not get any official publicity, but it displayed work by all the best controversial and officially ignored artists. People queued up before gallery opening time. What an event! At the end, after several months, the authorities had pulled the plug by threatening the gallery management... Through... (words and pictures) people were free. The system cannot tolerate that... Mark Lewis is dead, but his work still has the power to influence us. Only pictures and words, but through these people were not under control. In their minds they could still be free. Revolt through art. That’s why the state wants to control art. That’s why the exhibition was stamped out, and the bookshop raided... In Nazi Germany, Goebbels burned the books. In Disneyland, what they don’t want you to read just don’t get published... The official publication channels only follow the false and empty agenda of literary Freemasonry. There’s such an overwhelming weight of crap about that you can’t hear the people who really have something to say.’

If Booth took the trouble to read texts by Joseph Goebbels, he’d discover that his attitude towards art and a number of other issues is remarkably similar to that of the Nazi propaganda minister. For example, from Goebbels only novel Michael (English translation Amok Press, New York 1987, p.14): ‘I don’t like “professional” poets, or rather, “writers.” A real poet is something like an amateur photographer of life. After all, a poem is nothing but a snapshot from an artistic soul. Art is an expression of feeling. The artist differs from the non-artist in his ability to express what he feels in some form or other. One artist does it in a painting, another in clay, a third in words, and a fourth in marble , or even in historical forms. The statesman is also an artist. For him, the nation is exactly what the stone is for the sculptor. Führer and masses, that is as little of a problem as, say, painter and colour.’ Goebbels would no doubt view Booth as a ‘great poet,’ whereas we consider GA’s failed ‘novelist’ a talentless hack; Booth has nothing to say, and even if he did, he does not know how to say it. Booth’s ‘writing’ is simply more white noise preventing those who don’t know how to listen from hearing any of the many voices with something worthwhile to say.

It may seem perverse to have quoted so extensively from Booth’s ‘novel’ City-Death, but we wanted to deal with a wide range of material published by Green Anarchist. Incredible as it may seem, it appears from the GA Mail Order Service listing to be found in Green Anarchist 38 (as well as earlier issues of the paper) that City-Death and Even Eden, another ‘novel’ by Stephen Booth, are the only books GA has published (two other books are offered for sale on the most recent GA mail order list, but one was produced by Phoenix and the other by AK Press). Even more extraordinary is the fact that, discounting Richard Hunt’s earlier texts, the pamphlet Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences is, as far as we can ascertain, GA’s only ‘sustained’ statement of its ‘theory’ and ‘principles.’ Therefore, we were forced to concentrate on these thin works because there was nothing else apart from the Lancaster Bomber and GA’s ‘agitational’ paper. As we have demonstrated in, for example, our text The Anatomy Of A Smear, GA’s current ‘theories’ are simply Richard Hunt’s far-Right agenda tarted up with large doses of incoherent leftist rhetoric.

Finally, we would like to make it clear that we realise that Green Anarchist imagine themselves to be ‘good people’ and that since they have already shown themselves unable to refute the charges we have made against them, it is likely they will resort, yet again, to attempts at smearing the individuals they imagine were involved in the production of this text. We have amply demonstrated that GA lied about the content of various criticism we’ve made of their ideology (see, in particular, our text The Anatomy Of A Smear). In the past, Bakuninists have used other tactics against their critics, but since unlike the Bordigists, we do not consider the whole of Marx’s works to be a description of communism, it is not so easy to apply them against us. We agree with much of what Mustapha Khayati wrote in Captive Words: Preface to a Situationist Dictionary (Internationale Situationiste 10, Paris 1966, English translation from Knabb, p. 171): ‘To salvage Marx’s thought it is necessary continually to make it more precise, to correct it, to reformulate it in the light of a hundred years of reinforcement of alienation and the possibilities of negating it. Marx needs to be detourned by those who are continuing on this historical path, not idiotically quoted by the thousand varieties of recuperators.’

The present essay is not really aimed at the handful of individuals who constitute GA, our most immediate task is to warn the milieu in which Green Anarchist attempts to operate about what happens to those sucked into the vortex of Bakuninist fantasy; and while we wish to make shame more shameful by making it public, we have no desire to demonise the individuals criticised in this text. Jacques Camatte in Against Domestication (p. 15) states that: ‘If right from the outset certain people are denied all possibilities of humanity, how can they subsequently be expected to emerge as real human beings? So it is as human beings that they must be confronted... When the conflict comes, as it inevitably will, there should be no attempt to reduce the various individuals who defend capital to the level of “bestial” or mechanical adversaries; they have to be put in the context of their humanity, for humanity is what they too know they are a part of and are potentially able to find again. In this sense the conflict takes on intellectual and spiritual dimensions. The representations which justify an individual person’s defence of capital must be revealed and demystified; people in this situation must become aware of contradiction, and doubts should arise in their minds.’ We have again turned to Camatte, not because we are in complete agreement with him, but because close study of his text might help GA abandon their reactionary perspectives. To make something constructive out of the current situation, the most effective strategy Green Anarchist could adopt is to dissolve itself, which would at least demonstrate a belated willingness to deal sensibly with our criticisms.

Luther Blissett
Neoist Alliance

And indeed men. whenever they become too feeble to contemplate, undertake action as a shadow of contemplation and reason. For since the weakness of their souls does not make contemplating fit for them, not being able sufficiently to grasp the object of contemplation, and through this not being fulfilled, yet desiring to sec it, they are brought to action, so as to see what they cannot grasp with intellect. Thus whenever they make, they themselves want to see it and they want others to contemplate and perceive whenever their intention as far as possible becomes action. We will find then in all cases that making and action are a weakness or a side-effect of contemplation, a weakness if one has nothing after the action, a side-effect if one has something else that is superior to the action to contemplate.

PLOTINUS

Review: Lessons From History: The Stauffenberg File

“The neoist’s ‘Green Anarchism Exposed’ leaflet is trying to con us into treating fascism as an ideology which can be argued with. What futility. Did Stauffenberg argue with Hitler? — No. he tried to blow him up with a bomb....”

@narchist Lancaster Bomber #11 July 1995

Beyond dealing with @LB’s ridiculous ‘Lesson from History’, here we review Secret Germany:Stauffenberg and the Mystical Crusade Against Hitler, by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, two of the authors who penned The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail.

Count Claus von Stauffenberg was an aristocratic career army officer who was involved in a plot to kill Hitler in July 1944. Baigent and Leigh dress him up as some sort of hero. He was an upper class militarist who only acted against Hitler when his distaste for the Nazi regime was compounded by certain military defeat with the D-Day landings. Those who want to make him a hero apologise for a romantic militarism that tolerated Nazism while it offered the prospect of military glory, and only turned on Hitler to save the German war machine. In truth Stauffenberg was the sort of upper-class scum ready to slaughter the working class in warfare, even if his elitist, mystical ideology was not rooted in racist biological determinism.

The military coup he plotted utilised Operation Valkyrie, which had been endorsed by Hitler himself. It involved mobilising and deploying more than four million people in the Reserve Army. Baigent and Leigh point out its anti-working class nature, in that it was to deal with such emergencies as ‘an uprising of foreign workers, for instance’ (p 31). Party officials and civil servants would be subordinate to the army and it used’chains of command which bypassed the SS and the Nazi Party. Baigent and Leigh link Stauffenberg’s plot to a mystical group drawn around the poetry of Stefan George — “For George, the real classical antecedents of his circle were the schools associated (at least according to esoteric tradition) with Pythagoras. [ ... ] The schools were generally seen as mystically and magically oriented precursors of, say, Harrow and Eton, preparing and grooming hand-picked cadres of young men for active roles of service in public life, in government, administration, the military and other spheres of civic responsibility”. (p 274).

However, they fail to link this to other failed Pythagorean plots, particularly those to dispose of Napoleon. These were influenced by Charles Nodier, who they fingered as Grand Master of the Priory of Sion in their best-seller “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail”. Nodier set up the Philadelphians in 1797 and used a system of five person cells, the pentagon being a symbol for universal love. They built up a secret network within the army fostering a return to republicanism. One attempt was made in 1808 — it’s failure lead to over 500 arrests and possibly the mysterious death of Colonel Oudet at the Battle of Wagram in 1809. General Malet led the second in 1812. Following its failure he was tried and executed. When asked who his collaborators were, he told the judge “You yourself, sir, and all of France if I had succeeded.” Malet had circulated romours that Napoleon had died in France, but failed to disarm the police. 1,500 were arrested as conspirators.

“A single melodramatic hero leading a simple oganisation” this is how James Billington summed up the Philadelphian fantasy -“the radical sublime simplification that would lead to revolution” (“Fire in the Minds of Men”, New York 1980). While the men of action plotted, Nodier set his Pythagorean principles in “Apothesis de Pythagore. Imprecations de Pythagore”. Published in 1808, the book claims its provenance as Crotona, a small town in Southern ltaly where Pythagoras organised his fIrst mystery school. Nodier applied this name to his home town of Besancon.

The same military romanticism motivated Stauffenberg. Baigent and Leigh talk of the war in North Africa as a “clean” war, and make much of the notion of military honour. But here we see the liberal perspective embrace militarism. They write as if the success of the Stauffenberg plot would have saved millions of lives without analysing the roots of war within capitalism, and whether their proposed separate peace with the Western allies would have lead to further war against the ‘Soviet’ Union. It is quite clear Stauffenberg was an elitist in a text they were preparing as an oath the following sentiments are revealed:

“We want a new order which makes all Germans responsible for the state and guarantees them law and justice; but we despise the lie that all are equal and submit to rank ordained by nature. We want a people with roots in their native land, close to the powers of nature, finding happiness and contentment in the given environment and overcoming, in freedom and pride, the base instincts of envy and jealousy. We want leaders who, coming from every section of the nation, are in harmony with the divine powers and set an example to others by their noble spirit, discipline and sacrifice.” (p. 276)

Such fantasies of a new order free of the compromise and corruption which are essential for the functioning of the state, offer succour to such Pythagorean gangs who nest in the upper reaches of its apparatus. No doubt such ‘lofty’ sentiments motivated people like Anthony Blunt, reconciling romanticism with oiling the machinery of death and destruction. Stauffenberg only moved from fantasy to action when military defeat was certain. Contrary to attempts by Baigent and Leigh, or even Green Anarchist, to make such men into heroes, we see only our class enemy.

Richard Essex

The Anatomy of a Smear

The wicked walk in a circle, not because their life runs circularly, but because their false doctrine runs round in a circular maze.

St. Augustine.

Anarchist Lancaster Bomber 11 (July 1995) contains a bizarre Neoist Chronology, which I assume is intended as a list of the major incidents in an ongoing ‘dispute’ between Green Anarchist and the Neoist Alliance. This chronology omits items such as our leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed but includes Special Branch raids on Green Anarchist and others, although these are obviously nothing to do with the Neoist Alliance. The first item in the Lancaster Bomber chronology is the satirical Fatwa! leaflet issued by the Neoist Alliance in February 1994; at the same time I put out a fake press release purporting to come from the Rushdie camp, which sparked a major investigation and eventually resulted in me being threatened with a long list of legal charges, these incidents aren’t mentioned in the Bomber’s chronology. British intelligence were very embarrassed when what they initially believed to be an international plot, turned out to be the work of a ‘solitary’ English novelist, and it was quickly decided that if media coverage of the story could be completely suppressed, then no legal action would be taken against me. Only the Big Issue (who don’t observe the D notice system) ran the story, and I narrowly avoided a court appearance. It would be absurd for me to suggest that this brush with the ‘secret state’ had anything to do with Green Anarchist, although using GA’s ‘logic’ I could claim that since their publication Lancaster Bomber attacked the Neoist Alliance over its Rushdie leaflet (which was, as it happens, the opening ‘salvo’ in a war of words between us), then these two things must, in fact, be connected.

The Bomber’s chronology also reveals its bias by, for example, claiming Re:Action 1 attacks GA for ‘anti-Neoist Vril (arbitrary invention).’ This claim appears to be based on the headline of the lead article, which was The World As Vril And Misrepresentation. Vril is not an arbitrary invention, at least not on our part, in the famous nineteenth-century novel The Coming Race by Edward Bulwer Lytton, it is the deadly power utilised by an advanced civilisation located in the earth’s core. The book was so popular that a new food was named after the secret power possessed by its protagonists; Bovril is a compound word made up of bovine meaning ox or cow, and Vril, the fictitious power featured in The Coming Race. Unfortunately, a number of individuals read this novel as a thinly fictionalised account of real events, and in this way it greatly influenced Nazi hollow earth ‘theories.’ The World As Will And Representation is the most famous work by the nineteenth-century philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer; Internationale Situationiste 9 (Paris 1964) headlined an article with the pun L’Urbanisme Comme Volonté Et Comme Représentation (Urbanism As Will And Representation). Our satirical headline was not arbitrary as the Bomber ignorantly insinuates, it was an allusion to all of the above. Likewise, a follow-up piece in Re:Action 2 was run under the headline The Fourfold Root Of Insufficient Reason because we thought it would be amusing to elaborate on the previous pun; Schopenhauer’s first book was On The Fourfold Root Of The Principle Of Sufficient Reason.

Obviously, having to explain our satire in this fashion rather blunts its impact. Nevertheless, it would be unrealistic to expect our readership to spot all the allusions we make, since no one can be expected to know everything. The problem with the Bomber is that they claim to understand what we are saying when they clearly do not. We explained in Re:Action 1 and 2 that the Programme Of The Neoist Alliance was satirical; we do not believe in programmes and so we send them up by constructing ludicrous platforms. Despite this, in Lancaster Bomber 11 we are asked: ‘How anarchist is it to want to control finance, the media and the arts.’ This is a reference to points five and six of our satirical programme, and rather than being a literal statement of what we want to do, it is what the Imperial Fascist League claimed the enemies of fascism wanted to do. Apart from failing to understand that this is satire, the Bomber also seems to be under the misapprehension that we imagine ourselves to be ‘anarchists.’

The Bomber wants to satirise the Neoist Alliance for using: ‘the Hegelian scriptures, even going to the extreme of quoting chapter and verse to prove that: “The supersession of art is found in revealed religion.” The intended effect is to impress and intimidate, but it does neither.’ Unfortunately the Bomber fails to understand that we are criticising rather than defending this conception. In our letter to Freedom (10/6/95), we were responding to Michel Prigent’s claim (Freedom 27/5/95) that we: ‘have never been able to stomach situationists because they spoke of the supersession of art.’ It would be rather difficult for us to explain the flaws in the formulation that ‘art should be realised and suppressed,’ without reference to the historical development of the notion. Since we do not expect people to accept our pronouncements without evidence, we refer them to the various sources for our arguments so that they can be checked. I am not surprised that the Bomber dislikes this procedure, because it is completely at odds with the modus operandi adopted by GA. For example, the editorial in Green Anarchist 37 contained the following smear: ‘Home’s association with Screwdriver (sic) goes way beyond acknowledgement on record sleeves a decade ago.’ I have NEVER had any association with Skrewdriver, nor did I receive any acknowledgements on their record sleeves, which is precisely why GA does not cite ‘chapter and verse’ about the records on which these alleged acknowledgements are to be found; if they did, their sources could be checked and found wanting. In its chronology, the Bomber claims that this editorial ‘skits’ me for ‘alleged links to neo-Nazi Ian Stewart (sic) Donaldson.’ In the GA editorial, these links are not ‘alleged,’ they are stated as fact, the ‘skit’ comes afterwards, when it is claimed that I had sado-masochistic sex with Ian Stuart. Successful satire works by exaggerating actual truths, since I have no links with Skrewdriver, do not practice sado-masochism and by an accident of social conditioning, happen to be straight, the ‘skit’ aspect of the GA editorial completely misses its mark. However, I have not objected to the ‘skit,’ only the smears that precede and follow it; smears which were subsequently taken up, minus the ‘skit,’ by David Black at Student Outlook (something else missing from the Bomber’s ‘chronology’) and which have now been retracted by that magazine.

The bias in the Bomber chronology is also evident in its re-ordering of events, a common trick among those spreading disinformation. For example, we issued the leaflet No Useless Leniency at the beginning of December 1994, but the Bomber claims it came out in the New Year. Likewise, it is clear the Bomber do not understand this leaflet which detourns the article Le Décor Et Les Spectateurs Du Suicide (The Decor And The Spectators Of Suicide) from Internationale Situationiste 10 (Paris 1966), the anti-Charlie Chaplin leaflet that caused the break between Guy Debord and Isidore Isou, a few lines from Debord’s Society Of The Spectacle, a phrase from The Revolution Of Everyday Life by Raoul Vaneigem, the title of an article by Michèle Bernstein in Internationale Situationiste 1 (Paris 1958) and a leaflet by King Mob entitled The Death Of Art Spells The Murder Of Artists. The Real Anti-Artist Appears.

What the leaflet did was turn the words of Debord, and some of those who were at one time associated with him, against the spectacular image being created by his fans. Just because we take some of Debord’s writing seriously, it doesn’t follow that we have to treat Debord as an individual personality with respect; in fact, it was precisely because we DO consider some of the things Debord articulated to be important that we made this intervention after his suicide. Those who made facile criticisms of our leaflet as ‘inhuman,’ failed to understand that by attacking idols, we were simultaneously paying tribute to everything in Debord that is still revolutionary. The so called ‘death list’ on it expands the parodic elements of the tongue-in-cheek ‘death list’ on the King Mob leaflet mentioned above, which begins with the struck out name Andy Warhol; some time before this tract was issued, the pop artist had been shot by Valerie Solanas, he made a full recovery. Our list is headed by the crossed out names of two individuals who had successfully killed themselves. The obvious implication is that the other individuals listed are also going to commit suicide; surely it is not difficult to see that rather than being a ‘death list,’ this is a parody of a death list, since the ‘victims’ are supposed to kill themselves! The Bomber describes this leaflet as simply an attack on Ian Bone, which is an absurd distortion; while the assertion in their chronology that we have produced other material criticising Bone since the New Year, is an outright lie.

GA likes to take things out of context. For example, the Bomber objects to the photograph of a Nazi death camp on the leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed, but doesn’t acknowledge that the point being made with this graphic can only be understood in relation to the Sluyterman engraving that is also used as an illustration. Another form of distortion can be found in the fact that the Bomber tries to link perfectly valid criticism of spook mania in Green Anarchism Exposed, to the issue of whether or not what Larry O’Hara has to say about Searchlight in the pamphlets A Lie To Far and At War With The Truth is valid. This is absurd, since between them O’Hara and GA have insinuated that far more than simply Searchlight moles are working for the ‘secret state.’ Reviewing Turning Up The Heat: MI5 After The Cold War by Larry O’Hara (Phoenix Press, London 1994) in Lobster 28 (December 1994), Robin Ramsay observes that not only does O’Hara: ‘conclude his pamphlet with a long list of journalists and the agencies from which he suspects them of receiving material, on p. 37 he proposes renaming the television program World In Action, as MI5 In Action (MI5IA); he sees MI5 “pulling its strings.” But he offers no real evidence and, after making such a serious charge, he concludes the paragraph with this: “Hard evidence and leads to follow up on MI5IA I’d be grateful to readers for.” This is inviting ridicule.’

Taking one satirical sentence from my article Organised Chaos (Independent 25/10/94) out of context, the Bomber claims that it is: ‘an ignorant falsification and parody of what GA stands for and what we do.’ Clearly, GA do actually do more than simply: ‘Circulate texts denouncing their founder and ideological architect Richard Hunt.’ This sentence is included in a table satirising seven ‘anarchist’ organisations, and it would be idiotic to take any of the ‘what they really do’ comments literally since, within the context of my article, they are clearly signalled as jokes. However, parody is not as the Bomber reductively claims, a ‘falsification.’ Satire works by pushing things to an absurd but logical conclusion. Humour is often used to make serious points and satire, in particular, is much more than simply ‘a joke.’ The problem is not as the Bomber imagines, that the Neoist Alliance does not mean what it says, but rather, that GA does not understand what we mean. The Bomber whinges that: ‘the Neoists say we do not understand their position. In saying this, they admit they have failed to communicate.’ Communication is a two way process, how can we communicate with individuals whose conception of this process is so fundamentally flawed? We cannot communicate with inert matter, it is not us who want to hand down ‘truths’ from on high, it is GA’s refusal to put any effort into understanding what we are saying that is the problem, because real communication is a process of dynamic interaction.

Under the title How Green Is My Readership in Lancaster Bomber 11, it is claimed that the Neoist Alliance use four ‘basic lies’ about Green Anarchist. The first concerns Richard Hunt. The Bomber claim that ‘Hunt was not the founder of GA, neither is he our ideological architect.’ Whether or not Hunt was a founder of GA is not important to our argument, although Hunt certainly claims that he founded GA. For example, on page 16 of Alternative Green 10 (Autumn 94): ‘Marcus Christo, Alan Albon and myself (Richard Hunt) started the other magazine Green Anarchist. They elected me editor, I created Green Anarchist. I did 90% of the work. I edited it for the first twenty issues. All the theoretical ideas of Green Anarchism are mine: autonomous self-sufficient villages, regression of technology, disproof of the theory of Division of Labour, the exploitative relationship of the core to the periphery.’ If I am wrong in saying that Hunt was the founder of Green Anarchist (along with Marcus Christo and Alan Albon), then I am quite happy to retract the statements I have made to this effect; if I have made an error in this matter it is because the sources I used were inaccurate. I certainly wouldn’t view Hunt as any more of an unbiased observer in this matter than the current membership of GA. Access to the first issue of Green Anarchist might help me make a more definitive judgement on this issue; if Hunt made a contribution of any type to Green Anarchist 1, and he claims to have edited it, then it is not unreasonable to describe him as a founder of the magazine.

Regardless of whether or not Hunt edited Green Anarchist 1, it is clear to me that he was the ideological architect of Green Anarchism; among other things, he wrote and self-published the pamphlet The Natural Society: A Basis for Green Anarchism in 1976, well before GA was founded! In the only ‘substantial’ statement of GA’s historical development and ideological position since the split with Hunt, Paul Rogers devotes the first two pages of Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences to the development of Green Anarchism from before recorded history to the establishment of the Ecology Party. The next nine pages are concerned with the development of Hunt’s ideas before the founding of Green Anarchist. Hunt then emerges in the following six pages as the dominant figure in Green Anarchist from its founding in the mid-eighties until Alternative Green was established in 1991. After this, Rogers devotes five pages of his pamphlet to what he calls ‘American Anarchist Green Traditions’ (giving a paragraph to this and a paragraph to that, and only a paragraph to Fredy Perlman, while not everyone the Bomber mentions as influences even gets that). The final 5 pages describe how these and various other bits and pieces were grafted onto Hunt’s right-wing framework for Green Anarchism. Why would Rogers devote more than half his pamphlet (excluding the bibliography, title and contents pages) to Hunt, if Hunt was not the ideological architect of Green Anarchism? Despite the antagonistic attitude GA adopted towards Hunt after the split, Hunt still receives far more attention than anybody else. Lancaster Bomber states that: ‘People can change. Whatever Richard Hunt is now (including links with fascists) this does not prove that what he did before was fascist. At the time of The Natural Society (1976) and during his work with GA during the mid to late 1980s Richard Hunt was not a fascist.’ While I agree that people can change, analysis of Hunt’s ideas show them to have been right-wing all along. In the text The Sucking Pit, the Neoist Alliance gives a detailed analysis of the Paul Rogers pamphlet and other Green Anarchist material from the post-Hunt era, and conclusively demonstrates that despite an incoherent coating of leftist rhetoric, GA’s current ideology is right-wing. It is perhaps superfluous to add that this particular brand of Green Anarchism is fascist precisely because it is grounded in Hunt’s pre-Gulf War ‘thought.’

Presumably on the basis of the satirical leaflet Green And Brown Anarchist, the Lancaster Bomber asserts that we seriously claim that they have plans to set up green death camps. This leaflet was attributed to the Green Action Network, not the Green Anarchist Network. While readers were meant to draw parallels between the ideology of the spurious organisation Green Action and Green Anarchist, it ought to be clear to anyone who reads the text carefully that they are not being presented with the actual views of any existing organisation; the fact that a number of people, including Quentin McDermott a researcher from the tv programme World In Action, believed the leaflet to be genuine, merely demonstrates that the general level of intelligence in the world today is sorely lacking, and it is precisely this situation that makes GA’s ideology dangerous. We stated in our leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed: ‘With its anti-urban ideology and utopian vision of small autonomous communities, Green Anarchist has yet to face the problem of how it plans to ‘dispose’ of a huge ‘surplus’ population. While supporters of Green Anarchism might hope that the urban proletariat will simply starve to death (thereby saving them the trouble of killing us), if they successfully instigated a counter-revolution, the material unfolding of events would ultimately force them to resort to the concentration camp and the Gulag.’ Since our texts stress that GA do NOT consciously realise the logical implications of their incoherent ideology, it is absurd to make out that we seriously claim GA actually has plans to set up green death camps. While I make a clear distinction between Green Anarchist and Alternative Green with regard to this issue in G-Spot 16 (as I state, Richard Hunt openly proclaims in his current publication that his political programme requires a 75% reduction in the population), the Bomber is unwilling or unable to acknowledge this point. Personally, I believe it is highly unlikely that GA will ever be in a position to instigate a counter-revolution, and even if it was, it clearly has yet to face up to what this entails. However, our references to the horrors of the Nazi death camps and Soviet Gulags do serve to draw attention to GA’s schizophrenic pronouncements on population reduction, and this thinly veiled Malthusianism is treated in detail in The Sucking Pit.

The Bomber’s third ‘basic lie,’ anti-tax agitation, is also dealt with in The Sucking Pit, at one of a number of points where we discuss the contents of Green Anarchist 38: ‘In the... editorial, criticism of an anti-tax poster was distorted into being “laughable” criticism of an anti-poll tax poster. The item in question doesn’t mention the poll tax, and it would be bizarre indeed if Green Anarchist were still disseminating propaganda material on this issue long after the community charge had been abolished... As a campaigning issue, anti-tax agitation receives more attention from broad swathes of the American far-Right than any other topic; US extremists claim that liberal politicians tax the rural middle class and then spend the money on the inner cities in order to ‘buy’ the votes of the urban poor (the racial content of this argument is made more or less explicit depending to how close the groups and individuals utilising it are to the conservative mainstream). On the other hand, the fierce resistance to the poll tax in Britain arose precisely because it was a way of taking money from the deprived inner cities and redistributing it to suburban and rural toffs. The fact that Green Anarchist are seeking to confuse the sharp class distinctions between those who agitated against poll tax, and the ongoing campaign by far-Right extremists against tax as an alleged subsidy for the poor, demonstrates the way in which they create an ideological vortex or sucking pit.’

The last of the Bomber’s four ‘basic lies’ is equally absurd. We do not, as GA falsely claims, believe that since ‘some fascists are green, therefore all greens are fascists.’ In The Sucking Pit we offer Malthusianism as one of a number of possible tests for eco-fascism, as we conclusively demonstrate, GA fail it. We see nothing wrong with concern about the state of the environment, and the Bomber offers no textual citations to back up its fourth ‘basic lie’ because there aren’t any that would support this contention. What the Bomber does instead is quote me out of context as saying ‘if people can’t tell the difference between the left and the right, they might end up supporting Nazi ideals (sic) without even knowing what they are doing.’ This fails to back up GA’s case because rather than talking about greens in general, this point is made after I have explicitly referred to the magazines Green Anarchist and Alternative Green as being ‘dangerously close... to hardline fascism.’ By falsely insinuating that the Neoist Alliance attacks all greens, GA are, in effect, calling for unity, and by these devious means, they intend to suck innocent parties into the highly compromising position of having endorsed Green Anarchist’s vile brand of eco-fascism.

Despite having lumped Lancaster Bomber and Green Anarchist together as the ‘major’ players in the Green Anarchist Network, there is a clear difference in their attitude towards the Neoist Alliance. While issues 37 and 38 of Green Anarchist set out to smear me by falsely claiming I associate with everyone from spooks to the far-Right, the individual behind the Bomber at least makes a feeble attempt to deal with what I and others have written, before resorting to all the usual GA smears except those concerning alleged associations with fascists. My criticisms of GA deal with their politics, whereas they criticise me on the basis of the company they allege, but which I do not, in fact, keep. The Bomber should perhaps bear in mind that User-Friendly Nazis: How Green Was My Holocaust (and I am ready to defend every statement it contains) was written after I walked into Compendium and was informed that some loony from GA had just been in claiming I was involved in Nazi politics; a few hours later, I spoke to AK Press and was told someone from GA had approached them at a bookfair spouting the same piece of nonsense.

The Neoist Alliance does not, as the Bomber seems to think, operate on the basis that ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend.’ The reason we do not support the Green Anarchist and Larry O’Hara criticisms of Searchlight is because we do not agree with the reactionary perspective from which they are made. However, anyone who is able to understand the arguments we put forward in Green Anarchism Exposed can see that we are highly critical of Searchlight. The fact that the Bomber claims we are ‘pro-Searchlight’ simply proves that it does not understand our position. Likewise, the Bomber asks rhetorically: ‘Did the Red Army argue with fascism? No , they stormed Berlin.’ Even the Anarchist Communist Federation are able to point out in Organise! 38 (April June 1995, p. 13–14) that: ‘The Stalinist bureaucrats were no more “anti-fascist” than the Western leaders. The USSR had never stopped trading with Nazi Germany. The non-aggression pact signed between Hitler and Stalin was linked to an economic agreement: Poland would be carved up between them and Stalin would take over Lithuania and Estonia. The Jews of the Soviet part of Poland were as much delivered up to the Nazis as those of France. The Soviet leaders only became “anti-fascist” when the German state broke the pact by invading the USSR in June 1941.’

Appalling as the effects of Nazi anti-semitism were, the Bomber makes another major factual error by talking about the ‘6 million people murdered by the Nazi state.’ The six million figure refers to the Jewish victims of Nazism; Gypsies, Slavs, gays, communists and the mentally and physically handicapped were also systematically murdered by Hitler’s regime. This still comes no where near accounting for all of the 20 to 40 million (depending on which estimate you accept) Soviet citizens of all nationalities whose deaths are attributable to the Nazi state. Gil Elliot in his Twentieth Century Book Of The Dead (Penguin, Harmondsworth 1972, p 26 , 94), provides a very conservative estimate of those who died during the Second World War. Elliot’s figure of just over 20 million Soviet dead is made up of an even split between troop and civilian casualties. Since the collapse of the Bolshevik regime, it has become apparent that for propaganda purposes the Stalinists refused to acknowledge the full extent of their losses during the Nazi onslaught, and the number of Soviet dead has subsequently been revised drastically upwards. Elliot further estimates that between them Britain and the Commonwealth, France and the United States, suffered nearly one and a half million casualties (although obviously not all of these are attributable to the Nazi state). The list could go on but I think I have made my point.

It is somewhat rich for an individual who apparently does not know the most basic historical facts about Hitler’s dictatorship to claim that our criticisms of Green Anarchist are ‘a complete insult to the... people murdered by the Nazi state.’ The Bomber ridicules us for our knowledge of philosophy, it’s about time the individual behind this publication grew up and realised that books have their uses as tools of reference, as well as their obvious limitations. As we observed in the leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed: ‘Green Anarchist does not know what fascism is, and it is therefore incapable of recognising itself as fascist.’ And as if to add the icing to this cake, the Bomber caterwauls that the Neoist Alliance lacks humility, a complaint that exudes the rotten egg smell of the idea of God, a stink which envelops all right-wing mystical cretins.

Stewart Home
Neoist Alliance

Documents

We present here the texts that document the dispute between Stewart Home and the Neoist Alliance, Green Anarchist and Lancaster Bomber, along with several anonymous leaflets and other relevant letters. This has the advantage of not only showing up GA/LB, but also permits the reader to see how the Neoist Alliance constructed its operations, in that the form is as instructive as the content. Whereas Green Anarchist are anxious to erect a closed narrative structure which the reader can either bcleive or disbeleive, the NA material is constructed with a quite different goal. The NA is not peddling new verities for the faithful to believe, but instead constructs texts with an internal tension with an aim of encouraging readers to actively appropriate what and how they want according to their perception of their own interests, instead of passively consuming the texts.

Fatwa Leaflet	2/S A5	Jan ’94	20
‘Consortium’	Press Release Jan ’94	20
Big Issue	Article	Feb ‘94	20
Recognition or Retribution	Article	Summer ‘94	21
Organised Chaos	Article	Oct ‘94	22
No Useless Leniency	2/S A5	Dec ‘94	23
Death of Art	Leaflet	1968	23
The World as Vril and Representation	Article	Dec ‘94	24
The Neoists	Article	Spring ‘95	26
Editorial. GA #37	Article	Spring ‘95	29
‘Paul Rogers’ leaflet	1/S A4	Spring ‘95	29
Green and Brown Anarchist	2/SA4	March ‘95	30
Green Anarchism Exposed	2/S A4	April ‘95	32
Black Propagandist Exposed	Article	Summer ‘95	34
User Friendly Nazis	Article	Spring ‘95	35
Freedom Correspondence	Letters	May/June ‘95	36
The Fourfold Root of Insufficient Reason	Article	Summer ’95	37
Special Branch. Searchlight. Stewart Home	2/SA4	Summer ‘95	37
Green Anarchists Fall Out	Article	Spring ’95	38
Open Letter to Student Outlook	Leiter	Summer ’95	38
Neobore	Articles	July ’95	39
Sordid Truth	2/S A4	August ‘95	43
Encounters with the Insignificant	Article	Summer ‘95	45
Sad Lil’ Stewart	Article	Summer ‘95	45
Satire	Letter	July ‘95	45
Ode to Stewsy Babes	Poem	August ‘95	45
As the Thin Veneer of Sanity Starts to Fade	1/S A4	August ‘95	46
Feed-back	Article	Summer ‘95	47
Promise of Apology	Letter	August ‘95	48
Student Outlook Apology	Article	October ’95	48
Remember Jacques Molay	1/S A5	September ’95 48

[Image: Above: The platform of Green Anarchism during the Hunt era, reproduced from the pamphlet London’s Anarchist Movement Today: An Introduction (Anon 1989).]

Green
Anarchism

GOAL: Autonomous self-sufficient villages, bringing regression of technology no industry, no pollution no hunger, no bomb.

ANALYSIS: The theories of Division of Labour. Specialisation and Comparative Advantage make the poor poorer. Growing crops is dirty and tiring. In an anarchist society you’ll have to grow your own. There’ll be no -ruling class to take the peasants’ crops for you.

STRATEGY: Revolution on the periphery’, group no-go areas, the destruction of the system from outside inwards, starting in the Third World.

TACTICS: Actions in the countryside. at military sites, land squats, industrial targets. We hate and fear violence but we do re: reject. We must build a culture of resistance from festivals, pgs, fanzines for a future alternative society.

GREEN ANARCHIST.

[Image: Fatwa leaflet (2/s A5 part of a Neoist Alliance Project. Jan/Feb 1994)]

CELEBRATE THE 5TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE DEATH SENTENCE

PASSED ON SALMAN RUSHDIE, 14 FEBRUARY 1994

FATWA!

SMASH CHRISTIANITY, SMASH ISLAM,

SMASH THE LITERARY ESTABLISHMENT!

The book trade exists to prevent energetic, exciting and innov alive work being published. The publishing industry is not consciously organised as a conspiracy against youth and vigour but acts as such because good ‘taste’ dictates that ‘writers’ replicate the ideals of a long gone and unlamentcd age.

The world of English letters will soon be destroyed. The sick ‘men’ of Bloomsbury swept away by authors whose ‘writing’ is so fresh that they don’t know how’ to spell — and don’t need to know, because the software that came with their PCs included a dictionary and a thesaurus.

Culture is running amok, with genre cross-fertilising genre and endless graphic sex. The rising generation doesn’t give a shit about characterisation, measured prose or intellectual merit. Slapstick, brutality and violence are the weapons being marshalled against decorum and good taste.

We’ll shed no tears for Rushdie and his bleeding heart supporters when they die. We’ve no truck with Islamic or Christian fundamentalists. We’ve no demands. There arc no concessions you can make to get rid of us. Our banners read only ‘Behold Your Future Executioners’.

HUMANITY WILL NOT BE HAPPY UNTIL THE LAST BOOK BORE

IS HUNG BY THE GUTS OF THE LAST MULLAH

ISSUED BY THE NEOIST ALLIANCE, BM SENIOR, LONDON WC1N 3XX

PROGRAMME OF THE
NEOIST ALLIANCE

RELIGIOUS. To undermine all monotheistic creeds and to propagate crazy cults, mysticism, para-science and anti-philosophies.
ETHICAL. To introduce debasing codes and practices, corrupt morals, weaken the marriage-bond, destroy family life and abolish inheritance.
AESTHETIC. To foster the cult of the ugly and whatever is debasing, decadent and degenerate in music, literature, and the visual arts.
SOCIOLOGICAL. To break up large corporations and abolish privilege. To provoke envy, discontent, revolt and class war.
INDUSTRIAL AND FINANCIAL. To lower the ideals of craftsmanship and abolish pride in handicraft. To encourage standardisation and specialisation. To wrest control of finance from the corrupt ruling class.
POLITICAL. To secure control over the press, broadcasting, cinema, stage and all means of influencing public opinion. To break up ruling class institutions from inside by creating dissensions.

NEOIST ALLIANCE, BM Senior, London WC1N 3XX, UK

[Image: ‘Consortium’ press release, from same project.]

THE CONSORTIUM PRESENT

SMASH THE FATWA,
BURN THE KORAN!

At a secret location in London, 14 February 1994

Salman Rushdie has teamed up with conceptual artist John Latham to create a protest piece on the fifth anniversary of the death sentence issued against him by the Iranian government.

Latham will be recreating one of his famous SKOOB towers of the 1960s. using copies of the Bible and the Koran. Like its predecessors, this tower will be spectacularly burnt, reducing the books to ashes. Skoob is, of course, books spelt backwards.

Salman Rushdie says this collaboration demonstrates his commitment to artistic experimentation and opposition to censorship. ‘Since going into hiding, I’ve been studying middle eastern history and now realise that the workers are the only people in a position to defy intransigent Islam.’ the author explained. Tn 1958 when Qasim and the free officers seized power in Iraq, the workers killed the monarch and burnt the Koran. This is the kind of activity my collaboration with John Latham is designed to encourage.’

Journalists wishing to attend this unique artistic event arc asked to ring Brian on 071 351 7561 by 10 February, so that they can be vetted prior to being issued with details of the redirection point.

[Image: The Big Issue #65 (Feburary 8–14 1994). This was the only coverage in the press, probably thanks to the issuing of a D Notice.]

FIVE YEARS after the imposition of the Fatwa against him, [ lawyers acting for novelist Salman Rushdie are considering legal action following a publicity stunt by an anti-art establishment group. The Consortium, also known as the Neoist Alliance, issued a press release last week inviting reporters to a Valentine’s Day celebration involving a pile of Korans, the author, conceptual artist John Latham and a box of matches. Needless to say, this was hoax.

Like the K Foundation’s recent anti-Whitbread Award caper, i the Consortium promised journalists a free trip to a “unique 1 artistic event” if they rang a given phone number. The ^: number, however, is Rushdie’s agent’s, who says, ~We know absolutely nothing about this. Nor does Salman Rushdie.”

In fact, nothing is going to happen at all, admits Stewart Home of the Neoist Alliance/Consortium whose main target is the literary establishment. Mr Home said, “The literary establishment is run by ex-public school boys who never want to upset anyone. I’ve got nothing against Mr Rushdie, but he has said that writers should present other views. That’s what I want to do.” Mr Home, a writer and journalist, added that he didn’t think the prank would endanger Mr Rushdie: “He’s still surrounded by Special Branch.” At the time of going to press, no decision on taking legal action had been made.

FATWA

SMASH CHRISTIANITY, SMASH ISLAM,
SMASH THE UTERARY ESTABUSHMENT!

RECOGNITION or RETRIBUTION? ASPECTS OF THE CITY IN DECAY THE NEOIST ALLIANCE

The creative writing tutor at Lancaster University, Richard Burns, committed suicide on August 31^st 1992. the day before his 34^th birthday. Burns was a published wnter. five of his books were out. Only his first was ever reviewed. Burns complained of (he London based literary mafia which has no time for people living north of Watford.

The Neoist Alliance follow a similar track. The first part of the manifesto is spot-on, the attack on the book industry. Its response to the problem is negative, internalised, directed against themselves. The Neoists need to think again..

As with any hierarchical structure, the publishing industry exists to preserve and enhance the interests of the elite. At the top of the scale, we have the literary Rolls Royces — the Londocentnc closed in coterie of | narcotic narcissistic navel contemplators. At the other end, the Rats and Metros, but it all serves the same agenda.

In this context, the Neoisl’s anger is understandable. They have been shut out of the cultural glass palace and so stand outside throwing stones But why do we need the critics? What is it to be granted their seal of approval, why do the Neoists seek after their critical validation, their legitimation? — The critic is a form of advertising. ‘Buy this, its good .. Don’t buy this, its crap.’ Lit crit is superfluous, a reactive, parasite activity. If critical theory had any importance at all it would not need to be made compulsory on English Lil courses. Critics are parasites and lit crit is camoflage for the fact that these bastards know nothing more than you or I. TRUST YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT Don’t defer to the coo men who tell you “Only very clever people can see this invisible (non-existent) cloth..”

Periodically critics moan “Where is the new George Orwell?” If Orwell were alive today he would not be published by the mainstream. Critical orthodoxy is subordinate to politics. Follow the party line or no research grant. This has nothing to do with artistic merit. Because of this, mainstream culture is a stagnant pood, even the critics know this and moan the lack of the new George Orwells. The Neoists are one with the critics here, the difference being that the Neoist is angry.

Inversion

The Neoists have taken the critical value judgement, internalised it. and inverted it. ‘Iliey respond by producing work in accordance to this. (Point 3) To foster the cult of the ugly and whatever is debasing, decadent and degenerate in music, literature and the visual arts” Iliey make the decadent and debasing into virtues. ‘Ilie go along, they collaborate with that critical . judgement. Our task should not be to collaborate but mm it over completely.

Ilie Neoists want to lower die ideals of craftsmanship and abolish pride : in handicraft (Point 5) In this they follow the system. This will mu lead to i greater fulfilment or happiness but to greater emptiness, a greater sense ol ¹ futility. The Neoisl assimilates the negative values of the city and lire whole . aesthetic of self-destruction and anniliilaiion perpetuated by it.

Why bother making things worse? That is whai capitalist industii.il production does — production as exploitation of people and resources. Illis ‘ is to act in accordance with Ilie ethos of Disneyland itself. Il is heller not Ki participate than collaborate with this harm to ourselves.

‘The things we make for ourselves are im/uuiUHl to us. Why IhhIwi it we indend to make them worse? It does noi make sense to want to abolish pride in them. This is Ilie method of those who despair of ever making a difference. Even on a basic level of eg: a small home made table used to rest cups ami papers on. we can take pride in it as something useful ami In Im its iMirpo.se. not something to fall apart and waste the earth’s resources.

From our point of view, we want the things we make, magazines and posters, music and books, etc to he better. Hungs we make give «press«« io ourselves, to what we think and feel, what we experience; our hopes and aspirations. Second best, third best, is for ^V^effJ^? fSt Similarly with @ctions and activities. How can we be more effective. For people who act (eg in animal rights or ecology) presumes that they care, assumes an ethical view of how people ought to treat animals or the environment, it assumes self respect, responsibility respect Ultimately, they point towards a belter world. They point towards hope. People who act find a meaning for their lives absent from the city-dweller. They look for ways to make actions more significant, more efficient mid effective, more meaningful. If they did not take this care, the animal rights movement would be quickly rolled up by the state.

The things we do. things we make, paint, draw, write, perfect, but we find meaning and significance through them. We look for vrays io make them better. It’s a learning process. Deliberately making them worse is the step before giving up.

This article appeared in @narchist Lancaster Bomber in Summer 1994 along with a reproduction of the Fatwa leaflet. The same issue contained the illustration below.

THE WORLD OF ENGLISH LETTERS WILL SOON BE DESTROYED

Wishful thinking. Like the Conservatory party, like the media itself, the book-world addresses its artificial agenda lo a non-existent constituency. There is no such thing as public opinion. The anodyne, the artificial ‘A year in Provence* and the silver coaled supermarket pulp paperbacks finance the unreadable. It doesn’t matter how bad the coffee gets, the merchant just laughs. “What matters to me is the turnover..” The book world is about making money, about cultural hegemony, not about propagating ideas that change things.

The Neoists want revenge, they want retribution against this world. So do we all. Notice their day of reckoning is deferred. ‘Behold your future executioners.’ We don’t want revenge tomorrow, we want it today. Pan of the task of revolutionary culture is lo lake on the cultural establishment. One obvious way to do this is through the physical disruption of mainstream events — Booker Prize. Bafta awards, the October Cheltenham Festival of Literature. The liierary/cutiural equivalent of stopping the Grand National. This would he an emphatic rejection of their complacent back slapping critical orthodoxies. The other thing we need to do is develop networks of distribution and show cases of our own. Things like By-Pass magazine reviewed in this Bomba, (plug)

The Neoists want to throw stones at the glass palace. Fair enough, we would like to join them in this, the glass palaces deserve it Afterwards, the Neoists want to smear shit over themselves, and here we part company. They internalise the critical value judgement. “Yes it is shit, but shit is a virtue .” A better approach (in our opinion) would be to develop their own aesthetic of empowerment, not merely react with the aesthetic of somebody else. We need to completely fuck over the definitions of the literary elite and develop the merits and strengths of our own art works. Who cares if the tossers don’t like it? That is their problem. But if it isn’t any good, and we know it isn’t, why be so arrogant as to expect other people to waste their 1 lime reading/liskmingAooking at it?

How anarchist is it to want to control finance, media and the arts? I (Points 5 & 6) What we realty need is not a different form of control, but the I ¡Mitina of control. The exclusion of the new, exciting, innovative, etc etc 1 is a result of that fact of control. The elite stretching out its poisoned claw. «Publishers and critics are all of a piece in the same way as electronics, car (manufacturers and advertising. Control means homogenisation. Bollocks to I that. Why do you want everything the same? It is not about controlling •: things but about creating things and living without this shit system.

Organised chaos?

The tabloids loathe them, but anarchists are too busy arguing with each other to riot. Anarchism is often associated with chaos and makes newspaper headlines whenever there’s been a riot on the British mainland. The Anarchy In the UK festival, on all this week across London, demonstrates that the vast majority of anarchists aren’t interested in throwing bricks and bottles at the police.

While anarchism as a political doctrine has never exerted much influence outside Spain and the Ukraine, the impact of anarchist ideas on the arts has been enormous. Bohemianism is a quintessentially anarchist pursuit and it is this, principally in its subcultural guises, that forms the focus for the ten day Anarchy In The UK festival.

The event is the brainchild of Ian Bone, a founder member of Class War, whose past activities do little to inspire trust among old hands at anarchist politics. At one point, Bone left the Class War Federation to set up the rival Class War Organisation, which collapsed after a single issue of its national newspaper. Among revolutionary anarchists, Anarchy In The UK is derisively referred to as the Bone Show.

While the festival will thrill all rebellious punk squatters, the major British anarchist groups are refusing to participate in what they perceive as a desperate attempt to revive the careers of some second-rate rock bands.

An obsession with autonomy, or freedom, is what characterises all anarchist thought. Naturally, this leads to a great deal of sectarianism. One of the major divisions within anarchist thinking is between collectivist and individualist ideologies. While anarcho-individualists have never attempted to build mass political organisations, their collectivist brethren find that although there is a great deal of support for anarchist ideas, very few people are willing to become paid up members of the movement. Indeed, no British anarchist group has an active membership of more than a hundred individuals.

When the tabloid press report that Class War are responsible for the riots that have broken out during recent demonstrations, this is patently absurd. Street violence of this type is the result of the utter frustration many people feel at the huge increase in poverty that has accompanied the dismantling of the welfare state. Class War are not in a position to organise riots, almost all their time and energy is put into producing and selling their newspaper. Most of the Class War groups around the country consist of one or two individuals with a post box address and a can of spray paint. While a percentage of the people participating in riots may have become sympathetic towards anarchist ideas after experiencing unemployment and heavy handed policing, very few of them are members of any political organisation.

Easily the most active strand of British anarchism throughout the eighties was that of pacifism and non-violence. Many anarchists who are happy to glue the locks of butchers and participate in animal rights campaigns, wouldn’t dream of taking part in a riot. Likewise, anarcho-individualists and anarcho-capitalists are generally contemptuous of demonstrations and acts of public disorder.

Many of the younger and more committed class struggle anarchists who do view rioting as a viable political tactic, quickly leave the movement. They often find themselves unable to resist the lure of left-communist splinter groups. In attacking democracy as a bourgeois distraction, organisations such as the International Communist Current provide an ideology which is much more coherent than that of the anarchist movement.

One of the attractions of anarchism is that it can be practised as life-style that doesn’t require a great deal of commitment. Bohemian types may voice support for Class War, but they are unlikely to join the group because that would entail standing on street corners selling political literature and attending boring meetings. Likewise, squatters may find the doctrine of anarcho-syndicalism appealing, without actually wanting to go into some industrial work place to participate in rank and file activism.

Class War began as a witty attack on both the left and anarcho-pacifism. Today it is a poor man’s SWP, as obsessed as the next revolutionary splinter group with selling the paper and building the party. In a mirror image of this process, Ian Bone has reverted to the type of anarchism that was once reviled in the pages of Class War. CND, pacifists and scruffy punks used to be the subject of Bone’s invective, now he is actively promoting their interests with the Anarchy In The UK festival. This includes concerts by the Levellers and Conflict, alongside workshops on such stimulating topics as Love and Liberating Our Meetings. For full details phone the festival hotline on 071 274 6655.

Stewart Home is the author of ‘The Assault on Culture: Utopian Currents from Lettrisme to Class War’ (AK Press).

ANARCHY IN THE EC

Pdi, 35, an anarchist from Marseilles: ‘In Britain anarchy is nothing more than a fashion. People in the Czech republic and in France are really angry about the police — here people just drink and say ‘up yours’ and think that’s anarchy. This festival is not 10 days that shook the world, it is just a good trip.’

Pdi sells records, books and ‘maybe some drugs’ on the black market because he doesn’t believe in ‘the system’.

Maria, 18 from Madrid: ‘The anarchist movement here is our reference point. Here, there is a tradition of people expressing themselves — the way they dress, how they live.’ At home Maria is involved with a campaign against national service called Insubmission.

Niels, 21 from Berlin: ‘I am part of an anti-fascist gay and lesbian group from Berlin and came over to make contacts. People here are very sympathetic. They don’t believe in heirarchy and the state. My point is not believing in patriarchy, though there are the same macho men here as in Germany. I think anarchists here are less dogmatic than in Germany, but I don’t really know — I’ve only been here two days. I don’t think the police here are nicer, despite the fact they don’t carry guns.

Niels Boorman came to Britain especially for the festival For full details about the festival phone the 121 Centre on 071–274 6655.

Karen McVeigh

The main anarchist organisations in Britain

Name:	CLASS WAR FEDERATION, PO Box HH57, Leeds LS8 5XG.	SOLIDARITY FEDERATION (until recently the Direct Action Movement), PO Box 384, Preston, Lancs PR1 5PQ.	ANARCHIST COMMUNIST FEDERATION, 84b Whitechapel High Street, London E1 7QX.	GREEN ANARCHIST NETWORK, Box ZZ, 111 Magdalen Road, Oxford, OX4 1RQ.	LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE, 1 Russell Chambers, The Piazza, Covent Garden, London WC2E 8AA.	ANIMAL LIBERATION FRONT, no public address.	LONDON PSYCHOGEOGRAPHICAL ASSOCIATION, Box 15, 138 Kingsland High Street, London E8 2NS.
Aims:	To increase the militancy of working class people’s attempts to solve their own problems — through propaganda, active participation, and debate as equals.	To promote workers’ self-management and revolutionary unions as the way to overthrow capitalism and establish a libertarian communist society.	Put the class into class politics.	Autonomous self-sufficient villages, bringing regression of without technology, no industry, no pollution, no hunger, or no bombs.	Life, liberty and property.	End the exploitation of animals.	To smash the occult establishment, end masonic mind control, and expose the involvement of the royal family in acts of ritual king slaughter.
What they say about themselves:	‘Violence is a necessary part of the class war — but as mass class violence, out in the open. Not elitist terrorist actions.’	‘Our aim is the creation of a free and classless society.’	‘We reject sectarianism and work for a united revolutionary anarchist movement.’	‘We must build a culture of resistance from festivals, gigs, fanzines, for a future alternative society.’	‘The Libertarian Alliance exists to promote the broad range of libertarian, classical liberal and free market ideas.’	‘A lot of people would like to get involved in the ALF but are afraid to do so. Don’t be: it is essential that you do for the sake of the people those who have been and will go to prison but also obviously for the animals.’	‘After thirty-five years of non-existence, the London Psychogeographical Association is well and truly back. The revival of the LPA corresponds to the increasing decay in British culture, and indeed of the British ruling elite. It has been, in fact, an historical inevitability.’
What they really do:	Recruit people who can’t take the rigorous discipline of the SWP.	Seek to recruit trade unionists, and according to sectarian myth, they become sexually aroused when watching Come Dancing.	Fail to work co-operatively with any other anarchist group.	Circulate texts denouncing their founder and ideological architect Richard Hunt, who has caused them deep embarrassment by defending former National Front leader Patrick Harrington from accusations of fascism.	Provide bored right-wing students with a sense of getting involved in something dangerous, most obviously because they favour the decriminalisation of hard drugs.	Dress up in ski-masks and take snap shots of each other holding rabbits and other furry animals.	Teach collaboration and shifting alliances by organising games of three sided football on triangular pitches with three goals, keeping a careful tally of the goals each team concedes.

The notorious article by Stewart Home which appeared in The Independent. 25/10/94. It bares very little resemblance to how it is described by Green Anarchist.. Far from being part of it press campaign to dress up Anarchism as a terrorist threat, it suggests Anarchism has had more of an impact on the arts and shows itself more as harmless Bohemianism. Note that it gives the contact addresses as appropriate.

NO USELESS
LENIENCY

On 30 November 1994, Guy Debord killed himself, apparently without reason. He was 62 years old and had been a bohemian intellectual for the past forty years. The ‘avant-garde’ essayist had secured himself a major publishing deal, attractively furnished homes in Paris and Champot. televisions, washing machines, refrigerators, garbage disposal units, and even an aquarium. While the funeral orations and other ‘tributes’ are still ringing in our cars, the Neoist Alliance asserts that the most urgent task of those defending freedom is the destruction of idols, and the suppression of corpses, especially when, as in Debord’s case, they present themselves in the name of liberty. Let the dead bury their dead, we will blaze a trail to new modes of being.

Debord did not die for our sins, this non. man killed himself so that his highly spectacular image could be reproduced everywhere. The cultural assassin reemerges, not _as_ the vengeance of Dada, but as the cutting edge of recuperation! Everything that was directly lived has moved away into representation. The Spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life, is the autonomous movement of the non-living. Death obliterates the boundaries between self and other, true and false, reducing Debord’s suicide to the level of self-serving rhetoric. Only the Neoist Alliance has grasped the necessary conjunction between nihilism and historical consciousness, now allowing a new generation to spit on the graves of neo-surrcalist epigones.

OVERTHROW THE
HUMAN RACE

THE DEATH OF ART SPELLS THE MURDER OF ARTISTS. THE REAL ANTI-ARTIST APPEARS

OH JUNE THE LlHl’N HEW YORK,VALERIE S0L0HAS SHOT ANDY WARHOL IN THE GENITALS,WHILE KING COOL SCREAMED,“DON’T DO IT...SO NO” _THE_ FORTUITOUS PRESENCE OF MARIO AMAYA,EDITOH OF LONDON BASED “ABT AND ART1STS”WAS A CHANCE TOO GOOD TO BE HISSED AND SO SHE PLUGGED HIM TOO. SEVERAL HOURS LATER SHE WENT TO TIMES SQUARE, TAPPED A TRAFFIC COP ON THE SHOULDERS AND SAID,“I BELIEVE YOU ARE LOCKING FOR HE” AHD HANDED OVER TWO 38’S VALERIE,OF

COURSE,IS A WELL KNOWN MILITANT OF S.C.U.M.(SOCIETY FOR CUTTING UP MEN)

A RECEiff COMMUNit^ FROM U.A.W.-M.F.(UP AGAINST THE WALL MOTHER FUCKBR)AND S.C.U.M. IN EXILE SAID, “NON-MOM SHOT BY THE REHU17 OF HlS PHEAN- fHECuiruRnL HSS0S5IN FNF.Tr.ES-A TOuSH CHUK

SO DON’T THINK TWICE IT’S ALRIGHT.

HICK BOB MIKE

JAGGER DYLAN KUSTOW

RICHARD HAMILTON

DAVID MARY TWIGGY HILES

HOCKNEY QUAST SHRIHPTON

HAMANNS FAITHFuL

WE APOLOGISE FOR THE INFERIOR QUALITY OF THE _ENGLISH_ COP OUTS, PARASITES AND MERCENARIES HAMED ABOVE.

THE HEALING
POWER OF DOUBT

Anyone can be killed for any reason, but start by killing yourself. The moralists of left, right and centre all do their collective part, despite the fact that they imagine themselves to be motivated by the very beliefs we will ultimately negate. “Self-destruction” is a semantic swindle. Rheloric against suicide is simply a reactionary resistance to change. Only total opposition, both theoretical and practical (i.e, death), is irrccuperahle. Anything else will necessarily appear absolutist and contradictory.

THOSE ABOUT TO DIE
Guy Debord	Richard Burns
Bruce Kent	P. J. O’Rourke
Alain de Benoist	Salman Rushdie
Tony Blair	Ronald Reagan
Ian Bone	Martin Amis
Peter Lambom Wilson	Auberon Waugh
BELIEF IS THE ENEMY

Issued by the Neoist Alliance, BM Senior, London WC1N 3XX, UK.

END SOCIAL
RELATIONS

[Image: King Mob leaflet circa 1968. More about Up Against die Wall Motherfucker can be found in Black Mask and Up Against the Wall Motherfucker, the Incomplete Works of Ron Hahne, Ben Morea and the Black Mask Group, which we published in 1993. The Scum Manifesto is available from Phoenix Press (P.O. Box 824. London N1 9DL), ironically the publishers of Larry O’Hara’s Turning Up the Heat (1994).]

[Image: Two sides of a Neoist Alliance Leaflet, put out December 1994. This leaflet plagiarises several sources such as the King Mob leaflet above. The slogan “Overthrow the Human Race” is the title of a satirical article by Henry Flynt.]

RE:ACTION #1 WINTER 1994

Newsletter of the Neoist Alliance

No. I Winter Solstice 1994

THE WORLD AS VRIL AND MISREPRESENTATION

Anti-Neoist Defamations In Canada and England

Neither Nationalism nor Trilateralism!

I wept for a time f or the harsh circumstance of the passion of Christ, and finally my tears have issued from my pen.

ANTONIO MIRANDOLA

I wept for a time for the harsh circumstance of the passion of Christ, and finally my tears have issued from my pen.

ANTONIO MIRANDOLA

In an article entitled ‘Our Tactics Against The Literary Establishment’ (Variant 16, Glasgow Winter/Spring 1994) we have already detailed a number of the defamations spread against the Neoist Alliance and its leading activists by the national press. It did not surprise us when the Mail On Sunday You Magazine of 9 October 1994 chose to revive one of these libels. With the notable exception of royalty, politicians and priests, most people are highly sceptical of the media as a source of factual information, and utilise it chiefly as a fount of naive and unintended humour. Therefore, we will for the time being ignore the Mail On Sunday slander and concentrate instead on the low level whispering campaign being orchestrated by a number of reactionaries as a counter to our influence.

In Canada, an idiot called Istvan Kantor has been claiming for some time that he is involved in our activities. This is patently absurd because the old Neoist Network, of which Kantor was once a minor member, was definitively superseded by the Plagiarist and Art Strike movements in 1985, and this impostor has been permanently excluded from our circle for the past decade. While Kantor wishes to trade on our credibility as intransigents, his unsuccessful pursuit of a career in the art world demonstrates that he has yet to grasp the critique of the institution of art made by the classical avant-garde, let alone our more advanced position of atheism towards those parts of contemporary culture which function as a secular religion. Besides, Kantor imagines that Neoism still exists and that there can be Neoist works of art, when even the Situationists — who viewed art as a radical content deformed by its bourgeois packaging — reached the conclusion that to be worthwhile, cultural activities had to cease to be works of art.

In England, the anti-Neoist campaign has taken a number of forms, one of which has been attacks on ‘our’ six point programme in the underground press. Both the Anarchist Lancaster Bomber and Further Too have completely internalised dominant literary values and as a consequence, read our propaganda as though it were the product of an anchored authorial voice. Further Too goes so far as to suggests that ‘our’ programme is fascist, when it is actually modelled on an exposure of the tactics of anti-fascism by the Imperial Fascist League! Our explorations of the phenomenon of projection and unconscious mirroring illustrate the ways in which all ideology is shaped by discourse, and these ‘attacks’ provide conclusive proof of this particular thesis. The Neoist Alliance is not interested in offering ‘the class’ a coherent ideological programme, instead we are simultaneously deconstructing old myths and providing new ‘idea-forces’ which have an organising effect on those ‘subjects’ who genuinely wish to overthrow the power elite.

While much of the anarchist and underground milieu call for unity, the Neoist Alliance is more interested in scission and radical separation. It is to this end that we conjure up new memes and fantastic elementals which will facilitate the movement of particular social groups towards various goals. The desire for fusion found across much of the political spectrum is essentially fascist. Anarchist Lancaster Bomber is part of the Green Anarchist Network, who have distanced themselves from Richard Hunt, their ideological architect, now that he’s taken their shared beliefs to a logical and highly reactionary conclusion.

Hunt wants to draw a distinction between the ‘radical right’ and the ‘fascist right’. By using the techniques of empiricism, this clown hopes to define the cartoon Nazis of the BNP as the real fascists, and the likes of Patrick Harrington as a ‘Poujadist’. In reality, fascism is an evolving ideology, and ‘national revolutionaries’ of every stripe are just as fascist as the neanderthals who sign up with the BNP. If we understand fascism as a vampire that feeds on real social movements, then not only is Hunt’s Alternative Green fascist, so are the closet cases who adhere to the more genteel version of the same doctrine within the Green Anarchist Network. This truly is a love that dare not speak its name.

Staying on the subject of anarchism, Londoners were recently treated to a ten day farce in the form of Ian Bone’s Anarchy In The UK Festival. Despite the fact that the Neoist Alliance is not an anarchist group, Bone advertised us as organising a levitation of parliament, presumably because we had previously levitated the Pavilion Theatre in Brighton as a protest against a Stockhausen concert (for details see ‘Our Tactics Against Stockhausen’ in Variant 15, Glasgow Autumn 1993). The point of actions of this type is the psychological effect they have on our enemies. Stockhausen and his supporters are vulnerable to tactics of this type, British politicians are not — and to make matters worse, the levitation of parliament took place when the building was empty, thereby ensuring that it would fail as an act of psychological warfare. All that interests Bone is publicity, and he knows that cheapening our name by associating it with his own will earn him brownie points from the media.

To receive Reaction irregularly please send three 2^nd class postage stamps to:

Neoist Alliance
BM Senior
London WCI 3XX

and you will receive the next two issues. Elsewhere please send US $1 per issue (cash only).

Donations Welcome

Cheques payable to:
Cash

Lancaster Bomber issue 9, Spring 1995, page 3

Three page article on “The Neoists” which appeared in @narchist Lancaster Bomber #9. Spring 1995. We have omitted a press cutting of an article by Martin Walker published 14^th October 1978 (The Guardian?) as it was completely illegible apart from the headline “Sid Vicious ‘in a stupour”’. As with the other @narchist Lancaster Bomber material, this article has been very hard to reproduce thanks to the shoddy quality of the original.lt is as if their goal is “To lower the ideals of craftsmanship and abolish pride in handicraft”. They moan that “Even on a basic level of eg: a small home made table used to rest cups and papers on. we can take pride in it as something useful and fit for its purpose, not something to fall apart and waste the earth’s resources” (@LB #6). yet the slapdash layout and presentation of @narchist Lancaster Bomber completely undermines this position, showing a contempt for the reader, and in fact making it on occasions impossible to read.

Lancaster Bomber issue 9, Spring 1995, page 4

The Neoists want to throw stones at the glass palace. Fair enough, we would like to join them in this ... Afterwards the Neoists want to smear shit over themselves and here we part company.

We say separation and differences arc to be welcomed Who wants homogeneity? Blair the same as Major. McDonalds everywhere, the global Asda iust off the global by-pass...

FISSION VERSUS SYMPATHY

This claim the Neoists make that ‘the desire for fusion across much of the political spectrum is essentially fascist’ seems io be mistaken in our book at any rate. If fragmentation is absolute and total, why bother to engage tn dialogue at all⁹ Why bother to write and produce magazines⁹ If there is no common ground whatsoever, whai is the point? Who are your audience? If there is no sympathy, if no one is willing to listen or join in a controversy, why bother writing?

WHO CARES?

Who cares about anarchism⁹ Who cares about the Neoists⁹ But just to pick up the magazine and read it indicates something Sympathy⁹Wc arc not here to presuade’ or proselytize With then attacks on other people. Guv Debord. Richard Burns. Ian Bone, it is not at all clear what the Neoists intentions arc. but for the moment, no matter — the point is made — at some point there might be contact between speaker and audience, the alienation is not yet so total as io preclude that. Now to some extent wc can see exactly wnat they arc getting at when the Neoists say ’the desire for fusion . is essentially fascist.’ Il is the last, emotive word that is the problem Wc might say: the desire for fusion is essentially born of fear. But we do not share that fear. Tlic desire for fusion is born of the fear of being ineffectual, the fear of being alone But wc are effective, and we arc noi isolated

We might say that the desire for fusion is essential!) Nun of the urge to dominate But as anarchists wc refuse to join out selves with those who would uy to dominate us Step back from the call for fusion and look for die motive behind it Who is being submerged and why⁹ Which group or movement is doing the absorbing⁹ Looked at like this we can see the problems behind some calls for fusion, and block these • refuse io co operate with them There is a problem hete though, it is difficult to sort out why this or that particular call for fusion is flawed because it involves thought. The Neoists find it much easier to brand the call to join together fascist’ (a category of dismissal) and leave ir at that We would far rather know u7n wc find it defective

It is quite possible to see the implicit authoritarianism of certain types of fusion (the Hnffies. the SWP perhaps) but same i\ not oil There ate other groups we can join with, without compromising our ideas and so H is quite wrong to dismiss the whole process of fusion, right across the political spectrum as ‘essentially fascist’. We say let’s all stand our ground, all the different groups and if we can find ways of working that overlap, fine, we can work together on our own terms Difference is not a threat We have our own ideas and if we refuse to bow down to the state with its laws and police, its guns, cameras and torture camps: then we certainly are not going to bow to some two penny ha’penny political outfit like the SWP or whatever We have our own ideas, wc know and arc always being amazed at what we arc capable of. Who wants to be homogenised⁹ — Only the people who can’t find their own icons

Only until we try and fail will we know that joining together is not possible That’s why. from up here al any rate, the Neoist attack on TO Days that Shook The World’ looks so wrong headed What have the Neoists got against anarchist folks getting together and having a bit of a laugh⁹ To dismiss this as fascism seems completely wrong Perhaps the Neoists are into solipsism, or want to stand outside the freedom bookshop in the ram holding a soaked placard and earner bags of unread and unwanted magazines Is it just an ego top?

The less a person lays claim in the f uns of his work
The more he is enriched
Whoever works only for herself becomes an egotist

FUZZY

Il doesn’t help any kind of debate to bounce round accusations of fascism willy-nilly. That only leads to sloppy thinking, lack of clanty. hysteria, an absence of charity Are ya it really so incapable of making distinctions? Debate degenerates into name calling; it also leads to the devaluation to the icon ‘fascist’ in just (he same way as calling anti-road protesters ’criminals’ makes that word meaningless. Wc are all criminals now Perhaps the Neoists are following a wider agenda. The times are so desperate that in radical groups and protest movements, actions which promote disunity essentially help the state

3. LANCASTER BOMBER, GREEN ANARCHIST EQUATED WITH RICHARD HUNT

Re Action declared Richard Hunt to be our ideological architect This demonstrates a failure to grasp the situation. No surprises heir because the) offer no facts or analysis to support their slander. If they had troubled themselves to find out the facts of the ease they would not have made such an outrageous blunder. Are van really sn incapable of making thshncm^Hs’^,To claim that Hunt is our ideological architect is such a bizarre statement that it just has to be an example of Neoist ’Vrif (Arbitrary Invention) Perhaps the Neoists are resorting to the familiar McCarthy style guilt by association tactic Throw enough mud and see if it will stick. Throw them tn the river and see if they will Goal — it has the same mclluxlological validity.

NOTHING TO DO WITH RICHARD HUNT

We are not responsible for Richard Hum or hrs ncnvme« lie lefi Green AnarchiM rn 1991, a year before lire lumber Maned In pan i«micx wc have mnanced ourselves from hiesexiM. spccicxi.xi. ratio, xenophobic magarme M has GA (sec eg ihe cdnonal in issue ’4 p 17) Wc do mu s.ippon censorship, bul hi« magazine is such an aflroni io die green nmvemem ami cvcmihing rhai we siand for ihai we endorse ami fully support the plea m radical bookshops not lo slock u We have consistently opposed Hum II XV c concise the Tory Party next, will you accuse m of hemp I ones’

OURSELVES ATTACKED

Il has been drawn to our altcntion that tn 1992 the number was allocked m Airee,umvc Green No 5 page 17.‘ll s strong on whal it s ngainM Marxism, mdtisny. Europe, pacifism, cmchy io animals but has little about wh.u us in favour of ‘ We don’t want lo go on aboul all this because it him gives Hunt free publicity We don’t lake him that seriously He is on his own in the wilderness Just One man If you warn io know more ahoui our dispute« with him see GA 36 page 7 The Ncoi««’ imellecui illy lax blanket equation of Green Anarchist and Lancaster ho nth er with Hunt is just so much bullshit that anybody who knows anything about ihe Bomber Ims probably already pissed themselves laughing Categorise and then dismiss So much easier than thinking about something isn’t ip lb equate Hunt will’ the Bomber makes the Neoists look lust like the media they themselves denigrate as ‘a fount of naive and unintended humour.*

4. INTERNALISING DOMINANT LITERARY VALUES

The closest point the Neoists come to engaging with the original Rnmhct article is an inversion of the comment we ourselves made, on Point 3 < f the Neo«« Programme. We said ‘The Neoists have taken the cri.ical value judgement, internalised it and inverted it ‘ Back to smearing shit ovc themselves Arc yon really an incapable nJ making distinctions’¹

MY BIG BROTHER THE THEORIST

When deciding what to think about a piece of work, how to react to n u n not necessary to subordinate ourselves io a dominant system of culiui.il or ideological values We just look, and decide If our judgements arc to nc our own we have in stand aside from what other people say aboul it and look on the work in our own personal integrity To understand this we only h ive io understand the fable of ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ The cok p the

weaver of invisible material “Only very clever people can see this magic cloth.” Rather than drawing on some elaborate lheoretic.il bullshit to back up this call to worship the cultural object m the same (orthodox) way as lie.- devout critic we should all refer to the work itself anti make our own numb up aboul it Is il any good?

How do we find out the values a cultural work upholds’’ (if any ’I Tire reader or viewer, whatever, can sec these and claim them for him/herself If the values arc any good perhaps the viewer will be attracted l( wc get u wrong then wc lose out. u is our loss Serve us right for being conned If « e defer to the false persuasion of (he authoritarian theorists who « hispci m our cars ihen that will be our loss and our fault Wc should have known better The Emperor was Markers and all the giowit-ups deferred m the invisible cloth-weavers but nobody could fool the hide kid it is not uim speaks that counts but what is said Tnose interminable lists ol name« the name-droppers spout

Damlo Dolci. Napoleon Solo
Si John of the Cross and
The Marquis de Sade
Hindemith. Mick JaRgcr. Durer anil Schwitters
Gai cia Lorca
and last of all me .
(Adrian Henri)

We say. cut out the middle-men. cut out the theorist. Judge for yourselves and trust your own judgement. As with voting, as with Westminster, so to with critical “authority” — Representation entails betrayal — if we allow the critic or his theory to represent us. wc shall he betrayed Trust yourselves. Are you really so incapable of making these distinction?

Why should we believe in it if we all know it isn’t any good?

Public opinion TV. the Sun etc. is nothing So long as they stay passive their arm chairs, buying the coffee, what use is it to talk about their hold” opinions⁹ So you want to formulate different ‘opinions’ for them do you * you want to sell them a different blend of coffee⁹ Keep on drinking tl Neotst Blend, suckers’ They'll still be sitting there in their arm chairs, si be passive. It’s not what you think about it. but what you arc doing ahiua that counts We don’t just seek a cultural turning over of the demur.a paradigm, we seek the ending of domination Virtual reality counts b nothing when the blast wave hits the goldfish bowl

[Image: Anonymous leaflet attacking Paul Rogers, circulated Spring 1995. Green Anarchist still haven’t come to terms with the fact that their ideas originate in the far-Right. E.g. the Poll Tax revolt was a response to measures which reduced taxes for the rich and increased them for the poor. It was a working class response to a specific tax. and the fact that it did not continue when replaced with the Council Tax. or spread into an attack on VAT or income taxes, shows how thin GA’s pretence that their posters are linked with this movement really is.]

IF PAUL ROGERS OF OXFORD
GREEN ANARCHIST HAS BROKEN
WITH RICHARD HUNT WHY DOES
HE STILL USE HUNT'S IDEAS?

All true anarchists agree that Richard Hunt is a racist scumbag and want nothing to do with him. The problem with Paul Rogers & Co. at Oxford Green Anarchist is that while they’ve ended their association with Richard Hunt, they are still using a good number of his fascist ideas. This is most obvious in Green Anarchist merchandise such as T-shirts and posters, many of which were designed by Hun: and are now mainly sold through die Nazi Alternative Green magazine. To lake just one example, Green Anarchist still sell Hunt’s poster featuring the slogan Tax Is Theft. Anarchists quite rightly leave anti-tax agitation to the far-Right who try to use it as a way of tricking people into thinking fascism is radical. The Nazis might promise to gel rid of tax to win voles (these slimebags lie even more dian ordinary politicians) but they won’t gel rid of the slate! Anti-tax agitation is a big issue in America and its leading exponents such as Posse Comttatus have close ties with the Ku Klux Klan. Anarchists want to abolish government, to campaign against tax waters down this position and simultaneously leads people to associate the anarchist movement with the far-Right.

Syndicalism shows that it is possible to have a complex industrial society without hierarchies. Oxford Green Anarchist deny this in their platform. Worse still, they don’t explain how they plan to move from a complex mass society that can support a large population, to a world of small agricultural communities where there is less technology. Nazi scumbag Richard Hunt, who invented Oxford Green Anarchist’s ideology, says in the fascist Alternative Green that for this to happen there will have to be a 75% reduction in the population. Do Oxford Green Anarchist plan to set up death camps? Even if they simply want to leave Ilie bulk of the working class to starve to death this is still fascist! Oxford Green Anarchist have a lot of explaining to do. However, anarchists arc not sectarian like dogmatic marxists, now that the Green Anarchist Network has broken with Richard Hunt, it only has to break with his ideas and stop selling his posters to become an integral part of the anarchist movement. There are good people in the Green Anarchist Network whose energetic activism is an inspiration to others, it is a shame their excellent work is devalued by their association with Paul Rogers, who has not only worked politically in the past with Nazi scumbag Richard Hunt, but continues to use Green Anarchist as a vehicle for Hunt’s ideas. Real anarchists who are involved with GA should cither force Oxford Green Anarchist to drop its genocidal platform, or if they are unable to do this, leave Green Anarchist and join revolutionary groups that fight against all fascist ideologies.

ANARCHISM IS FREEDOM! SMASH THE STATE!

Green and Brown Anarchist

Internal Bulletin of the Green Action Network. No. 1.
For circulation among initiates only!

The Only Sane Response To Mass Society Is Mass Murder

It is necessary to animate the dead body and resuscitate it in order to multiply its power to the infinite.

Albertus Magnus.

The Population Bomb

While the far-Right knows it will go nowhere without the Left, many of our Anarchist supporters have yet to realise that it is tactically necessary to adopt the techniques of the Nazis and the Secret State in order to overthrow mass society. The squeamishness many City Dwellers exhibit towards the perfectly natural phenomena of Death means that we have no choice but to side-step the issue of how we intend to achieve a ninety-five per cent reduction in the human population. Everyone agrees that mass society cannot be reformed and must therefore be replaced, but the means by which we will achieve this utopian ideal must remain a secret that is only circulated among those who have been enlightened through initiation into the ranks of GA Cadre.

Death Camps

Everyone knows that the Nazi Death Camps were wicked and evil institutions because those parts of the surplus population liquidated during the Final Solution were selected on the basis of their racial origin or sexual preferences. The only fair and rational basis upon which to pick members of the surplus population for culling is by age. The populations of Europe and North America are ageing, therefore in these areas the GA Cadre intend to purge the planet of everyone over thirty. Along with Alain De Benoist, GA recognises the ‘right to difference’ that exists among divergent peoples. Therefore in the Third World, where there is a population explosion, it will be necessary to kill everyone under thirty. Mass society needs resources from across the planet in order to survive. The individuals most ruthlessly exploited by this system are those that work the land in the Third World, only to have the fruits of their labour exported to profit the rich. Death is infinitely preferable to being a degraded slave of imperialism.

Mass society alienates people from the Earth. By controlling the Earth’s resources, the State controls society. GA wants to return everyone over thirty to the Earth. However, unlike the Nazis, we will not do this with pollutants such as Zyklon B which poison the planet, nor will we plunder the Amazon for exotic venoms as a reactionary who has now been expelled from our ranks wished. Instead we shall make good use of natural toxins such as methane gas. By re-establishing our relationship with the Earth in this fashion, by turning the surplus population into fertiliser, we will undermine the hierarchical thinking that is destroying the planet and simultaneously transform the Nazi abstraction of ‘blood and soil’ into an exquisite and deeply meaningful reality.

Green Action Network. Box 88. Magdalen College. Oxford.

Satirical Green & Brown ©narchist leaflet, circulated March 1995

Liberal Smears

Newspapers such as the Independent have libellously claimed that GA spends all its time attacking Richard Hunt, our founder and ideological architect, because he now publicly defends unreconstructed fascists. This is a lie, we do not spend ALL our time attacking Hunt, the GA leadership has also expended a great deal of energy in planning Green Death Camps, where the surplus population can be humanly killed off. This is the only realistic method of cutting out the cancer that threatens to destroy Mother Earth, the only possible way we can kill off the parasitic core of mass society. Meanwhile, various reactionaries who object to Death Camps have started asking questions about how we intend to replace mass society with communities small enough for every peasant farmer to be respected as an autonomous individual.

GA security expert ‘Fat Boy’ O’Haw-Haw tells us that the best way to deal with those who criticise us is to spread rumours that these scum are Nazi bastards. Since our supporters never see racist rock albums, we can safely slander anyone by claiming that they have received dedications on Skrewdriver record sleeves, and no one but the victim will ever know that this isn’t true. O’Haw-Haw is our link man with various progressive tendencies that have transcended their far-Right origins, such as Derek Holland’s International Third Position. Likewise, O’Haw-Haw provides us with names and addresses of enemy targets to circulate, because he knows that anyone who criticises either him or us must be a spook. The Secret State is only capable of forming pseudo-gangs among the Left and the far-Right. Thanks to ‘Fat Boy’ O’Haw-Haw, the Cadre of GA has twenty-four hour protection against the machinations of Stella Rimington and MI5.

The Great Work

While GA whole-heartedly supports anti-racist and anti-imperialist struggles, this does not prevent us from recognising the achievements of National Socialism. Hitler was a vegetarian and animal lover who smashed the power of the Old Gang in Europe. National Socialism was a considerable improvement upon the Globalism of International Socialism. In works such as The Peasantry As The Life Source Of The Nordic Race, Nazi agriculture minister Walther Darré outlined a pastoral vision that is remarkably similar to the GA ideal of small autonomous communities. The tragedy of National Socialism is that this idealistic movement allowed itself to be perverted by the bigotry of men such as Alfred Rosenberg and Julius Streicher, while reactionaries such as Albert Speer simultaneously bulldozed autobahns through the European countryside.

Supporting the anti-fascist struggle does not mean that GA rejects the positive achievements of National Socialism. GA agrees with Savitri Devi when she says that the problem with Hitler was that he indulged his people with too great a solar warming, and as a consequence neglected the lightning of violence that should have been directed at a far greater swath of the population. To be sure, references to this are not lacking in the works of Julius Evola, the ideological inspiration for progressive tendencies such as the International Third Position. As Evola notes, within Alchemy the body acquired the label of a burden which enchains every soul. While the soul struggles within this prison, it cannot attain illumination. Hatred of the body is a prerequisite of Gnosis, while life in mass society is a living death.

The only sane response to mass society is mass murder. In the shadows, ashes and remains of the GA Death Camps there will be far more than mere liberation from mass society, this is where we shall discover the Philosopher’s Stone, and with it the knowledge of how to return to a Traditional form of society in tune with Mother Earth. This is a revolution in the true sense of the word, a homecoming.

POL POT HAD THE RIGHT IDEA! LET THE PARASITES DROWN IN A SEA OF BLOOD. A WORLD POPULATION OF ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND WILL BE ENOUGH TO BUILD A PURE SOCIETY. LONG LIVE DEATH!

GREEN ANARCHISM EXPOSED!

A special report by the Neoist Alliance

‘The struggle for democracy is not a short cut allowing workers to make the revolution without realising it. The proletariat will destroy totalitarianism only by destroying democracy and all political forms at the same time. Until then there will be a succession of “fascist” and “democratic” systems in time and space...’

Jean Barrot.

Green Anarchist and their collaborator Larry O’Hara wish to reorganise social struggle on the basis of what they claim to be a momentous discovery, the fact that the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight fails to operate independently of the British state! Since Searchlight has never claimed to be a revolutionary organisation, it is absurd for Green Anarchist and O’Hara to expect it to behave like one. They might just as well attack the Spectator or the Daily Telegraph for the same reason, or rail against a horse because it isn’t a zebra. Anti-fascism is a democratic ideology, it was invented for the defence of the liberal state, anti-fascists have always opposed fascism with democracy, whereas revolutionaries oppose both fascism and the liberal state with communism.

Democrats who claim to relish debate will not tolerate discussion of fascism. They wish to reduce the Nazi question to an issue of morality. Their dogma is that since the NSDAP was undoubtedly racist and genocidal, fascism is evil and that is all that needs to be said about it. Thus anti-fascism does not even reach the level of consciousness attained by the idealist philosophers of the eighteenth-century, it is essentially religious in character and this is its fatal weakness. To understand fascism one needs to grasp the material conditions that create it. Fascism does not gain mass support simply on the basis of its genocidal programme, it is a vampire that feeds on real social movements. In order to grow, fascism has to offer people solutions to the problems that confront them in their daily lives, even if — as is inevitably the case — these are false solutions to the contradictions thrown up by capitalism. Fascism wants to go backwards, at its atavistic core is a neo-feudalism, fascists don’t understand that they cannot escape the contradictions of capitalism through a barbarous programme of mass murder. There is only one way to escape from the agony of commodity relations, and that is for the proletariat to expropriate its expropriators.

Green Anarchist and Larry O’Hara treat fascism as a moral category, and as a result are prone to smearing anyone who is critical of their brand of activism as having connections to either Nazis or the Secret State. Fascism as a form of false consciousness is very different to the bogey brandished by Green Anarchist. While the murderous assaults of swastika wielding reactionaries can make life a misery for individual proletarians, these thugs are unlikely to muster mass support because National Socialism in its classical form is historically discredited. The ideological twists and turns of the French New Right and their offspring — such as the political soldiers of the Third Position — demonstrate that the rhetoric of anti-racism and pro-Third Worldism is not incompatible with an ideology that is fascist at its core. Indeed, given the negative fashion in which anti-fascism defines itself, the anti-fascism of those without a material stake in the liberal state can very easily be transformed into its opposite, that is to say fascism. Obviously, since the institution of communist social relations is the only means by which the proletariat can defeat fascism, there is no such thing as ‘revolutionary’ anti-fascism.

The practical result of anti-fascist moralism is that it prevents its adherents from recognising fascism for what it is, it prevents them from viewing fascism as anything other than a moral contagion, it prevents them from recognising genocidal ideology in anything other than its swastika wielding form. Green Anarchist does not know what fascism is, and it is therefore incapable of recognising itself as fascist. This is the real basis of Green Anarchist’s differences with Searchlight. With its anti-urban ideology and utopian vision of small autonomous communities, Green Anarchist has yet to face the problem of how it plans to ‘dispose’ of a huge ‘surplus’ population. While supporters of Green Anarchism might hope that the urban proletariat will simply starve to death (thereby saving them the trouble of killing us), if they successfully instigated a counter-revolution, the material unfolding of events would ultimately force them to resort to the concentration camp and the Gulag, as happened when capital restructured itself in Germany and imposed itself on Russia.

Green Anarchist’s false solutions to the contradictions of capital are identical to those of fascism. It’s propaganda includes posters bearing the following slogans: Only Guns Give Us Rights, Tax Is Theft and Stuff Your Jobs We Want Land. Being a form of capitalism, fascism draws on liberal rhetoric about rights while differentiating itself from democratic ideology by revelling in its willingness to use violence to impose commodity relations upon the proletariat. Likewise, anti-tax agitation is a favoured tactic of the extreme right, since it diverts attention away from the root cause of alienation and instead attacks a by-product of capitalist relations. As for wanting land, the Nazis had a word for it, lebensraum or ‘living space’. Likewise, Larry O’Hara’s concern about the peasantry (see page 21 of the pamphlet Paradise Referred Back: A Radical Look At The Green Party, co-written with Gary Matthews), is just what one would expect from Nazis without swastikas.

While nationalism was a key element of Nazism, the French New Right and some of those tail-ending it have demonstrated that fascism can mutate by organising itself around an ideological regionalism. What is crucial to fascism as a form of reaction is not nationalism per se, but anti-internationalism, of which nationalism is just one expression. However, it would be wrong to assume from this that Green Anarchist is very far removed from classical fascism. This fact can be illustrated by quoting a few lines of propaganda issued by a pre-war fascist organisation in Belgium: ‘Rex is neither a party nor a league. Rex is a movement, that is to say an active force carrying a current of ideas. Rex is a revolutionary movement. Rex is a popular movement... The Rexist movement wants the destruction of all that which in the present regime compromises the existence of particular (i.e. small) communities, suppresses their dignity — that is their functions and their social responsibilities... (the Rexist movement wants) the reconstruction of particular (i.e. small) communities, by a comprehensive series of measures designed to restore their position, their rights and their duties...’ This IS Green Anarchism even if GA reject the Christian nationalist trappings of Rexism..

What Larry O’Hara and Green Anarchist want proletarians to do is make a choice between fascism and democracy. Forced to chose between Searchlight (democracy) and Green Anarchist (fascism), anyone with their sanity intact would opt for the former. But in the end this is a false opposition, the material unfolding of history leaves proletarians with no real choice but to oppose both fascism and democracy with communism. If one considers this a choice at all, then in must be posited in terms of progress against reaction. As for the Larry O’Hara and Green Anarchist obsession with spooks, this serves to divert attention away from their reactionary politics. O’Hara and Green Anarchist have made a lot of allegations about various individuals working with the secret state, it’s about time they offered some solid evidence for accusations that we must otherwise conclude are simply smears.

WATCH OUT FOR BUREAUCRATS!
WATCH OUT FOR MANIPULATORS!
DOWN WITH WAGE-SLAVERY!

For a critique of fascism and anti-fascism see Fascism Anti-Fascism by Jean Barrot (Black Cat Press, Edmonton 1982). For a critique of the French New Right see The Echo Of Time by Jacques Camatte (Unpopular Books, London 1988).

Neoist Alliance. BM Senior. London WC!N 3XX. UK. Send three second class stamps to receive two copies of our newsletter at a UK address, otherwise send US SI cash per issue.

Lancaster Bomber issue 10, Summer 1995, page 5 5

PRESS RELEASE/FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION 3M/95

BLACK PROPAGANDIST EXPOSED!

In lale-March 1995. all listed EF¹ groups recieved Green & Brown Anarchist, supposed “Inlemal Bulletin of the Green Action Network” [enclosed] This” latest witless hoax by notorious disinformer Stewart Home prelends “GA . intend to achieve a ninety-five per cent reduction in the human population [by] Green Death Camps” and has links with the far Right, exactly the eco-fascrst smears thrown at Earth First¹ in 1991–2 to stop us organizing in UK-

Now we all know which side Home is on, treat him with the contempt he deserves via BM Neo. London WC1N 3XX and don’t forget to forward any future examples of anti-EF’ disinformation to JoumoWatch. BCM 1715. London WC1N 3XX

CONTACT: Oxford Green Anarchists. BCM 1715, London WON 3XX

NEOIST LEAFLET ATTACKING PAUL ROGERS AND GREEN ANARCHIST

P5

The pamphlet ‘Green and Brown Anarchist’ was so untrue it was beneath contempt. The Neoist leaflet against Paul Rogers raised a few points worth responding to but their attempt to reduce things down to the level of personality politics was a poor approach. Personality politics is a typical method used by state propaganda. They give a political group a figurehead, the movement is then equated with this figure and the ng tire knocked down. Thus, according to their public relations facade method, ihc group itself is discredited Do the Neoists really want to follow this road?

We don’t have figureheads, so Dividc and Rule isn’t going to work here. Everybody in GA knows that Paul has done as much as anybody else to oppose Richard I linn

TAX

Everybody is opposed to tax Even ihc Tories say they are going to «educe taxes before an election. Il seems a poor argument to suggest that opposing tax is a mark of fascism What about al! the people on the lelt and anarchists who Opposed the poll tax? Are they fascists too⁰ In 199(1 the anarchist group Class W.u produced a brilliant leaflet Tuck Ml ’luxes’ ‘Ihc opposition to las is not a mark of fascism, neither is it a waicimg down of anarchism. It is a sensible tactical move. If the state cannot collect taxes, it is weakened Example in Liverpool, a large number of people deregistered from electoral rolls io avoid poll tax. Duc to this reduction’ in population, the police budget was cm 4(X) ponce Ies’. the state in

The free market lias a terrible effect on mini’s like education and the NHS We could talk about ambulance roulette, the Orpington man who wa> helicoptered 200 miles to Leeds because of the intensive care shortage, or jusl that all over the world society is falling tn on itself faster than poison gas spreads down the Tokyo subway, faster than an Oklahoma office block collapses when hit by a bomb’s blast wave

Unemployment, workfare, slave-labour programmes. TV cameras in every street, computers More and more controlled, more and more a fascist hell on earth Then there is air pollution, asthma, new viruses, the increased risk of skin cancer due to ozone depletion . None of this is the responsibility of GA. it is implicit in the structure of the cities and the techno-nightmare itself

THE FERTILITY BOMB

Most significantly 0! all. one result of the cities’ attack on ihe environment is that human fertility is declining Detergents pass down drains into rivers and then into ihc water supply. These suppress male fertility, which is • ~ ■-’ r before this lias

Liverpool is that much weaket It is obvious to us, ihe more you knock oui u,^ — ..

IM. Ihc more you knock out the Slate. Tak is only one mcihoc. ihcrc arc going down somcihing like I « per year. How much longer

plenty of other ways we can Tight it By all iikuik acreixarx a serious effect”’ If we am’t all struck down by some sori ol super p.aguc

caused by pollution or tropical rain forest clear cutting, in 50 year» time ihc problem is not going to be overpopulation bin the link of human reproductive capacity Tins is not the fault of GA. but an implicit

You accuse us of advocating genocide. This is not true It seems to us that ihc present, technology-based civilization is unsustainable and in deep trouble Socially, the cities are collapsing under their own stagnation, then own contradictions This is not somcihing that GA is responsible for. u is lust a fact about cities and industrialization For example what w> happen when the EC trawlers have stripped the seas of hsb’ What will happen when all the topsoil has eroded away? No more food .

Not living in cities, being quite close to the sea and me environment, we can see how nature is being really fucked up by techno-cis Plankton in ihe sea is dying out because of pollution and also because o global warming. As the temperature of the seas rises, more plankton die. Ine speed ihc average temperture of the sea rises by increases and more plankion die. This has a knock-on effect op ihe food chain, ihe fish and

ciHiscquencc of techno-civ.

AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ANARCHIST MOVEMENT

The Neoist leaflet says “n (GA) has only to break with (I Ium’s) ideas ami slop selling his posters to become an integral pari of the anarchist movement”.. ,

The point here is that GA broke with Richard Hum over 4 years ago m me early 1990’s after his support for the Gulf War. We oppose his ideas

GREEN ANARCR/It °^XF°RD

WHO ARE THE NEOISTS TO EXCLUDE GA FROM THE @NARCH1ST MOVEMENT?

These people who say they are into “Schism and radical separation ■ well well well Now they “offer” us a place in the anarchist movement Typical LondiKeniric chauvinism We know we are ‘teal anarchists’ anil we doo i

need ibetr permission to be ihui

ACTION

The thing is. with GA’s emphasis on Action and people getting up their hums and ihhnx something, the Neoists anft in a position to argue with that. We invite everyone to judge us by our results The state cenainly thinks Green Anarchist is a magazine worth raiding, a magazine worth suppressing. Action speaks for itself. The Neoists say There are good people in GA whose energetic activism is an inspiration to others Results count. Seems to us the anarchist movement is made up of the c — . , , „ people who arc nmuchiMv Who arc ihc Neoists to legislate who is and ’¡lie cities themselves arc seized with kind of madness. (Have you

arc a panol it • that s what counts By ever stood on a motorway bridge ami watched the cars rushing by?) I his

that we aic. and ihmc is innlimg the Neoists can madness is expressed economically by the Dog Eat Dog ethos ol the tree

oilier living creatures who live off plankton will die Then ihc people who poisoned the sea in ihe Ursi place will also die This is just one example — technological civilization is making the situation worse in many oihet

ways. ,

As Ihe productivity of the land goes down, more chemicals have io be pui on ihe soil, io make up ihe loss These chemicals wash oil into ihe waicr supply or arc preseiu in food, poisoning people Nuclear reactors leak, radioactive waste from Thorp conies down into die water table and tun into die sea. from there into the food chain

Article from @narchist Lancaster Bomber #10. Summer 1995

User Friendly Nazis: How Green Was My Holocaust

When extreme nationalists wear battle fatigues, shave their heads and do the nazi salute, they’re easy to spot. But increasingly they are camouflaging their ideology to reach people who’d never have given them the time of day...

Nazi ideas have never enjoyed the support of ordinary people in this country. It was our grandfathers who fought against Hitler and freed Europe from fascist tyranny. We know the consequences of giving power to loonies who want to raise a swastika flag over every town hall and put a jackboot to our throats, which is why neo-Nazi views remain unrepresented in parliament. Having realised that showing their true colours does them no good at all, many Nazi activists are now presenting themselves to the public as greens and anarchists.

There is nothing really new in this situation, fascism was invented by the Italian dictator and former socialist Benito Mussolini. Fascism swept to power in Italy because it used socialist rhetoric to trick ordinary people into supporting its right-wing ideas. Hitler copied Mussolini’s tactics with great success and even more chilling results. Millions of people were murdered by the Nazis, whose racist campaigns often took the form of animal rights style agitation against the ways in which live-stock must be slaughtered according to Jewish religious law. Traditionally the colour red has been associated with the left and blue with the right, because fascism mixed elements from both ends of the political spectrum it is now depicted as being brown, which was also the colour of the shirts worn by Hitler’s uniformed supporters.

As long ago as 1989 Searchlight, the anti-fascist magazine, was running front cover features on what it described as ‘the greening of the brownshirts.’ For many years former National Front activists have been setting up quasi-green organisations as recruiting fronts for their vile activities, but it is only more recently that the anarchist movement has been targeted as a potential vehicle for Nazi propaganda. Former National Front boss Patrick Harrington has even managed to get a letter published in the latest issue of the American journal Anarchy, in which he writes ‘as a life-long vegetarian and pagan, I am genuinely interested in green issues... I do not see any contradiction between this and my other views , indeed I regard them as interlinked.’

A number of anarchists have been won over by this claim and it is these individuals who are most likely to succeed in getting it across to a wider public. The most notorious anarchist convert to National Front style racism is Richard Hunt, the founder of Green Anarchist and the driving force behind the magazine Alternative Green. Hunt vents his racism in anti-Irish rants with headlines such as Off Our Patch Paddy. Alternative Green has also run articles supporting the ‘red and brown’ united front fighting against democracy in Russia, and currently argues for tough immigration and deportation laws. More sinister still is Richard Hunt’s claim that the population must be reduced by 75% if we are to have an ecologically sustainable society. Hunt doesn’t make it clear whether he wishes to set up death camps or if people will simply be left to starve to death.

Green Anarchist, the magazine Hunt originally set up but subsequently left, has not yet adopted the openly racist style of its founder. However, it shares many assumptions with Hunt and its attacks on what it calls technological ‘mass society’ result in Green Anarchist being every bit as committed as Hunt to a huge reduction in the population. Likewise, Green Anarchist still sells many of the posters Richard Hunt created to promote his extreme right-wing ideas among anarchists. For example, the posters advertised in the latest issue of Green Anarchist includes one carrying the slogan Tax Is Theft. This idea is popular among Ku Klux Klan supporters in America because tax money is used to finance equal opportunity projects. Real anarchists want to abolish parliament and therefore have no need to campaign against the taxes levied by the government. They quite rightly see anti-tax agitation as a way of tricking people into accepting fascist ideas.

Last month a spoof bulletin calling itself Green & Brown Anarchist was mailed to radical groups around the world. Although this was obviously a prank, the leaflet demonstrated very convincingly the ways in which the green and anarchist movements have been corrupted with extreme right-wing ideas. The fact that many people did not realise the leaflet was a joke and assumed that Green & Brown Anarchist was a secret cell of either Green Anarchist or Alternative Green, shows how dangerously close these two magazines are to hardline fascism. This is a very worrying situation because if people can’t tell the difference between the left and the right, they might end up supporting Nazi ideas without even knowing what they are doing. To exploit this situation, a number of people with extreme right-wing views now claim to be anti-racist, and attempt to justify their desire for racial segregation on the grounds that this will stop everyone from becoming alike while simultaneously preserving the diversity of races in the world! This, of course, is nonsense. Every culture is enriched by contact with other cultures, black and white youth share the same ideals when it comes to fashion and music, which is why they should unite to fight against racism.

PS: Incidently, the Michigan Militia, the movement recently linked with the Oklahoma terrorist bomb, was recently quoted as saying, in all seriousness, that four billion people need to be removed from the face of the earth.

G-Spot 17 Spring/Summer 1995. The multi-colour underlay made this article impossible to reproduce readably without access to the original art work, therefore it has been reformatted and does not conform to the lay-out it was given when first published. Although this commercially commissioned piece of journalism was credited to Stewart Home, he was not responsible for the final edit, the headline, the introductory strap-line or the PS. With regard to the whole piece, it is interesting that the unibomber is now known to have far-Right views, when for years most commentators assumed that he was a leftist.

On Avant-Gardes

Deal Freedom.

Your reviewer refers to FT Marinetti’s “short lived attraction to fascism” in a review of The Futurist Cookbook (Freedom, 1 !th February 1995). Marinetti was more than attracted to fascism, and there was nothing short- lived about it He was the founder and leading light of the Italian Futurist movement (and not its “second wave”, as your reviewer writes); a movement whose whole philosophy can almost he summarised in the following hoe» from the first Futurist manifesto “We will glorify war — the world’s only hygiene — militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the freedom hungers, beautiful ideals worth dying for, and scorn for women”. Marinetti and the Italian Futurists were much more than ‘sympathetic’ to fascism, as they — especially Marinetti — played a leading role in the nascent fascist movement following World War One. Unlike his arusuc contemporaries Luigi Pirandello and Gabnclte D’ Annunzio. Marinetti ituiaincd faithful to Mussolini and fascism until the very cod, becoming an enthusiastic supporter of the Salo Republic. Indeed, during 1942. when well into his middle age. be volunteered for active service on the Russian Front.

So much for the first of this century’s avant-gardes and ns leader On to the last of the avant-gardes and its (thankfully late) leader, rhe Situationisi International and Guy Debord. Michel Pngent. defender of the Holy Grail of specto- situationistD. whines in typical pro situ fashion about someone having the temerity to get a few details wrong concerning the glistening object of his religious devotion (Freedom. 11^th February 1995). in an article concerning the long overdue suicide of that pompous imbecile Guy Debord Pngent informs us that the miserable Pope of specto-

situationisi ideology was suffering from

alcoholic polyneuritis, i.e. he was an

Dear Freedom.

Michel Prigent’s curious letter (Freedom, 27^th May 1995) reierred to our publication of Jean Hanot’s ‘Critique of the Situatiomst International’ tn the pamphlet What is Situationism? When back id 1987 Pngent first raised his criticism that Barrot was scared of critical flak if he puWished it in French. I must admit that I didn’t understand the significance of this. However since Debord’s publication of Cette mauvais reputation in 1993 things have become a little clearer In ihis book he limits himself to responding to “media gossip” appearing in France Under this phrase he makes no differentiation between mainstream newspaper articles and critiques from the radical milieu Far from any serious attempt to deal with criticism, Debord was more concerned with defending his reputation within the context of French national culture. In such circumstances, it is hard to guess why Barrot would be scared of being dismissed as “media gossip”.

We have not concerned ourselves with why this text was not published in France, but would like to comment that this has been the only criticism that Pngent has made of the text in the eight years since we published it Our aim was not to worry about whether wc could worm our way into a footnote of some History of the Situationisi International, but “that situationism be recognised as a product of the material conditions of its time rather than some transcendental doctrine that emanated from the beads of privileged geniuses” And while wc agree that Debord’s book Society of the

alkie This hardly explains why “the freaked out father of situationism” chose to do the decent thing dow.

Debord, after decades of condemning “the society of the spectacle”, ended his days cooperating in the production of a television documentary about his (non-) life and tunes His pompous vanity overcoming in practice his (incoherent) ideological posturing. Everything that was once lived has moved away into representation

Pngent informs us that”... a few people have tried to write the history of the Situatiuoisl International, but all have failed ... To write such a history it is necessary to have been involved in such an undertaking ...” Pngent no doubt has himself in mind, as a one-time lap-dog and general sycophant to the High Priest of Nothingness. Too bad he can’t even write a coherent leaflet, let along a history. He also concedes the essentially mystical nature of situationism with such a comment. Why is it that “those who have been involved in such an undertaking” have written nothing but incoherent, self-serving and self-indulgent clap-trap and have never off ered a reasoned response to those who have developed a critique of the Debordist theology’’

Let the dead bury the dead!

K. Eliot

Letter From Luther Blissett of 29/5/95 to Freedom

Your correspondent Michel Prigent implies in a letter published in Freedom that a Neoist Alliance activist recently wrote to you as Karen Eliot. This is not true, we have no idea who wrote the letter but it certainly wasn’t us. Prigent wrongly assumes that we are the only people who have criticisms to make of Debord and appears completely ignorant of Roberto Bui’s brilliant tract Guy The Bore which created a sensation in Italy a month or two ago. Not only is Prigent unfamiliar with the ideas and activities of those he pretends to criticise, he doesn’t understand either dialectics or satire as weapons of criticism. His assertions about Green & Brown Anarchist are even more idiotic than those Karl Popper makes about Hegel in The Open Society And Its Enemies. Utilising dialectics means looking at an issue from every angle, it is absurd to suggest that those who do so agree with the results they come up with during every stage of this process.

Likewise, Prigent warbles about the supersession of art without realising that by simply Hegelianising the critique of the institution of art made by Dada and Surrealism, Debord failed to move this debate forward. Debord was incapable of stepping outside the frame of reference provided by the institution of art, and instead theorised his way back to a one-sided understanding of the Hegel. It is perfectly clear from both The Philosophical Propaedeutic (The Science of the Concept, Third Section, The Pure Exhibition of Spirit theses 203 to 207) and the Philosophy Of Mind: Being Part Three of the Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences (Section Three &endash; Absolute Mind theses 553 to 571) that within the Hegelian system the supersession of art is in fact found in revealed religion.

Since among the more advanced sections of the ‘bourgeoisie,’ ‘art’ had by Debord’s day come to replace revealed religion, the Situationists were forced to skip this particular Hegelian inversion, and instead jump forward to philosophy which represents the highest achievement of ‘absolute mind’ in Hegel’s system. In line with the young Marx, Debord viewed the proletariat as the subject that would realise philosophy, The Situationist conception of the supersession of art is also filtered through the ideas of August von Cieszkowski, whose 1838 tome Prolegomena zur Historiosophie was dedicated to the notion that ‘the deed and social activity will now overcome (supersede) philosophy.’ It was this source that provided the Situationists with the material to complete their false ‘sublation,’ allowing them to arrive back at the final category of romantic art within the Hegelian system, that is to say poetry. It should go without saying that the Neoist Alliance has advanced way beyond banalities such as these.

In a series of idiotic moves similar to Prigent’s, various members of Green Anarchist decided that they wished to engage the Neoist Alliance in ‘debate’. Since it is clear from what GA have to say that they do not understand our position, it is hardly surprising that their ‘arguments’ quickly degenerated into a series of lies about us and our activists. In Green Anarchist 37 it was suggested that a member of the Neoist Alliance claimed in the Independent that Green Anarchist was still associated with Richard Hunt. It goes without saying that this was a complete fabrication, as was everything that followed in the same editorial. Neither the Neoist Alliance, nor any of its activists working in either an individual capacity or under the banner of the Neoist Alliance, have ever disputed that Green Anarchist has broken with Richard Hunt as an individual. Our problem with Green Anarchist is that they are still committed to Hunt’s ideas about the creation of small communities, ideas which necessarily entail a massive decrease in the size of the population. Green Anarchist do not explain how this reduction in the size of the population is to be brought about but we can be fairly certain that the process will not be pleasant for those who would die if GA made a serious attempt to realise this ‘dream’.

The lies being spread about the Neoist Alliance and its activists by the likes of Prigent and Green Anarchist are a clear case of scape-goating. Prigent asserts that we are ‘inhuman’, members of Green Anarchist claim the cities ‘are seized with a kind of madness’. In the eyes of Prigent and Green Anarchist our activists are ‘aliens’ and history teaches us that this type of name calling always proceeds attempts at genocide. Fortunately, it is highly unlikely that either Prigent or Green Anarchist will ever be in a position to set up death camps where they could rubber stamp death warrants.

Yours sincerely, Luther Blissett (in this instance aka Stewart Home).

Neoist Alliance

— namely two poxy novels and Mime cultural studies — and all this stuff will soon be available in bargain basements at knocked down prices, whereas Guy Debord’s book and film called The Society of the Spectacle might be of ure for a few more years!

The nothingness of K. Ehot and Co. is plain to rec They resemble a Swiss cheese’ Maybe if they drank a bit more, their dialectics might improve. Ooe poor guy they often quite and even publish has given up the fight Mr Jean Barrot did not have the courage to print his one-sided critique of so-called situationism in French, for he knew critical flak would have come his way. K Ebot makes out 1 am the defender of the “Holy Grail of spcctosituaUonism”. Far from iL I am and have been against certain aspects of the writings of Guy Debord and some of the positions of the Situations International, and this for quite a few years I am happy to say that I am not the only one As for the pseudo-concept invented by the little creep wbo uses the name Eliot, it means nothing, jus: as be means nothing.

Al leastNeil Buell admitted to his letter to Freedom (25^th Fdxiay 1995) in answer to one of my previous letters, that 1 was nght. I will be pleased to meet him when he comes to Undos and maybe we can collaborate on some project or another

As (or the crew called K. Ebot. they have lost all credibility. Thore who associate with them do so at their nsk and peril. Maybe the excellent writer wbo uses the tag K. Eliot ought to bang around more with journalists from The Independent as he has a lot in common with them. He showed us already what kind of material be is capable of.

The social revolution of which we speak has nothing to do with such practice and ‘theory’.

Michel Prigcnt

Dear Freedom.

Your reporting of the life and death of the situationisi Guy Debord, and the subsequent letter of my friend Michel Prigcnt explaining that Debord committed suicide because he was suffering from alcoholic polyneuritis, has provoked what I feel is a tasteless and ill-judged letter from ‘K. Ehof. apparently the pseudonym for the poseur Stewart Home.

The eminent social psychologists Serge Moscovici and William Done argue that “scorn of the masses is very widespread, whether it is expressed outright or mediated through the human sciences”, even though this traditional view is very one- sided because there is. they find, “in the association together of individuals a unique network having the power to stimulate and to overcome the inhibitions in their affective and intellectual qualities” (Consensus and Conflict, 1992) Debord’s book The Society of the Spectacle certainly echoed this “scorn of the masses” but. like Moscovici and Do ire. concluded that the apathy of mass society could be overcome by “the dealienaiing form of realised democracy. the Council “.

It is perhaps briefly amusing to speculate as to whether any of Home’s thought will be similarly reaffirmed 25 years on

Peter W ilkinson

Far Left: Richard Essex. 10/6/95 Left: Luther Blissett, 10/6/95

Above: Peter Wilkinson 10/6/95

In the last issue di Reaction we revealed that the initial programme of the Neoist Alliance was modelled on an 1FL text that allegedly exposed the modus operandi of those who opposed fascism. We went on to explain that spoofs of this type assisted us in smoking out humourless reactionaries who pose as radicals but are secretly sympathetic towards fascism, since only those who think like rightwing bigots would rail against the desire to ‘foster the cult of the ugly and whatever is debasing, decadent and degenerate in music, literature and the visual arts.’ As an example of liberal/leftist fascism we cited the ‘critique’ of this programme run by the Anarchist l-ancaster Bomber. The Bomber has responded to our ridicule with an article in their Spring issue in which they simply repeat at greater length charges made in their original ‘critique’, despite our explanation that the ‘programme’ of the Neoist Alliance was a joke! The Bomber is pan of the Green Anarchist Network and with regard to this, readers arc referred to the Neoist Alliance leaflet Green Anarchism Exposed!

Meanwhile. ex-Point Blank member Greg Dunnington issued a leaflet in San Francisco that attacks ‘our’ six point platform as being the programme of capitalism, thus proving himself to be as intransigent in his opposition to democracy as Arnold Leese and the Imperial Fascist League. In a text littered with spelling errors. Dunnington also criticises the Neoist Alliance for championing ‘authors whose writing is so fresh that they don’t know how to spell — and don’t need to know, because the software that came with their PCs included a dictionary’ and a thesaurus.’ (The quote is lilted from our Fatwa leaflet of 14/2/94). Dunninton’s attempt to make ‘an intervention’ at a Neoist Alliance lecture in SF resulted in this bozo and his chums being both physically and verbally humiliated. In the end. the pro-situ’s fled from the building. They did this, we should add. without making off with the cash box that contained the S5 admission fee each had stumped up.

London based pro-situ Michel Prigent recently attempted to denounce the Neoist Alliance in The Misery Of Football issued under the pseudonym F. A. Kicker. Like all good liberal humanists. Prigent considers our criticism of Salman Rushdie ‘inhuman.’ This hack whinges about the supersession of art but doesn’t know that it is replaced by revealed religion within the Hegelian system plagiarised by Debord. Likewise, it should go without saying that many Muslims view Rushdie as a traitor who deserted their ranks for those of the Oxbridge establishment. There are remarkable parallels between this case and that of William Joyce aka Lord HawHaw. While the Neoist Alliance does not wish to side with either ■fundamentalists’ or the English bourgeoisie over the Rushdie affair, we are at least capable of recognising that Islam was a progressive force in world affairs prior to the Reformation. In sharp contrast to this historically grounded dialectic. Prigent’s one-sided perspective produces mindless bigotry: he even berates an ‘American radical’ for preferring Coca-Cola to wine.

If pro-situs were not so readily satisfied with abstract substitutions for historical truth, they would pay closer attention to each expression, each idea, each definition made by the Neoist Alliance. Instead of taking everything for granted, through critical reflection they might begin to discover things for themselves. As it is. pro-situs falsely assume that everything has already been discovered by Debord, and that they can simply learn and apply these ‘Truths.’ Pro-situs know things praeter propter, and use them in the manner that others understand them or understand them approximately as others use them. As a result, they take their delusions for reality because like the most gullible among the Ancients, they believe Plato-cum-Debord’s parable of the cave/spectacle. Situationist ideology hinders real thought. Even today, when it is written as if it was a dead metaphysical language. Situ-speak is not properly philosophical because those using it have not read Kant, let alone Hobbes or Hume.

SPECIAL BRANCH, SEARCHLIGHT,
STEWART HOME

UNITED IN STRUGGLE

Lum November, Ilie deranged disinformer Stewart Home attacked Ihe ‘1(1 days’ anarchist festival as ‘The Bone Show’ in the pages of the Independent. Since when did radicals find an ear in the right wing press? The imbecile Home is al it again, attacking Green Anarchist by repeating slanders about green death camps and the green holocaust.

Home, the cretinous megalomaniac repeats smears he knows to be false in his own pamphlets ‘Reaction’ ‘Green & Brown Anarchist’ and the attack on Paul Rogers. They also appear in G-Spot magazine, the London Psycho- geographical Association, the letters page of Freedom, anywhere his asinine clique can get them printed, anywhere people arc gullible or politically naive enough to be taken in by the moronic monomaniac and his lies.

Where will Mr Ego go next? Wil! he go back to his puerile public school chums at the Indie and repeat them there? — Some ‘Radical ....

Curious isn’t it how the Blundering Babbler launches his anti-anarchist offensive from the pages of the Independent newspaper’ Thal same Independent describing Green Anarchist as a terrorist organization and warning of a secret stale crackdown on “eco-terrorisis” only weeks before a protracted scries of Special Branch raids on bookshops, printers, greens, animal liberationists, eco-actvists and even Greenpeace itself’ Such putrid prescience to be found in that newspaper....

Curious too that the Moronic Neoist also attacks Larry O’Hara, the anti fascist researcher as “Fai Boy O’Haw Haw ‘ tn almost exactly the same terms as that sewage outfall of secret slate disinformation. Seatihlisln. litis will boost Home’s radical cred... What a coincidence that the obtuse sociopath should write this in March, almost at the same rime as Seurehlisht is publishing O’Hara’s address, photograph and work-place details?

Why does Home, the obsessional fabricator of falsehood engage in his inept invective? Is it because the vacuous obscurantist has nothing more to say? “Two poxy novels and some cultural studies”? Is it because Home the otiose pseudo-theorist is intellectually bankrupt ? Or is it something more sinister?

Above: Anonymous leaflet (circulated Summer 1995)

Left: Extract form “The Fourfold Root of Insufficient Reason”, from Re:Action #2. (Summer Solstice 1995)

Open Letter to ^J Student Outlook

Box 15, 138 Kingsland High Street, London E8 2NS

Dear Mr Henshall,

Student Outlook #11 (Summer Term 1995) was marred by the singularly offensive article “Green anarchists fall out”. In this article David Black uses some of the classical tricks of media distortion. TV news became notorious for altering the sequence of events at the Battle of Orgreave by showing miners attacking the police before they themselves were attacked by the boys in blue, thereby reversing the order of real events. Black uses this technique by pretending that the Green Anarchist smear of Stewart Home as a Skrewdiver associate was a response to the spoof Green and Brown Anarchist leaflet To anyone who has read G&BA it is clear this is untrue. Aside from repeating Green Anarchist lies, he makes up his own. He suggests that the LPA is produced by Stewart Home. This is untrue, and Black has no excuse for making up such a story. He has been on our mailing list for sometime, and has received not only our material but also Re.Action, newsletter of the Neoist Alliance, with

which Home is involved. We collaborate in the Preliminary Committee for the Founding of a New Lettrist International. whilst maintaining our separate identities. Black made no effort to contact either group when preparing his article —■ so much for his idea of ‘open debate’.

Black refers to an “article Home wrote for the Independent (Organised Chaos, 25/10/94)*. He clearly hasn’t read it, as he simply repeats the nonsense in the GA editorial (#37). Home’s article concerned anarchism in general and referred to GA’s desire to distance themselves from their founder, Richard Hunt

However a closer look at Black’s article (reproduced below) makes us wonder whether Black is something more than a lazy journalist whose unprofessionalism has allowed himself to be duped by “GA’s fearsome intelligence department”. In and amongst the GA-inspired smear. Black asserts that “ex-fascists are now describing themselves as greens or third positionists” and suggests that Patrick Harrington is an “ex-nazi”. This is perhaps the most

disturbing lie.

Third Positionists are just as hard-core Nazis as when they were in the National Front In their fanzine Final Conflict these scum offer stickers saying “We’re not ■politically correct’ — we’re ‘fascist’”, along with all the usual Nazi crap. Of course most of the Nazis are continually trying to deny that they are Nazis, so that people will take them seriously. But usually they are too crippled by racist paranoia to succeed. They can only get anywhere when seemingly respectable people like Black vouch for them.

We call on Student Outlook to repudiate this highly offensive article and prevent David Black from using their pages to peddle apologetics for neo-nazi scum under the guise of shoddy journalism and green sectarianism.

Richard Essex, p&p London Psychogeographical Association * If those interested have problems locating this article, please send an SAE to BM Senior, London WC1N 3XX

Green anarchists fall out

GreeriAurcWsl. having unseated
Class Mass Britain’s most notori-
ous and seditious radical newspa-
per. is having a blaring row with
leyline-spoller and punk-novelist
Stewarl Home Ihe row pursued
with Ihe customary vigour (some
would say abuse) traditional to anar-
chism. centres on real isues. how-
ever How much difference is Ihere
between green anarchists hying to
go back to the earth and nan Lillie
Englanders seeking deportations ol

that Hunl. like many anarchists campaigned too hard against govern- mint and taxes and not enough against Ihe big corporations For the leii-teaningGA this was Ilie last straw

Hunl.an irascible campaigner Irom Ihe early CHO days in Ihe limes, formed his own AHernahva Green magazine, condemned the Tbalcher.le right but implicitly defended his policies as aimed al recruiting greens horn the lar right Al Ihe same lune many ex-lascisls ate

Home produced a spool bulletin called Green and Blown Anarchist ond wrote a piece in the Independent winch claimed that GA was no ddlerenl from Hunt’s new mag. Alternative Green But GA ■ which has headlineslikoBNP-SMYourseivesi — responded by reminding Home ol lus past association with nori rock band Skrewdriver the only fascists involved with Green Anarchist since

immigrants?

Home, a one lime situation’s! and eccentric strelchesllie minds of read ,,_s ol his London Psychogeographical Association is.c)newsleller.He believes the British empire was a masonic conspiracy. and that a nail recently died ol demiomc posession

Ilie row goes back Io a split three years ago when Ihe Green Anarchist Collective’s former founder and editor. Richard Hunl supported deportations olimmigranls.arguing that Ihe island was overpopulated Lell wingers were already worried

nowdescribing themselves asgreens or third positionists

When GA wrote to Plant News (see next article) calling for a boycott ol Hunt’s mag. Hunt blamed Hwl News demanding Hint they retract the allegations. Plant News, with its policy ol open tiebale, had previously published a letter horn Hurd posihonisl ami ex nan Patrick Harrington, but Hus cut no ice with beleaguered Hunt. Unfortunately lor Hunt Plane! News was suspended before his reply could bepubhshed. He condemned Ihem lor conspiring against him. calling them shits

the split leave been Intillralors (possibly horn MIS) uncovered by GAs fearsome intelligence department

An article In the latest issue of Republic wains of Home s uiicomradely. •intoxicating behaviour and in the latest development, we have received a leaflet purporting to be from syndicalists’ in support of Slewart I tome’s attack on GA accusing itol light wing anarchism It lias however no name or address on it and is widely assumed Io be Slewart’S tastes! fictional effort.

Green Anarchist: Box it. 111 Magdalen nd, Oxlord 0X4

Alternative Green 20 Upper barn. Cowley Centre. Oxford 0X4 3UX

London Psychogeographical Association LPA (ELS). Box 15. 138 Kingsland High SI. London ES 2N5

Planet News Update

Plinel Newt the campaigning ‘Green/Red’ paper ceased production last summer alter three-and-a- hall years, but it may be relaunched onthelnternel.WanetAfewstnedlo break out ol the low circulation ghetto of the alternative media by prinltng up Io 35.000 copies and distributing tree, paid lor by advertising and sub- scripbons. but not quite enough money was coming back in

The problem ol financing on Ine electronic highway would of course pose a whole new set cl challenges; but al least Ihere would not be the prinbngandcarriage charges to meet the Planet Hews collective are cur- । rently taking soundings on what Io do next Ideas and suggestions and oilers ol help are welcome Write to Planet News care cl Student Outlook. Send sue lor a copy ol the Iasi Issue ol Planet News and a discussion paper on the way ahead.

Article in Student Outlook and open letter circulated in August 1995

WELCOME TO THE INTERNECINE VORTEX SUCKERS!

NEOBORE

NEOIST CHRONOLOGY

February 1994 — Neoist Fatwah’ leaflet published celebrating the tinea: against Salman Rushdie, allocking the nuiiistream literary establishment and setting out the aims of the Ne«*« Alliance.

Stnmiter 1994 — l.ancaster Humber ankle analyses the Neoist Fatwall kaik-t

**October 1994 — ‘10 days Tliat Shook The World’ anarchist festival in 1 ‘“uhm ..leamrcd n. I.u. Bun. Include, mem pl lit levitate Rarlianicm Stewart I tome attacks tlx todays leslival in lite *Independent.***

Christmas 1994 — Re (•‘•t inm attack on GA and LB as anti Nernst Vtir (arbitrary invention) leaflet also repeals the Hum slanders, describing him as ‘GA’s ideological architect*.

Milt December 1994 Independent article attacks GA as ‘terrorists’.

New Year 1995 — Neuisl leaflets ‘No useless leaiancy’ and others attacking Ian Bone.

Februury/Mmcli 1995 LB issue 9 article replies to Kc:@ciioii.

Spring 1995 (February) GA 37 satirical editorial skits Slewart Home fin alleged links to neo-Nazi Ian Stewart Donaldson.

Early March Larry O’Hara’s photograph published tn Scartlilirht magazine.

Marclt/April Scries ol Hampshire Special Branch raids on GA and others.

Late March — Green ami Brown Anarchist leafier circulated repealing lire green death camp lie and attacking Larry O’Hara.

April 1995 — leaflet »Hacking Paul Rogets circulated.

Summer 1995 (May/June) LB issue 10 article an Neoists published in response io Ilie Paul Rogers defamation and Hum green death camp smears..

13(11 May, 27lh, 10^th June — Series of letters appear in Freedom lliis ■1,1.1. out I... di._llnl, ..Lun Marinelli but GA was drawn inn. this wlmn Michel I’ligcm .masked Horne lot producing Green and Drown Anarchist Hie Nernsts lespoudcd by describing GA as stupid and repealing tin- 11,„„ link ami smears about green death camps

June Similar attacks appear in G-Spot magazine, ‘How green was mv holocaust’ and in other places. ^{k J}

23^rd June — GA 38 published

Early July 1995 — LB i^suc 11. ‘Neoborc’ published.

A collection of items from the “Neobore” edition of Lancaster Bomber (July 1995). this also included a reprint of material already produced here (Pages 21, 26, 27, 28) as well as the next three pages.

What about Schiller’s ‘Letters ^~~N— >~~ on (lie Aesthetic education of Mankind” (6^th Letter) wlierc Ik claims philosophy is t\K antithesis of beauty

Comrade, May I draw your aitention to

ALL RIOTS REVERED

Hegel’s Philosophy of Mind, paragraph 554.7

THE NEOISTS HAVE SAID WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THEIR POSITION...

HOW CAN SOMETHING WHICH CONSTANTLY SHIFTS AND WITH NO FIXED POINTS BE SAID TO EVEN BE A ‘POSITION’ ?

Anti) .md JIIUg.HH, llK lllipiCSSIOII WC girl Hom (his is (hat ul lilt Spanish Inquisition, Gbc Hegelian Inquisition ??!?) Hying to root out ‘heresy’ with floating point orthodoxy “It is quite clear that Hegel says...” Now il is. now ii isn’t.

Who decides?

The Neosits say they are into ‘Schism and radical separation’ and then later lliey tell us ‘lite call to unity is essentially fascist.’ (ever ready with tlteir accusations of fascism)

Two months later they offer Green Anarchist a place in the anarchist movement. What arrogance ‘It <verbatim>IGA

</verbatim> only has to bleak with Hum’s ideas land slop selling his posters to become an integral part ot the anarchist movement.’

lite call io unity is essentially fascist

</verbatim> In offering GA a place in the anarchist movement The Ncoists make a call to unity.

Therefore the Ncoists are essentially fascist.

Now unity is fascist, three months later it isn’t. Who decides’ lite Neoisis may call this dialectic. We call il Bullshit....-.-

WELCOME TO THE INTERNECINE VORTEX SUCKERS!

We’ve been for, .

wave ol slandcis and bullshit emanating Hom lile Ncoist A liante and Stewarl Home II all stalled when we analyzed tire Neoisi Kuwait leallei m oui 6lh issue. Summer 1994. so we are reproducing dial article here We are also reprinting the other Neoisi articles from issue 6 and 1(1, We welcome your comments and criticism of them.

Tire Ncoist Alliance seems to centre around lire notorious poseí and disinformer. Stewart Home II has been suggested lire Neoisis are simply a vehicle to pronioie lire ego of Home — il remains lo be seen whether Urey have any identity apart from him Home himself is best known loi us btxik The Assault on Culture’ which is well regarded He has also produced pulp-splatter novels ‘Defiant Pose’ ‘Pure Mama and No I Uy recycling Richard Allen’s NEL classic Skinhead from the 19Ws Ihmre is also responsible for ihe An Strike Handbook and The Au Strike I .»per* advocating rampant plagiarism and the negation ol art

NEOiST DIALECTIC — THE LOGIC OF ILLUSION

We say dialectic is Ute pretence of technique, the imposition ol a paiicrn It resiricts the vision, and warps analysis The continuous unification ol opposites allows anything to be picked up and also dropped, combined, negated, recombined; arbitrarily at the whim ol whoever is using Ure dialectical method. As an idea, as a method, dialectic is played out Dialectic is so flexible- a “icchuiqiie” tlvi ir is capable ol acionmuxlatme OU) cluiigc, bril n is mil usclu! lui generating a me.mmglul prediction Dialectic is a form of Huge, a method of concc.dmcm Aie you real.) so incapable of making distinctions?

For example: The Ncoists use the Hegelian scriptures, even going to Ilie extreme of quoting chapter and verse to prove that ‘The supersession of art is found in revealed religion”. The ¡mended effect is to impress and intimidate, but it does neither. The same is true ol their mentioning the obscure Young Hegelian and Polish landowner, Cieszkowski. Such Hegelian fundamcmalistsl In 1995 how can anybody possibly believe in Hegel? Wow, I’m impressed. Chapter and verse loo! Are the Ncoists themselves a foim of revealed religion set to supercede an with strike’ Il so is there No Truth Hut I legs! and Stewart Home is His I’ropliet ..

I lie Neoisis then go on to undermine their leeble plan to impress us all when they dismiss the preceding quotations in their characterisueally dogmatic and arrogant way by saying “Needless to say, lire Ncotst A limits- has advanced way beyond such banalities as these .. Il so banal, why waste words on them?

Ill the same way. lire way of arrogance, the Neotsts say we do not understand their position. In saying this, they admit they have laded to communicate. Hut hang on a minute, is there anything there to be understood? How can something which constantly shifts and which lias no fixed points be said to even be “a position” ?

NEOBORE

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEOISM AND FASCISM

l ilt supposed ‘intellectuals’ (Haw Haw) the Ncoists bandy around accusations of fascism’ tar loo easily. The call to unity is essentially fascist” Their whole manner of conducting lliis dispute is altogether nut angry dogmatic and arrogant. We ask again, and nothing the Neosils have said, as far as we can tell, answers this basic question ‘How anarchist is u to warn to control finance, the media and the arts’?

HOW GREEN IS MY READERSHIP ?

THE BASIC LIES

ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN DEBATE

Compare lire Neoists unsubstantiated slanderous allegations ol lascisni

The Neoisfs basic lie againsl GA consists of font key points. Some or all

of these are repealed again and again, in the Independent, m Reaction GA wi’m lh^ and ‘•“is’lder for yourselves

Green & Brown Anarchm, *e anu-Pau Rogers leaflet. Freedom G-Spo. ¿^^ in debate. The Neoists claim ‘GA and Larry O’Hara

and Green Anarchism exposed. If 1 tell you a lie three limes, does this ^ ^J“ _as=a moial _{ualcgory Jllt}i as a result are prone to smearing make it ‘The Truth ? anyone who is critical of their brand of activism as having connections to either Nazis or the secret slate.’ The existence of tins magazine is in itscl! a

The four key points are: ..

The founder of GA, Richard Hunt is its ideological architect. Hunt has links with fascism, therefore GA is fascist.
GA aims to set up green death camps to reduce the worlds’ population by 75%.
Opposition to taxation is a mark of fascism. GA sells a poster ‘Tax is Theft’ (originally drawn by Richard Hunt) opposing tax, therefore GA is fascist. , .
The Searchlightism that some fascists are ‘green’ therefore all greens are fascist.

refutation of that siatenient. ,.,,...

When have we ever smeared anyone who disagreed with us like this Please name one example? This sounds more like a description ol Searchlight’s treatment of Larry O’Hara.

With success nrecn anarchists- But

. no road uuuoiny
ful campaigns on threaten

the movement is

cd by spb

NAZIS

THE NEOISTS HAVE SET UP

A STRAW MAN GA TO KNOCK DOWN

HOW GREEN WAS MY HOLOCAEJS

When extreme natig^ists wear battle fail ^■easytospo^ _I( h lie Who d never them the thl

Home pioduced . cilltll Green and t and «role a piece “ _tli|. which cbimerl drlleient liom Hum HiiGiive Gieen Bu headlines Ke OHP — responded by^,e’ his past associais baud Slrewdri.er 1.—1....I «.Illi Girt

I he Neoists statement is garbage. We arc quite happy (or people to discuss GA and offer criticism of what we s.iy In GA it even says ‘If you read an article you don’t like, think out why and semi in your response GA isn’t published on Planet Trotsky — anarchy is about thinking lor yourself.’ Again and again, the Neoists have set up a stiaw iii.ui GA lot them to knock down — The four points of their basic lie against us

We do not engage in Illis soil of falsification. Look back through rhe arguments and analysts in tins magazine. Il Iheie is anything there that is unreasonable, anything illogical 01 not drawn from the Neoists own leaflets, please write in and tell us. We want to know. The LB has tried to argue against what was actually said and not some self-generated parody

o! Nuhmh

Argue against GA or the l.B by all means • there is plenty ol controversial matcihil in there and we are more than happy to back up the things we say in any reasonable debate We would welcome this. But when it comes to lying about GA and repeating these bus again and again and again in dilTcrent place’., we draw I he line- _

THE FOUR POINTS REFUTED

To deal with these in turn.

(1) Richard Hunt was not die founder of GA. neither is he mil ideologic;! architect, as anyone who took the trouble to read ‘GA ns origins ami influences’ would have found out. Richard Hunt did not invent the Diggers the Luddites, William Morris. Kropotkin. Murray Bookchin. Schumacher. Marshall Sablins. Fredy Perlman; to name just a lew of mu influences...

People can change. Whatever Richard Hum is into now (including links with fascists) this does not prove that what he did before was iascist. At the time of The Natural Society’ (1976) and during Ins woik with GA dining the mid to late 1980’s Richard Hum was not a fascist. Ilie right wing change in his thought was die recon for him leaving GA

₍7, Guru AuauluM .Im — not aim to set up given de.nil camps In ore G \ 28 ciscussion ol population mid hold, we show there is enough land and food resources to go round, il shared out pioiNily

If opposition to taxation is a murk of fascism, does dial mean all the anarchists rioting in Trafalgar square anti poll tax riot were fascists Taxation is one way. (out of many odiers) we can attack the slate anil weaken it. To mu ck taxation is only a means, but not the end of anarchism which is to abolish government.
Some fascists me ‘green’ therefore all greens are fascist is a classic piece of state propaganda reverse logic currently being deployed aganiM the green movement It won’t wash. When used by the Neoists in ibis way il is indicative’of their inability to make distinctions “it people cam tell the difference between the left and die right, they might end up supporting Nazi ideals without even knowing what they are doing.” (How Green Was My Holocaust?) No thanks to Stewart Home’s sloppy blurring nt distinctions.

How Green Was My Holocaust?

How Green Is My Readership? This repeats the standard Home/Neoist lies against GA. Most astonishingly, the spool leaflet produced by the Neoists is then used retrospectively to ‘prove’ that GA = fascism.

HOME MANUFACTURING HIS OWN PROOF

How Green Is My Readership ? Astonishingly, the Neoist leaflet ‘Green and Brown Anarchist’ is then used retrospectively lo ‘prove’ that GA fascism. Home in his article (G-Spot magazine. Spring/Summer 1995. page 26) cites the obviously’ spoof leallcl as proof that green and fascist ideas arc indistinguishable. (Lie No 4 in Ihe box) Home claims that some people genuinely believed Green and Brown Anarchist was produced by ‘a secret cell of either Green Anarchist or Alternative Green’. Although this WAS obviously a prank, Home tell’ us, these gullible people were taken in by it. Such folks must be naive or politically ignorant, or more probably just a projection of Stwean Home’s wishful thinking.

THE LESSONS OF HISTORY

The Ncoist’s ‘Greer. Anarchism Exposed’ leaflet is trying to con us into treating fascism as an ideology which can be argued with. What futility Did Stauffcnherg argue with Hitler? — No. he tried to blow hint up with a bomb. Did the Italian Ramzans debate with Mussolini? No — they hung him up from a garage forecourt. Did the Red Army argue with fascism’’ No- they stormed Berlin, History shows that people who opposed fascism successfully did so from a position of superior force

In putting forwards their pro-Searchlight attack on GA, the Neosils falsely equate Searchlight with democracy and GA with fascism. They pose a false dilemma ‘forced to choose between Searchlight (democracy) and GA (fascism) anyone with their sanity leli intact would opt fot the former.’

This statement is a direct reversal of the truth. Of the Iwo it is GA that represents democracy. We have put quite a lot of effort into our decentralization and accountability, al no small risk to ourselves and our personal liberty as these police raids testify. ‘Britain’s most notorious and seditious radical newspaper.’ Reconcile die Ncoist’s statment with the ‘Planet Trotsky’ appeal for articles and letters published in every copy ol GA quoted above and ponder the fact that Searchlight docs not even lime a letters page, neither is there any course of redress against it for individuals

Green _ftomNazis

•haLone^^Z-—

GREEN ANARCHISM EXPOSED

The Neoists brand Larry O’Hara as ‘A Nazi without a swastika’ but offer no analysis whatsoever to back this up.

HOW GREEN IS MY READERSHIP ?

Home’s comments in the Independent were an Ignorant falsification and parody of what GA stands for and what we do. In the same place Home mostly savages Ian Bone for organizing the anarchist festival, one of the most positive things to happen on the anarchist scene for some time.

Prone to smearing anyone critical of our brand of activism’ -

When have we ever done this? This is a description of

Searchlight’s treatment of Larry O’Hara.

CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER

But then the case gets worse. I’he Neoists attack GA for spook-mania, and then they say we should ‘offer some solid evidence” about various individuals working with the secret state. Now with them making this demand ne are forced to a cmiclusiou Eithct the Neoists. who have liven attacking GA at least since last October are completely ignorant ol the contents of A Lie Too Far’ (AI.TF) anti ‘At War With The Truth’ (A WWTP) in which case they arc wholly uninformed about the thing they are .attacking; or they are following the Searchlight line of refusing to acknowledge the existence of these two booklets because they know the evidence in them is completely devastating. So which is it?

EITHER IGNORANT OF ALTF AND AWWTT AND I THEREFORE INCOMPETENT; or REFUSING TO I ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF THESE I UTTERLY DAMNING DOCUMENTS AND I THEREFORE ... ?

YOU DECIDE WHICH....

The poinUs^v^iav^r/rc<«!vpiiblislieiFsoii^videnc?H^^h!m'rc^S about Searchlight. The Neoists ignore this, or are ignorant of it. So it we arc to be charitable and assume ignorance and not malfeasance (lest you accuse us of spook-spotting); of what slams are the rest of ihcir remarks about us? If they arc so ignorant of us, how can they criticize us? The depth of their abusive propaganda is seen in the picture of the concentration camp nine captioned ‘Green Anarchist, the reality’ and vci Un ^voi>t> logn nujimincfiid. igmii.tiiLt ol ihv vciy group Ihvy ;ili;Kk in

:nu them from anything other on, it prevents ing genocidal other than its form. Green know what is therefore ng itself ns tl basis of inces with nti-urban ■‘f small

Neoist falsehood and abuse is crude to the point of absurdity but also in the cheapening of representations of the Holocaust, a complete insult to the memory of 6 million people murdered by the Nazi state...

The Sordid Truth About Stewart Home

Once again it’s time to reveal the latest trivial, retarded and remedial excretions of that brainwashed, narrow-minded and severely underdeveloped little man Stewart Home. This ego-maniac has been circulating yet more disinformation about both himself and the Green Action Network. This sick and pathetic creature recently distributed a sheet full of lies which was designed to make it look like GA was spreading smears about him. However, we know for a fact that Home has no connections with Special Branch or Searchlight and is actually the Grand Master of the Illuminati!

For the past ten years, starting with the story Anarchist published in the underground magazine Smile, Home has been claiming that libertarians are incapable of organising a piss-up in a brewery. This culminated in a vicious attack on anarchists in the liberal Independent newspaper last October, which carried the subtitle ‘the tabloids loathe them, but anarchists are too busy arguing with each other to riot.’ Home has persistently smeared anarchist and green groups by claiming that we are NOT involved in rioting or terrorist activities, thereby ruining our street credibility. Worse still, Home spreads lies about members of GA not having a sense of humour and being self-righteous. Some radical! He has also ridiculed the research of our fearsome intelligence department as paranoid fantasies designed to bolster our sense of self-importance. Even worse, Home failed to become upset or lose his sense of humour when Paul Rogers referred to him as Howard Clark in the pamphlet Green Anarchism: Its Origins and Influences. More sinister yet, Home has uncovered the true membership figures of GA and has destroyed the credibility of the organisation by revealing that there are only six of us.

We can now reveal that Home, whose mother is the Whore of Babylon, is an animal abuser of the worst type. He chains up his girlfriends, then makes them crawl around his feet like dogs. After shagging them, he throws them out of his country mansion and they are left with no choice but to walk the eight miles to the nearest bus stop. Home has regular sex sessions with his Pit Bull Terrier. He often visits the Scottish Highlands to abuse sheep, while one of his party tricks is cutting the heads off chickens and then shagging the decapitated birds in the neck. This sick little prat is fat, smells of mothballs and bathes in the blood of teenage virgins. He also eats babies.

Home attacks right-wing greens and anarchists under a bewildering variety of pen names. Hiding behind the pseudonym Murray Bookchin, Home wrote in his book Which Way For the Ecology Movement? (AK Press 1994): ‘biocentrism was extremely fashionable in the Third Reich among Heinrich Himmler’s crowd, which did not interfere with his operations as the administrator of death camps like Auschwitz... nature-mysticism permeated the thinking and avowals of the most murderous of the Nazi leaders... Biocentrism appears in several pages of Mein Kampf... That the young Wandervögel, members of a romantic “nature” youth movement early in this century that celebrated freedom from civilisation and closeness to the earth, drifted in large number into the Nazi movement, should warn us that reverence for Nature may often exclude respect for human beings.’

In a similar vein, Home criticises GA for opposing analytical thought. Obviously, our programme of technological regression would be pointless if individuals retained their capacity to think, and thus the ability to reinvent everything we oppose. Home might claim that a logical consequence of our anti-thought position is an incoherent and contradictory programme, but such criticisms make no sense to us. Likewise, we do not accept Home’s slander that what holds our ideology together is moralism, since he would inevitably win the argument if we allowed ourselves to be tricked into thinking about these issues. It should go without saying that one of the first forms of abstraction to be abolished under our rule will be the ability to count. It necessarily follows from this that we cannot accept the claim that the logical implication of putting our ideology into practice is a massive reduction in the size of the population. We refuse to think about these things because to do so is to fall into a trap set by City Dwellers whose souls have been corrupted by civilisation.

FORWARD TO A WORLD WITHOUT THOUGHT!
POL POT HAD THE RIGHT IDEA!

MATHEMATICS IS THE PLUTOCRACY’S TOOL FOR
PERPETRATING THE HOAX OF THE TWENTIETH-CENTURY!

Leaflet circulated August 1995, a response to the anonymous leaflet on page 37 (For reverse see overleaf).

HOME’S OFFENSIVE LETTER OF 14/6/95 WHICH FREEDOM WISELY DIDN’T PUBLISH

Dear Freedom

With regard to Peter Wilkinson’s letter (10^th June 1995), it seems this individual has an axe to grind because he quite erroneously suggests that I wrote the letter to you about Marinetti and Debord signed ‘K. Eliot’ (13 May 1995). I am sick of people attributing texts to me, some of which even conclude with my name, when it is quite obvious that I did not write them. If Peter Wilkinson and his ‘friend’ Michel Prigent were familiar enough with my views on art, the avant-garde and the Situationists to be able to criticise them, they would have known that I did not write the letter signed ‘K. Eliot.’ For example, ‘K. Eliot’ (‘a name that can be used by anybody’) suggested that the Situationist International is the last avant-garde, a view with which I strongly disagree. However, ‘K. Eliot’ is quite right to question Prigent’s allegation that Debord was suffering from alcoholic polyneuritis (11^th February 1995), since it does not explain why he committed suicide. Although this condition is painful, I have been assured by a nurse that it is easily cured by a series of vitamin injections. Likewise, Peter Wilkinson writing under the pen name Peter Freeman in the pamphlet Apathy & Its Cure, claimed that ‘to act effectively, one must understand the terrain in which one acts.’ It is a shame Wilkinson did not take his own advice seriously, since he clearly knows very little about me or my activities. In this ironic fashion, Wilkinson’s ‘thought’ has been reaffirmed fifteen years on, remembered solely due to the foolishness of its author rather than because there was any merit in what he had to say.

I was amused by the account Richard Essex gave of Prigent failing to realise that an article in Authority No. 2 was satirical (10^th June 1995), since it reminded me of Prigent’s furious response to a spoof manifesto put out by the Calderwood 15 replete with references to the ‘glistening commodity’ and jokes about Lenin not existing! My views on Debord are not dissimilar to those of Richard Essex, I take what is useful from his work while recognising the practical necessity of confronting Debord’s many failings. If such a stand appears harsh to liberal humanists, this is because they do not understand why it is tactically necessary. As the surrealist André Breton stated in his Conversations: ‘Historically, it was inevitable that we should oppose Symbolism, but the critics didn’t have to follow in our footsteps. It was their task to find the ‘driving belt’ linking the two movements and put it back in place.’

I enclose with this a copy of my article on anarchism from the Independent of 25/10/94 and the first two issues of the Neoist Alliance newsletter. If there is space, it would be useful if you reprinted the Independent article because a great deal of rubbish has been written about it, and it is clearly these smears, and not the article itself, to which Prigent is alluding (27^th May 1995). I think many anarchists who have not yet read this piece will be very pleasantly surprised by its contents. While I do not consider myself to be an anarchist, you can see from the Independent article that I know a lot more about the movement than most of those who have written on the subject in the daily press. Likewise, I included the addresses of organisations such as Class War, the Solidarity Federation, ACF and Green Anarchist in my piece, not something you’d normally expect to find in a national newspaper article about anarchism!

I would also like to make it clear that contrary to the lies being spread by various wannabe ‘investigative’ journalists and would-be ‘revolutionaries,’ I do NOT believe that green and animal rights activists are involved in ‘terrorist’ activity and I have no interest in so called ‘green guerrilla spotting.’ However, I do have a number of criticisms to make of the ideologies embraced by some green and animal rights activists, and am very pleased to note the firm line Aufheben take on this matter in issue 4 of their magazine. Aufheben state that: ‘If ‘over population’ by human beings is seen as the problem, the solution might be to call for the annihilation of 99.99% of the human race to return the other 0.01% to the state of nature, a rather problematic conclusion for someone who is supposed to be on the side of the human race against Leviathan: for, after all, who will decide who should make up the privileged 0.01%?’ Aufheben are dealing specifically with Fredy Perlman but their criticisms apply to a wider strand of primitivist ‘thought’ within the green and anarchist movements.

Finally, it will no doubt interest some of your readers to know that the Department of French Studies at Manchester University is organising a conference entitled The Hacienda Must Be Built: On The Legacy Of Situationist Revolt. I understand that the conference will take place at the Hacienda night club in Manchester on 27^th January. However, since this information is not contained on the leaflet I’ve received, I suggest anyone who is interested ought to contact the organisers Dr. Gavin Bowd and Andrew Hussey at Manchester University to confirm these details. The initial publicity also contains a ‘call for papers’ and I’m sure there are a number of Freedom subscribers with strong views on the subject who would like to contribute something.

Yours sincerely, Stewart Home

Unfortunately, Freedom were tricked into publishing offensive letters from the famous footballer Luther Blissett and Richard Essex of Unpopular Books in their issue of 10/6/95, after Neoist stooge Michel Prigent pretended to attack Home on the letters page of the previous issue. Clearly, Peter Wilkinson is also a Neoist asset and Aufheben are reds!

Leaflet circulated August 1995, a response to an anonymous and baseless leaflet insinuating Stewart Home was working for British intelligence.

ENCOUNTERS WITH THE insignificant Larry O’ Hara...

On how the ‘Apostle of Violence’ bottled it

On sunny day in late May. I was browsing in a Leftist bookshop when my attention was suddenly caught by a rather insistent but insignificant-looking individual. This person perched himself near to me and began shouting incoherently that I was a “shit, a fucking shit, a fucking shit”. Intrigued as to who the possessor of such a large vocabulary might be, I looked closely at this person and found out it was in fact the someanK-lndependenl columnist Stewart Home, author of novels extolling violence. The shop’s proprietors understandably didn’t want a heated discussion to ensue on their premises (it would have driven away the hordes of customers queuing outside) so I had barely time to establish that this Home creature apparently believes I am the editor of Green Anarchist, and is upset that his (presumably good friends) John Harlow (.Sunday Times) and David Rose (Observer) have been criticised by myself. It is always pleasing to see such defence of the oppressed and voiceless and I fully intended to inform Mr Home in detail of my full support for his brave stand.

This however is where matters got interesting. I waited outside the shop for a full twenty minutes and for some reason be didn’t seem to want io come out Indeed, he seemed to develop an urgent desire to see exactly what literature was contained in the shop’s basement, a desire that seemed to vanish a few seconds later, obviously totally unconnected with the fact that the basement doesn’t have an alternative exit Time marching on. as it does, I decided a conversation with this esteemed novelist would be facilitated if my waiting outside the shop wasn’t so obvious. So, I adjourned to a nearby pub doerway, and to my astonishment, when 1 turned around a few seconds later to review the situation, espied our esteemed novelist waddling like a demented duck on speed round the corner over a 100 yards away. Obviously being dextrous with wordplay is accompanied by being fleet of foot too. Strangely, our novelist hero seemed not to hear my entreaties to engage in earnest discussion with him, and when I look a short-cut to the local station he had disappeared from the face of the Earth: perhaps reading all those Rosicrucian manuscripts has done him some good after afl.

What is one to make of this brush with the brave? This is up lo you, dear readers, but 1 would merely say 1 find it ‘interesting’ that someone whose written work seems to consist of nothing more than the advocacy of violence should shrink so readily from any actual circumstance when it might hypothetically arise. Thus endeth the lesson. And unlike Home and his shadowy associates, 1 am not in the habit ci producing dummy documents or using false names, therefore I will sign my own.

SAD LIL’ STEWART

We’re glad lo report GA3Ts editorial so upset Stewart ‘Poland’ Home that he churned out not one but two black propaganda leaflets in reactionl Certainly goes to show he can’t take what he dishes out and such a fuss over acknowledgements from over a decade ago shows Home has much to hide — but you’ll hear more of atl that in future.

This cowardly creep hadn’t the guts to put his lies to our face but the witlessness and political illiteracy about GA and the far Right shown in his Green A Brown Anarchist show he’s not up to it. He pretends “GA .... intend to achieve a 95% reduction in the human population [by] Green Death Camps”, just a rehash of smears thrown at Earth First! and Greens in general by the State half a decade ago and now past their sell-by dale with all except Searchlight. When we discussed populaton in GA28, we argued current population levels aren’t a problem but if they were, women’s control over their own fertility would sort it — well eco-fascist, eh7

Home’s If Paul Rogers of Orford Green Anarchist (sic) has broken with Richard Hunt, why does he still use Hunt’s ideas? echoes Alternative Green’s egocentric whine — as if Hunt invented primitivism! — and laughably argues we’re fascists as GA sell an anti-tax poster done by Hunt at the height of the anti-Poll Tax wave, yean before we broke with Hunt when his ideas took a reactionary turn during the Gulf War. Following this ‘logic’, all syndicalists are fascists (as opposed lo anarchists, as Home stupidly believes) just because Mussolini used syndicalist ideas as a basis for fascisml

Through these anonymous leaflets, sad self-publicist Home has shown himself up to those he plays celeb — his circle of journos, publishers and fans — as cowardly, humourless, ill-informed, superficial and empty. The willingness of so many to lake our side (unsolicited!) has shown Home how hated he is outside that small circle — and how noone’s taking his shit no more, shit that leads nowhere. Thal won’t stop him shovelling more — but it might as well be straight down the pan now we all know what it smells like.

[Image: Editorial from Green Anarchist #38, Summer 1995]

[Image: Eccentric article by Larry O’Hara in the same issue]

[Image: Unpopular Books letter to Lancaster Bomber, July 1995]

[Image: Ode circulated August 1995]

Unpopular Books

Box 15,

136 Kingsland High Road, London E8 2NS England 27^th July 1995

Lancaster Bomber.

BCM 1715.

London WC1N 3XX

Dear United Ebola Weavers of Esoteria.

Thank you for sending me a copy of the latest issue of Lancaster Bombc (No.! 1). I feel compelled to write to you to correct an inaccuracy as regards remarks you made about my letter to Freedom (Kith June 1995). It was M. Prigent who suggested that Green and Brown Anarchist was a joke {Freedom 27^th may 1995). In my response to his letter. I referred to the leaflet as satire. Perhaps it would be helpful if 1 clarified what this term means.

Although satire has become identified with comedy from the days of Horace down to more recent Spitting Images, there is another fiercer aspect centred around militant irony. This is particularly true of the Celtic Bardic tradition. When asked what powers he wielded in battle, the poet Carpre replied “I will satirise them, so that through the spell of my art they will not resist warriors” (The Second Battle of Moytura). Satire was accorded the power to induce blisters on the cheek or even death — “Among primitive races powerful internal emotion affects the body in curious ways and in this traditional power of satire or “rime” we have probably an exaggerated reference to actual fact.” (The Religion of the Ancient Cells by J.A.MacCulloch. 1911). Satire is a long established weapon of psychic warfare.

I note that despite criticising the Neoist Alliance for personal attacks, you subject me to just such an attack in the self-same paragraph. You suggest some sort gematriacal link (anarchagram?) between my name and that of the odious Richard Hunt. (1 once had the misfortune to bump into this specimen as he stood outside Freedom Bookshop, handing out his race-hate leaflets.) Although the potency of your rhetorical technique is too weak to cause me any major psychic damage, I am still rather upset that you should mistreat me in this way. Whilst I can be charitable and assume ignorance and not malfeasance for your misrepresentation of my views expressed in Freedom’s letter page. I must admit I find this latter suggestion distinctly unpleasant.

yours sincerely

Richard Essex p & p Unpopular Books

Ode to Stewsy Babes

good evening artists I’m stewart home
i’m a skin
and I’m hard
(I Just wish some nice boy
would give me his bone)

I’ve written many a clever arty book
postmodern pastiches
why don’t you take a look
(but I’d swap my ben sherman
for a hard cock to suck)

i’m an avant- garde lovely underground star
so full of talent
i’ll go far
(I know I’m a closet
I pick up rent boys in my car)

i’ll give the art world such a clout
I’m a bad boy
I’ll tell you that for nowt
(but Just watch me turn into Julie burchill
oooh, did somebody shout ‘sell out?)

but you know you’ll never see me wear a hat
I’ve a shaven head
and I’m sooo proud of that
(oh no, at last, my secret’s out
all i am really Is a fat smug twat)

?
PCM POX 6423
LOWON
WC1N 3XX

AS THE THIN VENEER OF SANITY STARTS TO FADE

Larry O’Hara’s latest smears show he’s lost his grip on reality

I first met Larry O’Hara when he and John Murray of Open Eye manipulated a third party into arranging to meet me in a pub, and then turned up to ‘confront’ me about a satirical piece I’d written on conspiracy theorists in the first and only issue of Non Obedio. O’Hara attempted to play the ‘tough cop,’ Murray was more successful in fulfilling the role of the ‘soft cop.’ This incident left me with a rather low opinion of O’Hara, a self-styled spook buster and ‘independent anti-fascist investigator.’ Some months later, I ran into Brian Mosley of Phoenix Press who’d just published O’Hara’s book Turning Up The Heat. I told Brian Mosley the book was silly because O’Hara offered no proof that the journalists he implied were spooks, did in fact work for the security services. I mentioned that I knew Jon Harlow of the Sunday Times (who I was friendly with in the early eighties but who I’ve only seen once, and then by accident, in the past seven years), and that it was absurd to imply that the transport correspondent of a national newspaper was simultaneously working for Special Branch solely on the basis of one inconclusive article.

Sometime later, a highly distorted version of this conversation was run as part of the editorial to Green Anarchist 37, where it was reported as something I’d said to the independent newspaper. I have, in fact, only ever had one conversation with anyone at the Independent, when Helen Birch phoned me to commission a piece about anarchism after she’d obtained my number from a third party. I have never been inside the Independent offices and I don’t know anyone who is on their staff. Since Larry O’Hara was close to Green Anarchist and is published by Brian Mosley, I presumed he’d been the conduit for the tiny amount of genuine information used in a smear that implied I was simultaneously work ng for Special Branch and Searchlight, and had sado-masochistic sex with the Nazi bonehead Ian Stuart (who I am very glad I never had any contact with).* When I spoke to Brian Mosley about this, he offered to circulate a letter clarifying the fact that the conversation I was alleged to have had with the Independent was actually a highly distorted account of something I’d said to him. Although, as far as I am aware, he never actually did this. Brian Mosley later told me he’d spoken to O’Hara, who I was told was ‘only passing on information’ and was in no way responsible for the Green Anarchist smear.

It is strange indeed, then, that in Green Anarchist 38 under the headline Encounters With The Insignificant, there is an article by-lined to Larry O’Hara which talks about my ‘(presumably good friends) John Harlow (Sunday Times) and David Rose (Observer).’ I do not know David Rose and I have never had any contact with him. This is clearly a continuation of the smear run in the Green Anarchist editorial with which Mosley informed me O’Hara denied having anything to do (I was linked to both Rose and Harlow in this editorial). O’Hara also states in Green Anarchist 38 that my ‘written work seems to consist of nothing more than the advocacy of violence,’ another smear albeit one made with a qualification that would be unusual in the many unsigned pieces run by Green Anarchist.

I am known as a satirist and my fiction clearly uses humour to deconstruct various forms of discourse, including the very complex set of associations built up around the term violence. A theoretical precedent for this type of prose fiction can be found in Hegel’s Aesthetics. Likewise, most of my ‘non-fiction’ is also satirical or at least humorous. O’Hara is not noted for his sense of humour and I assume that it is his inability to understand that my writing is satirical that leads him to smear me by suggesting I advocate violence. My own

views on social transformation are not dissimilar to those of the Situationist Alexander Trocchi, who wrote in his manifesto Invisible Insurrection Of A Million Minds: ‘We are concerned not with the coup-d’état of Trotsky and Lenin, but with the coup-du-mond. a transition of necessity more complex, more diffuse than the other, and so more gradual, less spectacular.’

However, it is not O’Hara’s smears but the story that is constructed around them which indicate their author has lost touch with reality. I am supposed to have drawn my myself to the attention of O’Hara in a bookshop, and then run away from him; an unlikely scenario, since if I had done one of these things, I would not have done the other. O’Hara wants people to believe that he was not threatening me, but I was nevertheless scared out of my wits by him; another unlikely scenario since human beings are not subject to fright when they are not being threatened. 1 did accidentally meet O’Hara in a London bookshop in May, but quickly decided he wasn’t worth talking to, particularly as he was mumbling something incomprehensible about the secret state. The only threats he made were that he was going to write about me in a pamphlet and that he would see me in a police station.

The building where we accidentally met contains two separate bookshops, and I went down to the basement to talk to one of my former employers after O’Hara had been told to stop following me around the shop by a member of staff. O’Hara, I am told by the assistant working in the bookshop upstairs, spent some time standing outside the door, but he wasn’t there when I left the basement Writing in Green Anarchist, O’Hara claims to have been hiding in a pub doorway, and to have taken a short cut so that he could cut me off before I reached the nearby British Rail station. Since I wandered in the opposite direction, it is hardly surprising that in O’Hara’s words I had ‘disappeared from the face of the Earth.’ The assistant in the upstairs bookshop told me a few weeks later that O’Hara followed him into a local bar after he left work, all the while whispering in his ear that he had something important he wanted to tell him. Upon realising that the said shop assistant was being greeted by some of the more colourful ‘low-life’ characters who reside in the area, I am told O’Hara turned on his heels and fled.

O’Hara has been accused of being a spook, and while I do not think there is any truth in this accusation, I can see why his behaviour might lead some people to such a conclusion, despite the fact that there is clearly no evidence for it. After all, what is one to make of a grown man who writes accounts of concealing himself in pub doorways? To me, O’Hara appears to be acting out childish counter-espionage fantasies. There is a long tradition of accepting the simplest explanation for any given phenomena as being the true one, in O’Hara’s case, this must simply be that he is mad.

Stewart Home * Among other things, the Green Anarchist 37 editorial claimed my article Organised Chaos in the Independent of 25/10/94 insinuated that they were still associated with Richard Hunt, when I actually stressed the desire of the current membership to distance themselves from their founder and ideological architect. For more details about the Green Anarchist smear see the letters from Richard Essex and Luther Blissett in Freedom of 10/6/95 and the undated Open Letter To Student Outlook issued as a leaflet by the London Psychogeographical Association. Anyone who has trouble obtaining copies of these, or any of the other texts associated with this smear, can send me six 1^st class stamps and I will send them a selection of related material.

Neoist Alliance, BM Senior, London WC1N 3XX

Neoist Alliance response to “Encounters with the Insignificant”, August 1995

THE GREAT GREEN HOAX

Eß’BACK

send feedback to GSpot, 25D Copperfield St, London SEI OEN fax to 0171 928 0033

e-mail gspot@hardnet.co.uk

In User-Friendly Nazis last issue. Stewart Home told how fascists ‘trick ordinary people’. He didn’t tell how his article was a hoax at the expense of Green Anarchist. Home makes great play of Green and Brown Anarchist, a leaflet calling for a 95% reduction in global population, but didn’t admit he is the author. No, he attributes it to GA’ — an act of black propaganda. Like New Internotional-ist, Green Anarchist argues the world is not overpopulated and if it was. women exercising control over their fertility would put it right. Home is so ignorant of fascism he doesn’t know the Nazi’s patriarchal kinde kuche kirche doctrine was about promoting population growth’.

Home misrepresents our position to pass it off as Alternative Green’s. Its editor, Richard Hunt, was ousted from Green Anarchist in the wake of the Gulf War after he contradicted his original anti-state, pro Third World justice ideas by publishing a pro-nationalist, pro-patriarchal article. Immediately after Hunt left, we wrote ‘GA is now free to adopt a more pro-situ, primitivist position” and “distanc(edl ourselves in advance from a new zine he had planned ‘pushing nationalism and kinship loyalty”. When Alternative Green arrived a year later, we called a boycott which Hunt conceded had ‘done me great damage’. Patrick Harrington’s letter in Arorcny. quoted by Home, was a response to a letter we d written in warning its readers off neo-nationaltst publications like Alternative Green, Perspectives and Harrington’s own Third Way.

In a feeble attempt at guilt by association*. Home argues because we call for a decentralised

society of small communities as Hunt docs, we’re fascists’ In the Neoist Alliance’s Green Anarchism Exposed!, Home’s chums argue calling for small communities is fascism, laughably citing an obscure “pre-war fascist organisation in Belgium” as an example of fascists calling for small communities. Next door at this time, Nazi Germany was building the autobahns, remilitarising and generally glorifying the mass organisation of society — but they weren’t fascists by the Neoist’s absurd definition! The far Right will use any ploy to advance its authoritarian agenda — we argue only small societies can be free of authority. We are no more fascist than seminal Green thinker and Bhuddist E F Schumacher when he argued “small is beautiful’!

The reductio ad obsurdum of Home’s guilt-by-association smears is that “Green Anarchist still sells many of the posters Richard Hunt created ... including one carrying the slogan Tax Is Theft”. The poster was produced al the height of the poll tax rebellion, well before Hunt’s drift to the Right. Dots Home seriously suggest the Trafalgar Square poll tax rioters were “Ku Klux Klan supporters .. tricking people into accepting fascist Vdeas”? Hiller was a national socialist -should we ditch socialism because of his political perversion? Why. then, should GA ditch non and even implicitly anti-fascist statements Hunt once made?

Why all the lies? Home is a sad. vindictive little man who hadn’t the bottle to argue straight with us when we participated in Anarchy In the UK last year. Home opposed the festival because ex-Clas$ War luminary Ian Bone organised it. Conflict between attending anarchists and police was a trial of strength just as the Criminal Justice Act was becoming law. Why. then, did Home’s Independent article on the festival attack the anarchists?

When Green Anarchist exposed Jason Bennetto of the Independent and John Harlow of the Sunday Times as mouthpieces for Special Branch smearing anti-motorway activists as “green terrorists”, Home defended the journos.

denying their links to Britain’s political police. He unleashed his torrent of anonymous fabrications exactly at the time we faced a series of Special Branch raids for speaking up for imprisoned AU press officer Robin Webb. Home’s eco-fascist smears fit hand in glove with Searchlight’s and those John Harlow planned to print in the Sunday Times following up his infamous Green Guerrilla Boobytrap Sites.

Searchlight’s role as an MI5 front was exposed in 1993 when Larry O’Hara investigated their mole Tim Hepplc, and then published his handwritten admissions in A Lie Too For and At War With the Truth. They retaliated by smearing us and O’Hara as “Nazi counter-intelligence’. So why did we — as well as Open Eye and Richard Black, also under attack from Home — expose David Icke’s anti-semitism a year before Searchlight? Home’s smears will undoubtedly reinforce Searchlights lie that all the above are fascists infiltrating the Green movement”.

Is it coincidence Home and Searchlight throw the same smears — or is it the same secret state operative supply ng them both? With Soviets. Irish and trade unions out of the running, the secret state need to hype up the militant Green ‘threat’ to keep in work. Green Anarchism Exposed! ends by saying, “O’Hara and Green Anarchist have made a lot of allegations about various individuals working with the secret state, it’s about time they offered solid evidence”. What with O’Hara’s pamphlets and his expose of Searchlights agent provocateur in Leeds, Tony White in the latest issue of Green Anarchist. Home s chums may be more concerned about too much solid evidence. Another Searchlight asset in Leeds. Paul Bowman, accused O’Hara of “wild conspiracy theory” in a Class War internal bulletin as he knew O’Hara would expose him. When Neoists argue you’re “forced to choose between Searchlignt (democracy) arid Grern Anarchist (fascism), anyone with their sanity intact would opt for the former”, it’s hard not to appreciate where Stewart Home is really coming from. Green Anarchist

G-Spot #17. Summer 1995. An example of the Green Anarchist lie machine in operation. Compare this with the article to which it is the response (Page 35) and savour the absurdity.

87 KlrksUII Road, London SW2 4HE tel 0181 671 7920

Outlook, Student Outlook, Planet News

the OUTLOOK group

Stuart Home,

BM Senior.

London WC 1N3XX

8 8.95

without prejudice

Dear Stuart Home.

Thank you for your loner and reminder.

This is to confinn that 1 intend to run the retraction you specify’ in the next issue of Student Outlook, which ispuiblished at the end of September

1 apologise for the delay in replying

Yours Sincerely,

Ian Henshall

REMEMBER JACQUES DE MOLAY ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE SUPPRESSION OF THE TEMPLARS

FRIDAY 13 OCTOBER

PSYCHIC RALLY: SUMMERLAND

To the heirs of Philip IV of France, rhe Knights of St. John, the Worshipful Company of Drapers anil all those » ho hose benefited from the suppression of the Knights Templar since 1)07.

We call ourselves Knights of the Grail, our pens are our swords, and we live in the land of the Bohemians. Always you w ill be loathsome and repugnant and hateful to us. for you have plundered the twelfth letter of our alphabet with terrible hand, the essence of our joys; you have pitilessly plucked the sweet summer flower of our delight from our heart s garden; with evil cunning you have stolen our fortune’s slay from us. our chosen dove’ You have worked irretrievable loss upon us. Consider for yourselves whether we arc not right to remonstrate, to rave, to accuse: through you we are robbed of joy-bringing life, cheated of our happy days and despoiled of all gladsome possessions. Cheerful and contented we were at all times before this, short and joyous was each hour of day and night, both in like measure rich in jovs and delights, every year was a year of grace. Now they call out to us: Be off! Over the turbid potion, on the dry branch, embittered, benighted, withered, we live and weep without cease. The wind drives us along, we swim through the flood of the wild sea. the waves overpower us and our anchor finds no hold. Therefore we will cry without cease: by Death be you accursed!

We DEMAND that all land and other properly held hy the Knights Templar in 1307 is restored to the Neoist Alliance. To arrange the transfer of the deeds to their rightful owners, please contact the Neoist Alliance. BM Senior, London WC1N 3XX. UK If nil address).

BAPHOMET RISING

Left: Letter from Ian Henshall publisher of Student Outlook promising to run a retraction of the false allegations contained in the David Black article Green Anarchists Fall Out. The Autumn Term 1995 issue of Student Outlook had not been published at the time of this pamphlet going to press, the retraction Mr. Henshall is agreeing to run in it reads as follows:

•STEWART HOME: AN APOLOGY. In the last issue of Student Outlook we ran an article entitled Green Anarchists Fail Out by David Black which contained a number of inaccurate and misleading statements about the novelist Stewart Home. We would like to take this opportunity to apologise to Mr. Home and clarify various matters. We wish to make it clear that Mr. Home has no past or present associations with the rock group Skrewdriver and that his life-long commitment to multi-cultural ism results in him viewing Skrewdriver’s racism with complete abhorrence. We would also like to make it clear that rather than stating that there was no difference between Richard Hunt’s current magazine Alternative Green and Green Anarchist as David Black suggested, Mr. Home’s article Organised Chaos in the Independent of 25/10/94 stressed that the current membership of Green Anarchist wished to distance themselves from their founder Richard Hunt. Likewise, we accept that Mr. Home does not write the London Psychogeographical Association Newsletter, nor does he run this group, nor does he hold any of the beliefs David Black attributed to him.’

Below: Apology that actually appeared in Student Outlook #\2. (Autunn Term, 1995).

Stewart Hnmp- An annlnnv “*“^“ ■“ults In his viewing Screamer’s OLCWdll nuilie. Mil apology „ism with complete abhorrence .We would also In the last Issue ot Student Outlook we ran an article like to make it clear that Mr Home’s article Or-entitled Green Anarchists Fall Out which contained innac- gamsad Chaos In the Independent ot 25/1 CM curate and misleading statements about the novelist Slew- stated that the current membership of Green art Home. We would like to take this opportunity to clarity Anarchist wished to distance themselves from various matters. We wish to make it clear that Mr Home their founder Richard Hunt. We also accept that has no past or present associations with the rock group Mr Home has no association with the London Screwdriver and that his lifelong commitment to multi- Psychogeographlcal Association.

[Image: Neoist leaflet demanding restoration of all land and property held by the Knights Templar in 1307. As every school child knows, the Knights of St. John were the main beneficiaries of the supression of this rival order. Given the number of Knights of St. John involved in the secret state here and abroad such a demand is hardly likely from some so-called security service assets.]

Guy Debord is Really Dead

the major failures of the Situationist International considered in their historical, cultural, psychological, sexual and especially political aspects, appended with the modest proposal that we cease allowing the traditions of the dead generations to dominate the lives of the living.

The Old Idealist …

“Debord and Sanguinetti conclude thesis 22 of Theses sur TInternationale Situationniste et son temps with the extraordinary claim that situationist theory — i.e. the theory of the proletariat, as stated in thesis 3 of the same text — even if it is often misunderstood and deformed, ‘will know how to return in all its authenticity each time historically that its hour is come, beginning with today even. We have left behind the epoch where we could be falsified or effaced without appeal, because from now on our theory benefits, for better and for worse, from the collaboration of the masses.’ According to Sanguinetti and Debord, the Si’s ‘historical success’ lies in persuading the masses to ‘collaborate’ in the elucidation of proletarian theory, i.e. in persuading the proletariat to collaborate with itself! Examining the text more closely, it becomes apparent that the ‘theory of the proletariat’ was not formulated by the class itself, but, in the end, the class was allowed to co-elaborate this theory. ‘Co’ means ‘together with’... With whom? Who was co-starring in this articulation of class theory if not the SI?

“In short, this is the old idealist fallacy of Holy Spirit descending into unconscious matter, of ‘consciousness being brought in from outside’. There, standing against the light, is the decrepit figure of the ‘separate intellectual’ who ‘goes towards the people.’ Drawing on the legacy of Russian populism, Bakunin and Lenin had previously made an identical error; history repeats itself, the first time as farce, the second as tragedy and finally, as the Situationist International. And despite the bald references to ‘historical struggles’, this theory turns out to be meta-historical, ready to reveal itself whenever the time is right.”

Sabotage Editions
BM Senior
London WC1N3XX, UK

Horror Vacui

Super8 film shot by Luther Blissett in 1975. A dizzy, bitter and schizoid reflection on the saturation of contemporary mediated language, with a violent evacuation and dense agglomeration in the Brakhage style of single images captured from television. In a bizarre and enigmatic finale, the face of Guy Debord and that of the director are substituted in the “detournment” of a musical from 1932, which itself concludes with the subtitles: “il mezzo e il mixaggio”.

Two Million Mummified Ibises (1970)

Shot on Standards film, this was to launch the career of the funnyman, Griff Rhys-Jones. A central peice is the animation of the Avebury stone circle in an inspired example of neo-celtic avant-bardism. Features some of the individuals who were to later set up Outer Spaceways Incorporated, that well known Essex psycho-geographical outfit which flourished in the mid-seventies.

“Forget about necrotising fascitis, the flesh eater, Ebola is the biggy — a virus as contagious as flu with a 90% mortality ratQ and no cure, no treatment. We don’t really have a datum to compare it with but the Black Death wiped out a third of Europe, 1346–9. If Ebola gets out into a major conurbation and is spread around the world through airliners, all our over population problems will be over.”

Green Anarchist 38 (Summer 95, p. 17)

“When we discussed population in GA 28, we argued current population levels aren’t a problem but if they were, women’s control over their own fertility would sort it — well eco-fascist, eh?”

Green Anarchist 38 (Summer 95, p. 21)

A lot of people have been puzzled by Green Anarchist’s schizophrenic pronouncements on the ‘population question’ and other issues. This publication strips away the tissue of lies and exposes the cancer of Malthusianism underneath. Revealed for the first time, how Green Anarchist has united a disguised form of far-Right primitivism with the organisational techniques of the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin. This is far more than simply an exposé of Green Anarchism, it is also a timely critique of the Bakuninist programme of ‘invisible dictatorship’ and the ways in which its adherents use secret societies to derail revolutionary movements.

Blunt, shocking and uncomfortable, this publication is essential reading for anyone concerned about the fate of the earth and the ways in which this is inextricably linked to the urgent task of social transformation. The main text is supplement by an exposure of how Green Anarchist sets about smearing anyone who dares to criticise its reactionary politics.

The set of documents detailing one vendetta Green Anarchist attempted to pursue are not simply highly revealing, they are also often hilariously funny — as one lie is exposed, GA simply substitutes another equally unbelievable calumny. Here at last, and in his own words, are the secrets of how Larry O’Hara, Green Anarchist’s ‘security advisor’, conceals himself in pub doorways to spy on those who refuse to take him seriously!

The emblem on the front cover shows the figure of a worker who here functions as a representation of the proletariat in its entirety, about to smash alpha enclosed by omega (the beginning and the end), a symbol of the apocalyptic faith in one of its secular forms, whose adherents posit the final resolution of a ‘struggle between good and evil’ in the immanent future.

UNPOPULAR BOOKS
Box 15, 138 Kingsland High Street
London E8 2NS

ISBN 1 871593 66 6
£3.50

<www.files.libcom.org/files/GreenApocalypse-small.pdf>

This pamphlet was the product of the Neoist Alliance, an iconoclastic group associated with post/pro-situationist gadfly Stewart Home. The Neoists were an amalgam of aesthetic vangardism and ultra-leftish swagger. The Green Anarchists on the other hand are influenced by a mix of eco-anarchism and U.S. anti-authoritarian and European ultra-left politics. Their feud has generated an abundant, confusing and rather fetid midden of materials. Only the most persevering investigator could decipher this mess; most people quite understandably won’t bother.

Unpopular Books