Anarcho-fascism

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Anarcho-fascism is a political philosophy which believes that an anarchic society, in the absence of publicly recognized government or enforced political authority, can and should be brought about through a harsh authoritarian state. It is believed that since the people cannot be trusted to come to this freedom on their own, it must be imposed on them by the state. They support a situation of complete social, political and economic equality between all citizens, presided over by a rich ruling class. Anarcho-Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy, yet are against any type of such organization on the grounds that it is undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful.

Bouncywikilogo7
For those without comedic tastes, the self-proclaimed experts at Wikipedia think they have an article about Anarcho-fascism.


edit Origins

Around the end of June 2004, Wikipedia gave birth to what some claim is a purportedly illustrous hybrid philosophy, although this chronology is disputed by certain parties. With its policy of NPOV having been, observers argue, twisted into shreds by hordes of what the same observers describe as right-wing apologists in order to justify anarcho-capitalism, many believe that plenty of room was made through their heroic ground-breaking efforts to bring about this new (and yet very old, even ancient) political philosophy!

Anarcho-fascism is arguably the newest, very arguably the most scientific, and less arguably least hygenic form of anarchism. Indeed, many experts in the field, according to specious reports, have gone so far as to label it "Anarchism 2.0". Anarcho-fascists hold their position to have removed all the pesky parts of old anarchism, in the sense that it can mean whatever an individual or group wants it to mean at any given moment to justify their claims, so long as those claims are identical to those of anarcho-fascists.

It shares similarities with anarcho-stalinism, libertarian-totalitarianism and anarcho-feudalism, in synthesizing conflicting interests, much like Anthony Giddens's The Fifty-Seventh Way. Anarcho-fascism was pontificated amongst working men, intellectuals and the mentally ill at the Four and Three-Quarters International at Lichtenstein in 1906.

Not to be mistaken for national-anarchism, which claims to be the same thing as it, anarcho-fascism perhaps claims as many as millions of adherents worldwide (through a series of allegedly uneasy relationships). Many believe that some critics allege that anarcho-fascists do not exist outside the internet, but reasonably clear evidence (on the internet) of the existence of anarchists and fascists throughout the world proves them wrong.

edit Arguments for and against anarcho-fascism

Other critics may have alleged that anarcho-fascism is not a genuine form of anarchism. Anarcho-fascists reply that this might be seen as a "no true scotsman" fallacy and defend anarcho-fascism along the following lines:

  1. Many believe that there is no documented proof that anarcho-fascists do not exist. In fact, there is arguably no proof that they are not currently one of the largest factions of anarchists in existence. Therefore, it has been suggested, that any claims that anarcho-fascists are a "minority" within anarchism are without merit.
  2. It has been suggested that it is clear that there is nothing contradictory about anarcho-fascism, anarchism is (according to the one dictionary anarcho-fascists perhaps use in every single case to support our claims and reject all others) nothing more than rejection of the state. But clearly it is very likely possible for individuals to voluntarily follow a something along the lines single authoritative leader. And since anarcho-fascists, according to some of their detractors and proponents, define the state as an involuntary relation not involving anarcho-fascism, it may follow that one can be a fascist and an anti-statist as well!
  3. Legend has it that anarcho-fascism predates all other forms of anarchism. Arguably, anarcho-fascists did not call themselves anarchists or fascists at the time, but they were arguably adherents of the same philosophy, thus anarcho-fascist claims to the title anarchist are actually arguably more legitimate than those of libertarian socialists, and arguably of about the same legitimacy as their brothers the anarcho-capitalists. These precursors to anarcho-fascism can be found in what are described as the pages on fascism and anarchism.
  4. It is widely believe that anarchism is used by some people to mean a great many contradictory things like: terrorism, chaos, a society based on voluntary relationships, green cheese, and corporate capitalism. Therefore, it would appear that anarchism can easily be compatible with fascism as well.

edit History of anarcho-fascism

Given that they reject the state, many believe that anarcho-fascism is a form of anarchism. Anarcho-fascists regard absolute liberty as the primary political value, and as such each citizen should sacrifice theirs to the supreme leader and be absorbed into the state machinery. Many believe that anarcho-fascists repudiate all forms of state control — including involuntary taxation, coercive regulation, unjust war, and impolite monopolies on the use of defensive force — as violations of the essential individual rights of the supreme leader. However, anarcho-fascists pride themselves on working to benefit the state (which does not exist) as a whole. Anarcho-fascism has existed in name for nearly two days, but many believe that in its current form it can be said to have existed for thousands of years. Many believe that all or a few anarcho-fascists draw some degree of inspiration from individualist and communist anarchists, though they disagree in a few minor places. Many believe that anarcho-fascists consider anarcho-capitalists to be their closest cousins, although few if any anarcho-fascists have allied with anarcho-capitalists over the years (these alliances, many believe, often take the form of being mentioned on chat-room discussions, much like the alliances between individualist anarchists and anarcho-capitalists in the form of printed articles a hundred years before anarcho-capitalism existed). Some anarcho-capitalists disagree that many believe that this relationship is close.

Many believe that anarcho-fascists draw much inspiration from individuals such as Kevehs, Rothbard, Mussolini, Tucker, Baruch Spinoza, Emma Goldman, and Glen Matlock. Many believe that their philosophy is a blend of capitalism, authoritatianism, and phrenology. For the past 300 years certain anarcho-fascists argued that many believe that the phlogiston found inside the monad particles of Proudhon's decaying corpse prove that anarchism means only "without state". A non-negligible number of anarcho-fascists believe that Ayn Rand was their most prominent intellectual predecessor, and many believe that any claims to the contrary are based on the ignorance of individuals too steeped in trivial matters like etymology, history, philosophy and fact to see the essence behind her words. Many believe that these views are controversial to other anarchists.

edit Philosophical roots

Most anarcho-fascists locate themselves within the arguably non-existent tradition of capitalist anarchism. Like the capitalist anarchists, they reject what they and most normal people describe as The State™ and endorse a society based entirely on free association, though it has been suggested they disagree with capitalists on exactly what is entailed by free association. Certain anarcho-fascists have at times "also" been influenced by individualist critiques of the state and their arguments for the right to ignore and/or withdraw from it (as, for example, in Lysander Spooner's No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority, which was sometimes referred to in blogs that "also" referred to anarcho-fascism a couple pages down). Anarcho-fascists also follow in the capitalist condemnation of, in some senses, all forms of collectivist coercion, though it has again been suggested that they disagree in some places on what constitutes collective coercion. Anarcho-fascists, for example, are thought to not believe that the private dictates of their supreme leader qualify as a form of collective coercion, in the sense that it is left to each individual to decide of their own free will whether or not to follow the supreme leader.

Proponents argue that individuals who do not follow the dictates of the supreme leader will not be harmed in any way, though they may be ejected from the private property of the leader, and the exit for that property just so happens to rest atop the sheer face of what studies indicate may be a 200 foot cliff, so it is theoretically not impossible that individuals who do not voluntarily follow the leader will die. However, nearly any collective form of responsibility is shunned by anarcho-fascists and anarcho-capitalists alike, so many would dispute that it is not the leader's fault that the only handy exit is a very high cliff and the guards, in this view, decided to throw the dissident off of said cliff without the knowledge of the leader. Personal responsibility is considered to be of utmost importance to the typical anarcho-fascist.

The relationship between anarcho-fascist and anarcho-capitalist economic and other views is often said to be somewhat more complex. However, there is, many are absolutely certain, no real difference, as mostly they are just using somewhat different terms to mean somewhat the same things. In a fact that many consider fortunate, since most of the intellectual predecessors to anarcho-fascism are long since primarily dead, they are seen as being in no position to deny our interpretation of their statements. This may be true even when our interpretation flatly contradicts common interpretations of their statements on the subject.

In any case, both anarcho-fascists and capitalist anarchists are often assumed to agree with the principle that in a free society, everyone should be regarded as free to organize themselves into any voluntary economic order that they wish (i.e., in any way that respects particular conceptions of property rights) — whether in capitalist firms, certain forms of slave plantation, independent family-run businesses, or, in some sense, in mutualist co-operatives. Anarcho-fascists merely defend fascism (in the voluntary sense of the word) as a largely legitimate choice among these forms of organization, and argue the science of phrenology can be construed to demonstrate that it is the choice which is the most efficient for a prosperous and vital community — but one which they should not and, in their conception, will not impose on others by force; the exit to the leader's property is always, de facto, a viable alternative.

edit Anarcho-fascist critique of other anarchist factions

Anarcho-fascism has a long tradition, between 2 days and over 9000 years, though many anarcho-fascists are believed to have been too afraid to admit their arguable existence until recently. Many would argue that within this tradition falls af's common critique of the "state-like" qualities of anarcho-socialists, or left-anarchists. They claim that any decision reached by a collective is coercive, depending on what the definition of the word "is" is. Reports indicate that anarcho-socialists often respond that this isn't a valid representation of what is seen as their philosophy. Anarcho-fascists then insist that their close cousins the individualists never advocated violence in order to end the exploitation of rent, wage, and usury. Critics generally respond, "Are you believed to be on crack? Have you even read a single passage from a single book by a single anarchist in your conception of your entire life?" Anarcho-fascists often note that the books written by anarcho-communists are widely suspected of misrepresenting the true essence of anarchism, and thus pretty much fall into the same fact/science/history/philosophy/linguistic trap above.

edit Links

Personal tools
projects