The “Alternative Right"

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby kool maudit » Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:47 am

This "alt-right" thing, or rather a loose cloud of related voices surrounding that core, is approaching the status of counterculture.

This is because the power-structure is ostensibly sympathetic to left rhetoric while remaining steadfast in its pursuit of a neoliberal-plus-identity-politics system.

(I would think that this would be enormously frustrating for committed progressives.)

Consider three rooms or locations that represent different parts of the current power structure: A boardroom at Apple, the world's largest company; an editorial meeting at the New York Times; and the corridors of the UN Secretariat in Manhattan.

In each of these locations, and I know these people to a degree, even very obstreporous remarks from a left perspective will generally be indulged if not actually followed. Reparations in the US? "I certainly understand the need for some sort of blah blah". Environmental sanctions against key trading nations? "Well we certainly do need to address blah blah...".

While these programmes may not be pursued (hint: they won't be), they sit within a rhetorically familiar framework. These people talked like this at school. The motivations are regarded warmly.

Rightist rhetoric, however, is entirely inadmissable in such environments. It goes against everything. It is pitied and feared all at once. It is something monstrous.

There is a power in this. History is cyclical in this regard. The next counterculture will come from the right and this is what we are sort of warily circling here.
Last edited by kool maudit on Mon Nov 30, 2015 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
kool maudit
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby jakell » Mon Nov 30, 2015 7:11 am

The next counterculture will come from the right...


I'd say that this is inevitable anyway. Counterculture tends to spring from what seems to be suppressed, about "what we are not allowed to talk about" as Henrik (Red Ice Radio) would say, and political correctness has played the clumsily obvious whip-hand role for long enough now to produce a reaction.

You go to the top of power structures here, but I'm looking a bit lower down too. In 'conspiracy culture', I've noticed that theories based around the idea of Cultural Marxism are frequently derided as baseless and paranoid (very likely because they come from the Right), whereas equally flaky stuff from elsewhere is given consideration. A double standard.
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:46 pm

A Movement of Long Knives: Death in June, Alternative Nationalism, and Building a New Antif-Fa

http://libcom.org/news/movement-long-kn ... a-12112014

Image

In the wake of recent protests around the neo-folk(and neo-fascist) band Death In June, some thoughts on how we can develop an anti-fascist movement for the 21st century.

As Death in June began making its rounds on the Death of the West tour (a line often used throughout White Nationalist literature, and the title of a book by it’s public face, Patrick Buchanan), an anti-fascist group began to rally to have the dates canceled and shows protested. As the organizing began there was a mad rush to defend DIJ by a fan base that could not imagine that an iconoclastic band such as this could really be responsible for the kind of hate they were being accused of. “They are representing a kind of folk culture.” “They only use fascist imagery as an ironic shock.” “They are queer friendly, and play in Israel.” These are only a few of the justifications given, while most people simply cited that they don’t usually say anything racial so therefore do not fit in the Nazi category. This was responded to by a difficult discussion about the factions within Nazism and an attempt at a critical analysis about the use of fascist and nationalist imagery, most of which was lost on those defending DIJ.

What this tends to bring up is less a question of how DIJ presents themselves and more a difficulty in the discourse around anti-fascism. Today a rising tide of fascism takes on multiple political programs, finds entryism into a variety of cultural movements seen as traditionally both left and right, and often times shades itself in images that are completely alien.

The term Nazi is often hard to apply, and therefore the discussion often creates confusion and robs anti-fascists of the ability to truly mobilize around this issue. It is much easier, in comparison, to target things like the North Dakota town being infiltrated by the National Socialist Movement and the Creativity Movement (formerly World Church of the Creator) as the aesthetics and most people generally understand rhetoric. But what about the tribalist rhetoric present in DIJ? How about the discussion of paganism, right wing anti-capitalism, folkish culture, and the various tenants of rising ”intellectual” fascism. This creates a disconnect as anti-fascists are often reduced to the most obvious, and often least effective, target. The question here becomes what the goals of an anti-fascist movement should be, and what the results of a fascist current can be when not countered.

There are two primary problems that a fascist movement can create when entering a community.

1.Extreme violence towards members of communities that oppose them. This means the targeting of minorities, Jews, LGBTQ folks, and others for violence.

2.Entry into existing movements to push them in a fascist direction, whether on the right or the left.


The first one has often been the target of anti-fascist groups, and for good reason. The most common issue that a militant racist movement will cause is spontaneous violence for people, such as the random attacks on people of color on the street. This is an incredibly difficult problem since, by and large, anti-fascist groups are really not equipped for the kind of community policing that this requires. This does not mean it is unnecessary, but in reality it creates such a point of violence that most people cannot risk their lives to participate. Likewise, though people often hurl epithets at the police, calling them fascists, they are usually not, and the police usually targets Nazi gangs pretty regularly. Problems with the police do not usually come from their participation in openly fascist movements (at least in this country), but instead in their protection of a system of capital and institutionalized oppression. The system exhibits consistent racism on a daily basis, but this is fundamentally different than a paramilitary force that hopes to establish an explicitly racist social system. For anti-fascists that do want to target these groups, they are going to have to commit to a life at risk of violence and retaliation.

This fact does not, however, mean that their efforts are not needed, but instead much less effective. The violence of explicit Nazis is often unprovoked, unplanned, and difficult to counter. Instead, a praxis of community protection and solidarity can be employed, where safe spaces are established and large-scale community response networks can be created.

The second problem is the one that is both more persistent in our current climate and often less targeted. This comes in several forms, less often having participants of an open Neo-Nazi self-identification. Instead, these people may refer to themselves as radical traditionalists, revolutionary conservatives, reactionaries, neo-pagans, or simply “concerned citizens.” The rhetoric here often changes with whatever the cultural subsets of these ideas are, but the fact remains that they share a White Nationalist worldview. Their primary focus is to now enter social movements, community spaces, spiritual communities, and the like, and influence them in a certain direction, usually towards the “preservation of the European traditions and people.” They may not recite the “14 words” explicitly, but the content of their speech remains the same. It is here that things become more difficult, but there are some mainstays that we can look towards.

What is the primary issue for White Nationalists to focus on? Immigration (you may also say Affirmative Action, but this has really receded as will be discussed later). What is the second most primary issue for them? There is none.

This is not because White Nationalists view immigration as a problem above all else, even though their current rhetoric will lead you to believe this. Instead, they have found a dividing issue in which they can enter and shift the conversation consistently. In a different generation, there were contentious issues that were easy to enter the public discussion about, yet today immigration is on many people’s minds and mixed consciousness about this issue is common even in “progressive” communities.

A great example of this is the clearly racialist website VDare. Run by White Nationalist Paul Goddfried, this is an anti-immigration website that hosts a “variety of viewpoints” that are critical of immigration. It is through this website, and really only through this type of discourse, that someone like Peter Brimelow is able to be taken seriously and be invited to mainstream conservative events like C-PAC. Brimelow hosts openly racist writers on VDare, as well as well known reactionaries like Pat Buchanan. Here they are given a gift in that racist immigration ideas are still mainstream and accepted within the sphere of “reasonable discourse,” and therefore White Separatist ideas become part of this sphere through VDare’s position on the issue. The same is true of overt racists like Steve Sailer and the former National Review contributor John Derbyshire.

Other issues come and go as racists feel as though they can utilize them. At times they have been on both the vanguard of the pro and anti-environmental movements. They have at times been conservative Evangelical Christians, while also shifting to Germanic Neo-Pagan movements with an ethnic identitarianism. They are both hyper rational, and critical of materialism and science. They lack consistency in their issues and their approach to criticism, yet remain consistent in their conclusions.

The diversity and complexity of this has really taken shape with the injection of far-right academics into this discourse, usually coming out of Western Europe. Movements like Noveaux Drois, GRECE, the French New Right, as well as individual authors like Alain DeBenoit and Jonathan Bowden developed a canon to be essentially the fascist equivalent of Frankfurt School Marxism. Domestically, the vanguard of this “novel restatement of fascism” comes in places like Alternative Right, Count-Currents publishing, Voice of Reason radio, and others. There is again nothing consistent in the politics of these areas, except their criticisms of multiculturalism, egalitarianism, and anything that could possibly rip white Europeans from their “glorious history.” At Attack the System we see the North American lead of National Anarchism, amongst other similar strains like Anarcho-Feudalism and Anarcho-Monarchism. Here former Worker Solidarity Alliance member turned National Anarchist, supports secessionist movements where people abolish the state in favor of ethnically homogenous tribal sects. Richard Spencer, previously of Alternative Right and now Radix Journal, focuses on what he calls Radical Traditionalism, creating an essentialist and biological explanation for almost every social system. Here he consistently argues for fascist policies as the continuation of the great “Western civilization,” based on heroism, strength, and a strict nationalism. All of these utilize the language of academia and activism to argue for some of the most reprehensible views on race and politics, with a starting point that popular democracy is a perversion and that people are inherently unequal.

There have always been intellectual vanguards on the far right, so these new terms and publications are nothing new. What is different, however, is that the vigilance of their entryism has waned. It may seem obvious when looking at their writing that they are getting at something fundamentally fascist, even when avoiding the word outright. At the same time, as these ideas enter our movements we have not created the kind of united fronts that are important.

An example of this has been the uncomfortable relationship between these nationalist neo-tribalist movements and the radical environmental and Anarcho-Primitivist currents. While people like John Zerzan and Kevin Tucker critique all aspects of civilization for its alienating effects, and advocate a return to a pre-civilized way of living, there are definite elements to their discourse that have become questionable. What Zerzan often refers to as a critique of “mass cultural orientation” often resembles the newly forming critiques of multiculturalism that are happening on the far-right, as well as the inherent belief in Primitivist politics that people with special needs must be sacrificed. There is a definite spiritual element to this analysis, at times echoing the folkish connection between the people and the land. Fetishism of tribal communities is common, often forgetting to discuss how a return to these original tribal communities often takes the form of racial segregation. This is not to say that people like Zerzan himself share these fascist worldview, and likely far from it, but this has created a clear opening. Recently, a National Anarchist was added to the editorial collective of Green Anarchist in Britain, forcing many infoshops to remove it from their shelves. Often times this discourse has affected green communities, and it is not uncommon for things like race and nation to be discussed alongside these anti-civ perspectives. In Deep Green Resistance we see a respect for the top-down militia style that we see in right-wing paramilitarism, as well as an acceptance of transphobia without a consistent backlash.

As we entered into the Occupy Movement, the diversity of political ideas and backgrounds created a lot of ideological conflicts. While this disagreement is totally welcome in a multifaceted mass movement, we again saw a return of the conspiracy theory and “libertarianism”(for most anarchists, calling capitalists libertarians feels like a punch in the stomach). We saw things like 9/11 Truthers, Mises Institute fellows, and many on the fringes of right-wing economics being discussed. As an undercurrent to many of these are classic conspiracies about the control Jews have in the media, banking, and politics, many of which are the same that the John Birch Society had in the past. The inherent “inequality” of people is central to the ideas present in people like Murray Rothbard, and his racial views are well known. As a search for openness was heralded as incredible in these burgeoning occupations, we began to see an unquestioning acceptance of borderline conspiracy theories and disgusting views on the poor as part of the acceptable range of discourse. While many of these “libertarians” had connections to neo-confederate, militia, and racial movements, we still sat through talks on the gold standard and the Federal Reserve as if this fringe element was just a part of our revolutionary milieu.

The problem is, they aren’t. These ideas do not make up political allies in left communities, especially ones that have committed themselves to an anti-racist egalitarian worldview. Without the ability to identify this rhetoric for what it is it is difficult to be able to see it when it begins to influence our movements. Just like a parasite turns its host against itself, these movements go from being our tools for social change to their weapon for social destruction.

The question that comes up here is how can we go forward with an anti-fascist praxis that can be both effective and comprehensive. This often begins by knowing what we are looking for, and what we are fighting. Without a clear understanding of what fascism is we will only be able to spot it in its most obvious caricatures of itself. Unfortunately, the fascist movements that will attempt to gain powerful holds in America will likely not be under a Nazi flag. This makes them harder to spot, harder to attack, and harder to suffocate.

What people have done for years is attempt to create a “generic definition of fascism.” What this means is a way to describe what fascism is that is not dependent on a particular movement, conflict, country, or period of time. What is the specific fascist element? Some argue that there is no generic fascism because it is always a false ideology that is specific to the dictator and always just a way to exploit a population. While this is true, there are common features that bind together fascist movements even though they may be culturally and contextually different.

There has often been an effort to simply define authoritarian movements as fascist, though this is not a universal connection. Marxists often define fascism as the more reactionary sector of capital, but this misses its most key elements. Fascism as a state philosophy is almost universally anti-capitalist because capitalism creates too much multiculturalism and does not put the welfare of a homogenous racial or cultural group first. In this way fascism is often described as a right-wing socialism, where by a welfare state is used to systematically exclude people. The fundamental core of fascism is the belief in the essential nature of hierarchy. If people are fundamentally unequal, then society should be stratified and democracy should be waned since the governing of the people is best left up to an elite. Any form of capitalist representative democracy, which most anarchists and anti-authoritarians would say isn’t even a true democracy, allows for too much class mobility and popular control. Instead, a fascist state is meant to force hierarchy to exist without the irregularity of capital. This state is meant to subvert democratic institutions along an ideological line, force “class collaboration,” and make sure that inequality is observed. Many on the modern intellectual fascist line return to the ideas of Julius Evola, a radical right wing philosopher that states that societies are healthier the more clearly the social stratification and hierarchy is. He asserts that modernity is a “feminizing” and equalizing force that strips of our national, racial, and spiritual identity, which is inherent in “traditional” societies. This shows the next key element of fascism, which is a paleogenic myth about the “true nature” of society. Fascism promises to restore the true order, the heroic history that never was. Fascism outlines a mythology about a particular grouping by suggesting that in the past it was racially homogenous, filled with heroes, perfectly run, and where by people are spiritually fulfilled. This often forgets the history of extreme oppression that most people experienced historically as subjects of the empires they hope to emulate in a modern context, as well as the fact that there is no genetic homogeneity in any of these European communities at any point in history. The reality is that this vision of its past was never true, but that does not negate that fascists believe we can return to it.

Elitism, essentialism, and racism are all key since they create a worldview that inequality is “natural” and that nations are essential characteristics of a person’s biology. Without this return to the pure essential it is hard for them to argue that a nation has something crucial to offer, but if you assume that all things are based in biology they can string together a narrative that racial categories define our cultural realities. There is no contemporary science to justify these racial categories and no evidence to propose that people of Germanic decent have something fundamentally different about them than anyone from any other part of the world, which is why they easily slip into pseudo-scientific double speak, quoting obscure philosophers and playing with subjective terms like “identity”

There is a lot of discussion about what is truly fascist, what is proto-fascist, and what simply has “fascist elements.” The answer to this for anti-fascist organizers comes a lot different than academics that make it simply an intellectual exercise. Instead, we have to see fascism as something to be opposed and countered, not simply something that exists as an idea on its own. Fascism attempts to conquer and transform our communities, so its definition is only as useful as we can use it as a category to identify and destroy. Fascism is not defined by its command economics or its anti-capitalism, but by its elitist, hierarchical, racist nationalism and mythology. It’s perceived return to the past, its utopian visions of superiority, and its belief in the essential nature of sexual, gender, racial, and social roles.

Within this context we can see an entire historical run for fascism as it arises as a distinct current within a political movement, even if that current does not take over every apparatus of government and social life. Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and Fascist Italy are often proposed as the only true manifestations of fascism, but this negates the reality of its place in the Fallange in Spain, the Iron Guard in Romania, and, most recently, the paranoid race-based nationalism of North Korea. Fascism makes up a distinct worldview where by imagery has substantive meaning and ethnicity is a defining characteristic.

Fascism does likewise not attach itself to specific political formations. There has often been a very common comparison, usually by the less intelligent conservative milieu, that any kind of nationalized industry thus denotes fascism because they also nationalized that industry in Germany and Italy. This is an obvious logical fallacy, but does present some of the problems with discerning fascism. While it does often take on authoritarianism, and the idea of authority whether in a macro level through “furor” type leadership and on the micro level by strong men within the family, it does not necessarily denote totalitarianism. National Anarchists argue for a state-free form of nationalism, where by tribal and racial authorities are important without the apparatus of the state. This is one of the many “third position” fascist ideas that have become popular, where it is not uncommon to combine previously thought of as non-complimentary social ideas.

The key element here will never be a type of political machinery, but instead a distinct one of values. Political methodology is usually chosen because of its perceived effectiveness in realizing a sort of value. From the perspective of most people, equality, freedom, and the like are common values, though the methods of how to achieve this very greatly. Among the radical right, this sense of value is completely different. Instead, hierarchy, authority, tradition, and strength over the weak are the values, and the political apparatus that is chosen is just the method. While the kind of state fascism seen in Italy and Germany may be the kind that is commonly known, it is not the only method that these people come up with. The totalitarian tyranny of Soviet Russia took on many of the state functions that Nazi Germany did, but different in that they thought this oppression could lead to an egalitarian democracy. The difference is the Nazis used these tools to smash both.

From here we can begin to sketch together a profile that is common amongst the various groups, often hiding behind the syncretic “dualism” of Third Position fascism. At their core is a disbelief in the capability of all people to rule, the inequality and stratification amongst people, the essential nature of value in biology, and the need to lead through violence, heroism, and strength.

The definition of fascism should then come from what is useful rather than what is academically perfect. In this way, the broader definition of the history of fascism can trace a series of examples of fascism that may not fit the definitions verbatim. The reason is that while these movements are diverse and may not hold every single element of fascism, this is still their dominant current and can be reduced to this common denominator for the purpose of targeting. This does not mean, however, that we should be liberal with the term. Without the key elements of inequality, authoritarianism, and the like it does not really represent a revolutionary fascist current, but rather just the most barbarous elements of the current capitalist system. When the Obama, and previously Bush, administration engage in corporatism and totalitarianism, it does not inherently make it fascist. As anti-authoritarians we already have a critique of these elements and currently oppose the state of the system, but this does not necessarily represent fascism. Instead, fascism is going to run counter the current mechanisms of capitalism and the State since they do not perfectly represent the forceful implementation of their vision. Instead, they can influence or overthrow the State, in the same way that various strains of the left could. We very well could devolve into fascism in America, but it is likely to not simply come from the regular functions of capital and the State.

The war that is at play here is not with the fascists for the fate of society (yet), but instead over the fate of radicalism.

Fascism, as a radical current, critiques the current social order for various reasons, often times taking to task the same things that revolutionaries do on the left. Boredom. Environmental destruction. Alienation. Poor living standards. All of these things are presented often times within the fascist program of critique, but it does so with a fundamentally different set of values. As they come in contact with people looking for a deeper analysis and have a general distrust of the system, they present an alternative. They do this inside the various radical movements that are at play to attract revolutionaries, and inside conservative social movements to attract the reformists. While we will not be persuading potential converts inside the right-wing anti-immigration movement, those working in Palestinian support and radical environmentalism can and should be comrades in an intersectional struggle against oppression. If these struggles are primary to someone, they are susceptible to systemic critiques that support their current issue. If we allow these disgusting ideas to become a viable option for those in struggle, we will let our movements be areas of inflation for the fascist movements.

For committed anti-fascist organizers there needs to be a few ideas that can lead a way forward away from the current failures and to begin to target fascist movements as they arise, try to make entry into radicalism, and shift current social movements.

1. It is important to differentiate fascist intellectual movements and political organizing from fascist gang culture. The main reason for this is not ideological, but tactical. In the case of skinhead gangs or KKK militants there is rarely a deeply thought ideological root, but rather a pairing of racial difference with economic and personal strife. Here they tend to recruit the down and out, often youths with difficult backgrounds, and their main tool is violence. The reality here is that they will never influence any movement, and even the far right would like to disassociate at any chance. Instead, they pose the risk of spontaneous violence to communities of color, LGBT color, and anyone else they begin to add to their list of discontents. This presents a fundamentally different challenge from targeting white nationalists in American Renaissance or The Occidental Observer, who are there making poised ideological arguments to people willing to absolve themselves of conventional ethical logic. The plan of action is completely different, as approaching skinheads is really a matter of physical defense of self and community. Here they need to be dealt with simply as agents of violence, and in reality police will still act as their adversary. This is also not a conventional battle of political organizing as it would be with actual political organizers, and you do not have to win people to your side since they have already done a pretty good job alienating everyone around them already. This does not mean that anti-fascists should not strike against groups like Combat 18, but it means that this is a guerilla war and community organizing does not take on the same precedence. Instead, it is social movement fascists and intellectual right-wingers that need to be targeted through social movements that hold a radical enough analysis that their charade can be unveiled.

2. The fascism of tomorrow will never look like the fascism of yesterday. While a fetishism of nationalist images is a permanent fixture of far right institutions, with Death in June being the perfect example, the most classic images of World War II fascism have been completely stripped from the intellectual and social movement fascists. You are not going to see a swastika from the National Anarchists at a Palestinian solidarity rally, nor are you going to see pictures of Hitler in the pages of the Radix. Instead, you are going to see vague references to nationalism, identity, spirituality, tradition, and the like, all of which can go under the radar if you are looking for “Heil Hitlers.” The reality is that the obvious images of traditional war fascism are so repugnant to everyone in modern society that people who share those ideas are never going to cloak themselves in them if they want any chance of success. The fascist movements that do so, like the National Socialist Movement or the National Alliance, make up the most organized wing of the skinhead gang culture, but in the end the only threat they present is motivating spontaneous violence. They will never have power in social movements or statist politics. Instead, fascism will take on the same core ideological principles and motivate them within existing movements. This was seen very plainly in the reactionary behavior of the Tea Party, and the open invitation that they gave to openly fascist organizations like the American Third Position Party (now called the American Freedom Party). Here the rhetoric was the same, though cloaked in libertarian jargon. This society is being stripped from the inside by immigrants and non-whites, degenerating our culture, and taking the country from its rightful inheritors. The rhetoric was so cleanly disguised that it was often dismissed by even left-wing people as something wholly different. When the release of the Ron Paul papers came out, he was able to disguise clearly racist and homophobic articles as being some kind of clerical error. When Anonymous hacked the website for the American Third Position Party they found clear communication between those in the Ron Paul camp and those in the “whites only” political party. There was even an image of Ron Paul shaking hands with Don Black, the founder of the large white nationalist network Stormfront. None of this seemed to matter to young Ron Paul supporters who were more interested in his attacks on the TSA and marijuana laws than the fact that he was exploiting racial tension to bring in a southern voting base. These are fascist ideas repackaged, and having a clearly successful strategy to influence political discourse. Similar situations have occurred in different radical communities, whether it is continuing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories around the 9/11 attacks or influencing the pagan religious movement by associating Norse paganism with ethnic identity. The names and faces have changed, but the core ideology has not. It means that while we are looking for swastikas, we miss the Asatru Alliance creating bonds between mainstream Wiccans and white nationalists. Nazis will never rise again, but nationalists of a different sort can and will influence the social movements that continually reshape society.

3. Anti-fascist organizers should be able to differentiate between fascists, but there is no reason to do so when organizing publicly. It is important to be able to understand fascist ideas, imagery, and history so that they can be identified and their efforts countered, but this does not mean that we need to engage in long winded public exercises on the difference between National Bolshevism and nationalist Satanism. Instead, call a fascist a fascist. There is an effort to differentiate between proto-fascism, crypto-fascism, and real fascism, but in the end they are all just various levels of the same thing. To the public, the declarations should be simple. Someone can go on long diatribes about ethnic identity and Jungian archetypes, but in reality they simply are a racist. It may be more complicated than that to them, but it is not in any practical terms to the anti-fascist. The definition of fascism must remain useful, so do not publicly overcomplicate the discussion. This differentiation is exactly what they want since they do see themselves as more complicated than those stereotypes, but it is more useful to maintain them because in the end they simply are anti-egalitarian, anti-democratic, race baiting authoritarians. To successfully target them we need research, but to the outside we need only scorn

4. Drop your liberal moralism. Fascism is the core opposite of a free and equal society. It represents the exploitations of the darkest parts of humanity, and the barbarism that is at the polar opposite of anti-authoritarian and egalitarian movements. There should be one, and only one goal, destroy fascism. The kind of respect and “even playing field” logic that many people like to utilize in a liberal democracy needs to go out the window when you are dealing with a direct spawn of evil. Success is the only possibility; their defeat is the only goal. This should come from any means possible, with no moral reservation. This does not mean that you should target confused people with absolute impunity, but know a real fascist organizer when you see one and seek to destroy. They do not deserve to make their case, this allows them to talk around issues and cloud things. Do not let them speak, do not let them have their own organizations, do not let them have a livelihood, do not let them live in your community.

5. Know fascism when you see it, but not all things that should be opposed are fascist. Free market corporate capitalism is a radical tool of class destruction and should be opposed. Imperialist wars on the Muslim world are racist and used to deepen the pockets of corporate pockets, and should be opposed. Rape culture is a disgusting aspect of the ongoing patriarchal structure, and should be opposed. Domestic spying and wiretapping are an encroaching police state that strips us of our liberties, and should be opposed. This does not mean that they are all necessarily fascist. If you have a clear understanding of what fascism is then you will be able to target and irradiate it. If you have a social and class analysis that is growing and targets systemic flaws, then you have the ability to really deal with society as a whole. This means knowing what you are looking and seeing it for what it is. As an anarchist I find capitalism and the state incredibly tyrannical, but they are not always fascist (and today, usually are not). Fascism remains the vanguard of the reactionary elements of every social sector, boiled down and magnified.

Where does this leave us with Death in June? As has been pointed out by many an anti-fascist blog, his ideas make up an affinity for radical Strasserist fascism aligned with National Bolshevist Third Positionism. This sounds like academic pseudo-jargon, and it is. The fact of the matter is that this is how they see themselves, how they differentiate themselves from the other forms of fascism that they do not perfectly align themselves with. What does it mean for us? The bottom line is that they are fascist, not matter what sub labels and traditions they attempt to quote from. Simply because they appeal to a queer audience or play shows in Israel does not mitigate the layers of fascist ideas that permeate not only their imagery and lyrics, but also outright statements in interviews. We do not need to get into a discussion about the details, especially when we can look at those details and see them for what they really are. A fascist does not deserve to be argued with. They do not deserve point and counter point. They do not deserve to have their ideas paired against ours. They represent the purest form of the enemy, the crystallization of every element of the current society that forces us to reject its basic premise. If Death In June wants to go on diatribe about folkish communities and tradition, let them. We will be on the other side trying to end the words before they even begin. To really combat fascism, we have to know what it looks like and what its tactics will be. To do this we need a way forward that does not only look to the past, but looks at our own communities and sees it when it begins to take shape.

Death in June has hidden itself from criticism with irony and calls to pre-Christian paganism, and these are claims that can be debunked with a quick Google search. Pearce has said openly that they began looking towards the ideas of early Nazi Gregor Strasser, which often takes a more economically socialist position than Hitler ended up taking the party in later years. In an article by John Eden at Who Makes the Nazis, he re-asserted Pearce’s public affiliation for violent White Nationalist actions. “It has been widely corroborated that Pearce dedicated a song from the stage to the ‘White Wolves’ – a neo-Nazi grouping who had initially claimed responsibility for these atrocities. In much the same spirit, a valedictory message was posted to the Di6 Yahoo group forum immediately following Anders Breivik’s Utoya massacre, and mainland bombing.” Pearce has also shown open support for genocidal Croatian nationalists, and continues to take inspiration from the neo-fascist National Bolshevist movement that is popular amongst the most violent skinhead gangs in Russia.

Pearce’s eugenic ideas have been posted in very clear terms, though he often shades the racial elements. “MAINLAND EUROPA, HAS SEVERE STOCK PROBLEMS. THAT, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE HAS ONLY GOT WORSE. THOSE WHO SHOULDN’T BE ABLE TO BREED ARE DOING SO WITH SUCH FREQUENCY THAT THE UK IS BEING OVER POPULATED BY MORONS WITH NOTHING TO DO EXCEPT HARASS THE REST OF THE POPULATION,” said Pearce. Whether it was when he glorified white domination of people of color by saying “Thank the Gods for Euro-colonialism,” or when he openly attacks non-white immigration and Islam, it is pretty clear where his allegiances are. In an interview in 1998 with Scapegoat he said plainly, “Depending upon their ‘version’ of Eurocentric Racialism, then 9 times out of 10 I feel very comfortable with it.”

These quotes are not a-typical for him, and this has happened on a regular basis. For those who see the esoteric and gothic turn that a lot of White Nationalism has taken in the last twenty years, then this is no surprise. But for those who are regularly looking for the traditional demons, they are going to have trouble parsing them out in a subcultural that treats shock as inherently artistically valid. They are likely not to know about the occasional acceptance of various queer identities in White Nationalist circles these days, often championed by Portland’s Jack Donovan who refers to himself as an “andriophile” because “gay” is “associated with effeminacy, feminism, and leftist politics.” The point here is not that there is a common acceptance of queer identities on the far right, which there is certainly not in any meaningful way, but that one point of contradiction is not enough to discredit their fascist ties. Many of these movements are perfectly willing to accept internal contradictions in the favor of pushing their agenda.

The more important argument, rather than focusing just on the band themselves, is to really look what they open a space for. If you are to find many of the more contemporary intellectual White Nationalists from organizations like Counter-Currents, Occidental Observer, Alternative Right, and American Renaissance on social media, you will find that there is a direct correlation to the band. As an article at the One People’s Project pointed out, it is much more that the band creates a comfortable meeting space for people with these racial perspectives. One former fan reflects on their experience at a show.

Then I saw the first Call the Paramedics shirt, and then shit got even less subtle up to and including National Alliance patches and Nazi medals. This was not a crowd I wanted to be hanging out with all night. Mind you, they were a very small portion of the attendants but the fact that they were there at all was increasingly upsetting as the night went on. Most of the folks were just sort of willfully ignorant of what was around them. Just like me.


I noticed Kevin I. Slaughter in the audience. His publishing company – Underground Amusements - publishes some of the works of Jack Donovan an anti-feminist, anti-gay, anti-equality author. There was a couple next to me that was chanting out any line they found adequately racist and kept yelling for a song called “Enemy Within” that I’d never heard before (I looked the lyrics up when I got home and was not surprised what I found. Ugh.).

When I got outside, it was all pretty much laid bare. The folks who had been asked to cover or remove offensive symbols re-revealed them (the extremely anti-racist staff of the venue was extremely vigilant in their enforcement of this standard inside the club and anyone was who did not comply was told they had to leave – outside the club they had no say) and it was at this point that I just said “Fuck this” and walked home feeling like a sucker that had played a part in something that was really disrespectful and shameful.

If we give the excuses ourselves as to why this kind of thing should be allowed in our communities then we create the space for the development of a fascist movement that will grow before it can be confronted. The best organizing disallows the violence before it even takes shape, and we need to know that without a strong form of resistance then this discontent and collapse in our country can easily become the kind of reactionary wave that we never previously believed would be present.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby Searcher08 » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:06 pm

And in those last days,
great Flying Aerial Copy Pasta Machines, called American Dreams were seen
Their giant cloud-thought and fog creation weaponry inscribed with
"To anyone, from Irrelevant"
"No Time to Format" and
"From Libcom, with Love*"

* Obviously, Love is being used here in a way that is outside the economic paradigm of a patriarchical post-Structuralist enophilic analysis - and leans "closer to", but is not "informed by" a reading that is asymptotic to a Kristeva "enunciation" of culturally mediated meaning - disbursed through the objectification of the donut involved.
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

love is just a state of mind

Postby IanEye » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:46 pm

American Dream » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:46 pm wrote:
In the wake of recent protests around the neo-folk(and neo-fascist) band Death In June, some thoughts on how we can develop an anti-fascist movement for the 21st century.

There are two primary problems that a fascist movement can create when entering a community.

1.Extreme violence towards members of communities that oppose them. This means the targeting of minorities, Jews, LGBTQ folks, and others for violence.

2.Entry into existing movements to push them in a fascist direction, whether on the right or the left.


1. It is important to differentiate fascist intellectual movements and political organizing from fascist gang culture.

2. The fascism of tomorrow will never look like the fascism of yesterday.

3. Anti-fascist organizers should be able to differentiate between fascists, but there is no reason to do so when organizing publicly.

4. Drop your liberal moralism.

5. Know fascism when you see it, but not all things that should be opposed are fascist.

Where does this leave us with Death in June?

Death in June has hidden itself from criticism with irony and calls to pre-Christian paganism, and these are claims that can be debunked with a quick Google search. Pearce has said openly that they began looking towards the ideas of early Nazi Gregor Strasser, which often takes a more economically socialist position than Hitler ended up taking the party in later years. In an article by John Eden at Who Makes the Nazis, he re-asserted Pearce’s public affiliation for violent White Nationalist actions. “It has been widely corroborated that Pearce dedicated a song from the stage to the ‘White Wolves’ – a neo-Nazi grouping who had initially claimed responsibility for these atrocities. In much the same spirit, a valedictory message was posted to the Di6 Yahoo group forum immediately following Anders Breivik’s Utoya massacre, and mainland bombing.” Pearce has also shown open support for genocidal Croatian nationalists, and continues to take inspiration from the neo-fascist National Bolshevist movement that is popular amongst the most violent skinhead gangs in Russia.




some day some old familiar reign
will come along & know my name
& then my shelter will be gone
& then i'll have to move along
but 'til I do i'll stay awhile
& track the hidden country of your smile




some day the man i used to be
will come along & call on me
& then because I'm just a man
you'll find my feet are made of sand
but 'til that time i'll tell you lies
& chart the hidden boundaries of your eyes


"Deception is a state of mind, and the mind of the State."



.
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4863
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:02 pm

4. Drop your liberal moralism.


"It is now clear that we are facing an implacable enemy whose avowed objective is world domination by whatever means and at whatever costs. There are no rules in such a game. Hitherto acceptable norms of human conduct do not apply. If the US is to survive, longstanding American concepts of "fair play" must be reconsidered. We must develop effective espionage and counterespionage services and must learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemies by more clever, more sophisticated means than those used against us. It may become necessary that the American people be made acquainted with, understand and support this fundamentally repugnant philosophy."

--Gen. James Doolittle
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby backtoiam » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:10 pm

I think it could be argued that the television set should be in the running as one of the most destructive devices ever created by the human race.
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby Elvis » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:39 pm

re: the next counterculture—might be useful to revisit the last one;

from Theodore Roszak—who coined the term "counterculture"—in his introduction to a 1995 edition of his brilliant 1969 book, The Making of a Counter Culture:

What I have called "the counter culture" took shape between these two points [1946 and 1972] in time as a protest that was grounded paradoxically not in the failure, but in the success of a high industrial economy. It arose not out of misery but out of plenty; its role was to explore a new range of issues raised by an unprecedented increase in the standard of living. For a period of some twenty years the world's most prosperous industrial society became an arena of raucous and challenging moral inquiry the likes of which we may never see again—at least not if those whose wealth, power, and authority are at stake have anything to say
about it.

. . .

From the outset, the counter culture, so distrustful of authority and suspicious of leadership, suffered for its lack of long-term organization. The closest it came to giving its values durable political structure was the idealistic, if ultimately disastrous, McGovern takeover of the Democratic Party in the early seventies. With the failure of that effort, the liberal wing of American politics found its position in the national mainstream steadily undermined, as, one by one, the old Democratic Party constituencies drifted into the conservative camp. A movement that cannot find ways to revive and use the institutions it inherits—even if the institution is as flawed as our political party system—cannot expect to provide leadership. But the counter culture made a worse mistake. It grossly underestimated the stability and resourcefulness of the corporate establishment, the ultimate locus of power in industrial society. Money talks in American politics. It can buy all the brains and organizational talent it needs. For all the damning revelations that came to light about the military-industrial complex, the corporate system outlasted its opposition and struck back with astonishing effectiveness. For one thing, the steady relocation of military spending to the Sunbelt states gave the military and the business community an unlikely and unforeseen ally: the evangelical Christians.

. . .

In the swinging sixties, who would have predicted that by the eighties and nineties the liberal wing of American politics would need to devote so much of its time to defending gay and abortion rights and struggling to keep prayers and creationism out of the schools? It is surely the bleakest
measure of political cynicism that corporate elites, many of them Ivy League alumni and cosmopolitan lifestylers, have been willing to bed down with throwbacks to the Scopes Trial. They have deliberately bolstered the most benighted and fiercely intolerant forces in our society, enclaves of smoldering resentment that would be burning witches and branding adulteresses if they had free rein.

Even more effective than its collaboration with Bible Belt reactionaries, however, has been the corporate community's systematic repeal of the affluent society. Having seen what dreaded things result from fat paychecks and cultural permissiveness, business leaders have decided to rely on a blunter, more traditional weapon: economic insecurity. They have exported the jobs that once promised to make affluence possible for all and busted the unions that defended high wages. This is turning out to be a far more efficient form of social control than corporate largesse.

. . .

...Liberalism, whose goal was little more than to spread enough wealth from the top to the bottom of the corporate order to keep the system economically viable, has come to be seen as the "radical" extreme of the American political spectrum.

As intimidatingly effective as the new Social Darwinist conservatism may be in the short run, it is a reckless and risky option. Corporate America is playing with psychological dynamite. The new global economic order is reneging on the only promise industrial society ever had to offer its working millions: that of eventual material abundance. As an end in itself that was never a noble ideal, but it was as much as the corporate establishment could imagine: a world built in its own image of grasping, competitive acquisition. But why will the millions work, obey, and bear the daily burdens once the hope of universal access to that high-consumption future has been taken away? An indefinite future of material insecurity makes for an ugly, demoralized people, and a dilapidating biosphere is the shortest path to a new dark age.

For all its quirkiness, the counter culture dared to envision a better future, and in fact the one interesting postindustrial vision we have thus far been offered. I have always imagined it to be an Arcadian commonwealth much like the Utopia William Morris envisioned in his News from Nowhere, but with the addition of a "small is beautiful" technological base to relieve the drudgery. There the free flowering of personality, the ideal of organic community, the adventure of ethnic diversity, the exploration of the further reaches of human nature, life lived gently on the earth, an economics of permanence, a new biocentric contract between our species and the more than human world from which we draw our sustenance become the priorities of the day. The only reason all this ever had to be a counter culture was because the culture it opposed—that of reductionist science, ecocidal industrialism, and corporate regimentation—was too small a vision of life to lift the spirit.


http://musicandhistory.wikispaces.com/f ... ulture.pdf



It gets my goat when people—especially 'leftists'—bitch about hippies. Enjoy the new "alt/right" vision, bitchers, it's so much more down-to-Earth.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby slomo » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:54 pm

Wombaticus Rex » 30 Nov 2015 11:02 wrote:
4. Drop your liberal moralism.


"It is now clear that we are facing an implacable enemy whose avowed objective is world domination by whatever means and at whatever costs. There are no rules in such a game. Hitherto acceptable norms of human conduct do not apply. If the US is to survive, longstanding American concepts of "fair play" must be reconsidered. We must develop effective espionage and counterespionage services and must learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemies by more clever, more sophisticated means than those used against us. It may become necessary that the American people be made acquainted with, understand and support this fundamentally repugnant philosophy."

--Gen. James Doolittle

Oh, the irony!

We had to destroy liberal moralism ... to save it!
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby slomo » Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:04 pm

Liberal moralism for me but not for thee....

AD, how do you think that's going to play out in the long run? Hint: there are vastly more heterosexuals than LGBT folks, and even if whites are becoming a minority in the US, they overwhelmingly are more tolerant of LGBTs (and feminists) than are any other US ethnic group. Once you succeed in pitting everybody against everybody, what do you think will happen to the true minorities?

I see it every day, online and in real life: people are becoming alienated by the hypocrisy of the current crop of "progressives". You're not fooling anybody, most people can see right through it. This doesn't give me any joy, BTW, as it will end in tears and bloodshed before the century is over.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby backtoiam » Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:18 pm

True that. Just ask black people how much better they have it these days. They got duped into fighting for their "rights", and buddy, they got those. The right to live in an environment so desperate and sad that they are now even killing each other by the dozens every week.

(yes i know they are not in chains anymore, so lets don't go there)

That "right" through polarization is on the table for everybody in the future.

Fake artificial left politics masquerading as social change, shoved down the throat of humanity by people at the top of the food chain who don't care about anybody but themselves, pretending to lift the less fortunate out of poverty and misery is the stone in the griss mill that wears all groups down into a state of misery.

All you have to do is say "I wish we could go back to the days of the 1950's of the good old days industrial economy" and invariably somebody will shout you down by saying "oh you want black people to go back the Jim Crow days when they had no rights."
It makes me want to slap them in the forehead and ask them whether or not they realize that black people have it worse now than they did back then, and so does everybody else. Same with the new "white people" bashing that has become a stone in the griss mill to break down ALL GROUPS by polarizing the narrative.

Television is an idiot maker of monumental proportion. Back in the 1950's black people were not shooting each other every day by the dozens over the fact that they lived in a crack infested drug infested neighborhood that was intentionally cultivated by the CIA drug trade.

Then they would say "yeah but black people couldn't go to school with white people, etc..." I bet black people would rather have their own schools back than live in a situation so desperate that they are now killing each other by the dozens every week in an effort to survive. I'm thinking that if they knew where all this was eventually headed they would not have fought so hard for their "rights" and said "no thanks."

I would be mortified if I were a transgender person and everybody would not stop talking about me. "Progressives", that mindset, in the hands of the blind, is very destructive.

Beware of those who come bearing gifts...
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

i am back too

Postby IanEye » Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:30 pm

No.

The reason everyone is worse off is because the money system is not the same.

The desperation stems from that.

People of color were, and are, better off for insisting they not be treated as second class citizens in U.S. society based on the color of their skin.

The oligarchy can keep everyone but themselves down because of the way the money changed beginning under LBJ, and continuing under Nixon.

If that can change, then everyone will benefit, and on a social level people of color will have already established that they will not be treated as second class citizens.

Only a fucktard wants to go back to the Jim Crow standard of the 50's.

your self go fuck.

.
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4863
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:44 pm

Even more effective than its collaboration with Bible Belt reactionaries, however, has been the corporate community's systematic repeal of the affluent society. Having seen what dreaded things result from fat paychecks and cultural permissiveness, business leaders have decided to rely on a blunter, more traditional weapon: economic insecurity. They have exported the jobs that once promised to make affluence possible for all and busted the unions that defended high wages. This is turning out to be a far more efficient form of social control than corporate largesse.

. . .

...Liberalism, whose goal was little more than to spread enough wealth from the top to the bottom of the corporate order to keep the system economically viable, has come to be seen as the "radical" extreme of the American political spectrum.

As intimidatingly effective as the new Social Darwinist conservatism may be in the short run, it is a reckless and risky option. Corporate America is playing with psychological dynamite. The new global economic order is reneging on the only promise industrial society ever had to offer its working millions: that of eventual material abundance. As an end in itself that was never a noble ideal, but it was as much as the corporate establishment could imagine: a world built in its own image of grasping, competitive acquisition. But why will the millions work, obey, and bear the daily burdens once the hope of universal access to that high-consumption future has been taken away? An indefinite future of material insecurity makes for an ugly, demoralized people, and a dilapidating biosphere is the shortest path to a new dark age.


Ye Gods, I need to re-read this book ASAP. What a mammoth slab, right there.

Written in 1969, too. Reminds me of an equally cogent MIT misfit, William Irwin Thompson, who published the obscenely prescient "At the Edge of History" two years later.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:46 pm

backtoiam » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:18 pm wrote:I bet black people would rather have their own schools back than live in a situation so desperate that they are now killing each other by the dozens every week in an effort to survive.


I bet "black people" is not a sufficiently homogeneous category to generalize about in terms of anything, except perhaps skin color.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Nov 30, 2015 5:11 pm

backtoiam » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:18 pm wrote:True that. Just ask black people how much better they have it these days. They got duped into fighting for their "rights", and buddy, they got those. The right to live in an environment so desperate and sad that they are now even killing each other by the dozens every week.

(yes i know they are not in chains anymore, so lets don't go there)

That "right" through polarization is on the table for everybody in the future.

Fake artificial left politics masquerading as social change, shoved down the throat of humanity by people at the top of the food chain who don't care about anybody but themselves, pretending to lift the less fortunate out of poverty and misery is the stone in the griss mill that wears all groups down into a state of misery.

All you have to do is say "I wish we could go back to the days of the 1950's of the good old days industrial economy" and invariably somebody will shout you down by saying "oh you want black people to go back the Jim Crow days when they had no rights."
It makes me want to slap them in the forehead and ask them whether or not they realize that black people have it worse now than they did back then, and so does everybody else. Same with the new "white people" bashing that has become a stone in the griss mill to break down ALL GROUPS by polarizing the narrative.

Television is an idiot maker of monumental proportion. Back in the 1950's black people were not shooting each other every day by the dozens over the fact that they lived in a crack infested drug infested neighborhood that was intentionally cultivated by the CIA drug trade.

Then they would say "yeah but black people couldn't go to school with white people, etc..." I bet black people would rather have their own schools back than live in a situation so desperate that they are now killing each other by the dozens every week in an effort to survive. I'm thinking that if they knew where all this was eventually headed they would not have fought so hard for their "rights" and said "no thanks."

I would be mortified if I were a transgender person and everybody would not stop talking about me. "Progressives", that mindset, in the hands of the blind, is very destructive.

Beware of those who come bearing gifts...


Black-on-black homicides have plummeted 67% in 20 years. Also, recent studies have shown that children of all walks of life in diverse schools benefit academically as well as socially. Crack cocaine use has also dropped within black communities after peaking sometime in the late 80s or early 90s.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Data & Research Compilations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests