Morales assassins: Bolivia gang "fought in Balkans"

[Jan Klimkowski]

For anyone interested, there are very interesting, highly detailed, accusations that Southgate is both a British intelligence agent provocateur and a Satanist here:

http://web.archive.org/web/2005021302104...aders.html

Bolivian-Croatian-Hungarian mercenary & National Anarchist Eduardo Rozsa Flores moved in deep black circles.

EDIT: the link is malfunctioning, so I'm going to post the article here - in several parts - to keep it alive.

AGAINST POLITICAL 'LEADERS' AND 'LEADERSHIPS'




Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then
shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
(Matthew 7: 5)

He has spoken like a traitor, and shall answer
As traitors do.
(Shakespeare, Coriolanus III: i)

Defiance, traitors, hurl we in your teeth.
(Shakespeare, Julius Caesar V: i)





PART I: HOW NOT TO RUN A REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT






1. INTRODUCTION: THE UNRELIABILITY OF POLITICAL LEADERS GENERALLY

I have, on numerous occasions, warned of the dangers that accompany faith in political 'leaders' and 'leaderships'. My warning has consistently been this: show me a 'leader' and I'll show you a potential traitor.
The capacity of political leaders to betray their professed ideals and their followers is truly breathtaking. Look, for example, at the Russian Marxist tradition: first we see Lenin's 'old Bolsheviks' resoundingly and fatally betrayed by Stalin, then we observe the legacy of Stalin betrayed by Khrushchev, then we see Suslov and Brezhnev ousting Khruschev, only to institute a form of state-capitalism that is eventually sold out in favour of the more laissez faire approach of the American New World Order by Gorbachev. The Marxists have hardly fared better elsewhere. In China we had the ignoble spectacle of hard-line Maoism suddenly transforming itself into a rabidly pro-Western capitalist dictatorship. In Albania we saw Ramiz Alia, the supposedly loyal and unflinching communist, deliver the entire country into the American camp as soon as he was able. In Voice of the Resistance we exposed the manner in which the North Korean leadership, despite its anti-American rhetoric, is also making moves to 'open up' the country to Western influences -- and we have already seen where that typically leads:1 North Korea's direction is set; the only question at the outset of 2004 is whether Kim Jong Il will perpetrate the final betrayal himself or whether the deed will be done by his successors.
None of this should come as a surprise -- the old anarchist, Bakunin, foresaw the dangers of leaderships and 'vanguards' and did not hesitate to give voice to his qualms in his various debates with Marx.2 His warnings about the dangers of leaders and leaderships were striking in their prescience:


Nothing is more dangerous for man's private morality than the habit of command. The best man, the most intelligent, disinterested, generous, pure, will infallibly and always be spoiled at this trade. Two sentiments inherent in power never fail to produce this demoralisation; they are: contempt for the masses and the overestimation of one's own merits.
'The masses' a man says to himself, 'recognising their incapacity to govern on their own account, have elected me their chief. By that act they have publicly proclaimed their inferiority and my superiority. Among this crowd of men, recognising hardly any equals of myself, I am alone capable of directing public affairs. The people have need of me; they cannot do without my services, while I, on the contrary, can get along all right by myself; they, therefore, must obey me for their own security, and in condescending to obey them, I am doing them a good turn.'3
It is not only the Marxists who have found themselves repeatedly betrayed by leaders and leaderships. Wherever the cult of leadership has become entrenched, disaster has ensued. Sometimes leaders have overestimated their power and have embarked on catastrophic wars, which they have lost to the ultimate advantage of the Americans (Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein). Sometimes, enticed by the American dollar and scared by American power, they have simply sold out on everything for which they purported to stand (Franco, Qadaffi). More usually they have simply proven incapable of staying in power and have been overthrown, eventually to the advantage of the Americans. (Argentina is the best example, giving us a delightful string of unstable leaders, culminating in Mr Bignone handing the country over to the New World Order , which promptly plunders it, not least through the activities of the International Monetary Fund. Latin America is full of such cases. Even the more stable regime of Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay, eventually bit the dust in 1989, being overthrown by those who performed the inevitable tinkering to guarantee the country's future loyalty to the New World Order. Countless other examples may be found in the history books.)
What is true of the leaders of nations is equally true of the leaders of political parties and political movements. Such organizations are easily infiltrated by agents of the Establishment, who render them ineffective in a variety of ways, not least by causing splits, by disrupting communications, by inducing supporters to commit unlawful acts for which they are subsequently arrested, or simply by creating a state of paralysis and inaction, which leads to disillusionment. Is it any wonder that Marxist parties and white nationalist parties alike throughout the world have such a lamentable history of splits? Is it any wonder that resistance has never made any headway? Is it any wonder that they have failed to make any inroads against the New World Order? Any organization that is reliant upon a single individual or a small group of individuals, is vulnerable to betrayal, sellouts, hijacking and disruption. And they happen as predictably as the setting of the sun.
Bakunin advocated a very different approach from the elite-led leadership vanguards and all-encompassing ideology of the Marxists and the dictators, and an approach from which we might learn much:
And the first word of this emancipation can be none other than 'Liberty', not that political, bourgeois liberty, so much approved and recommended as a preliminary object of conquest by Marx and his adherents, but the great human liberty, which, destroying all the dogmatic, metaphysical, political and juridical fetters by which everybody to-day is loaded down, will give to everybody, collectivities as well as individuals, full autonomy in their activities and their development, delivered once and for all from all inspectors, directors and guardians.
The second word of this emancipation is solidarity, not the Marxian solidarity from above downwards by some government or other, either by ruse or by force, on the masses of the people; not that solidarity of all which is the negation of the liberty of each, and which by that very fact becomes a falsehood, a fiction, having slavery as the reality behind it; but that solidarity which is on the contrary the confirmation and the realisation of every liberty, having its origin not in any political law whatsoever, but in the inherent collective nature of man, in virtue of which no man is free if all the men who surround him and who exercise the least influence, direct or indirect, on his life are not so equally. This truth is to be found magnificently expressed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man drafted by Robespierre, and which proclaims that the slavery of the least of men is the slavery of all.
The solidarity which we ask, far from being the result of any artificial or authoritarian organisation whatsoever, can only be the spontaneous product of social life, economic as well as moral; the result of the free federation of common interests, aspirations and tendencies.4

2. A CASE STUDY: THE SELF-STYLED 'LEADER' OF THE NATIONAL-ANARCHISTS

2.1 Casting out the beam from our own eye
How can we national-anarchists credibly contribute anything of value to the question of leadership when we ourselves have in our midst an individual who is spoken of as our 'leader' and who is, as leaders generally tend to be, busy delivering us into the hands of the enemy? I assert that if we are to have any credibility whatsoever on this issue or on any other issue we must give a firm 'no' to Troy Southgate and all others who would set themselves up as our leaders. We must not hesitate to expose Southgate to the world for the servant of the Establishment that he has (knowingly or unwittingly) become, and to replace him not with another leader or a group of leaders, but rather with new forms of leaderless politics.
The purpose of the first part of this article will be to illustrate the dangers of 'leaders' and 'leadership', and hence the case for doing away with these things as far as possible, by showing how the self-styled 'leader of the national-anarchists' has become a dangerous clown. The article will go on to argue that national-anarchism has no place for such buffoonish leaders, or any leaders at all, and that it needs to evolve techniques of leaderless activism if it is to avoid the dangers posed by such traitors. It will then discuss how leaderless activism can progress to community building.
In November 2003, Southgate launched a savage attack on us. This was no surprise -- relations with him had been poisonous for some time. The most notable thing about Southgate's attack was not its content (which consisted of a series of non sequiturs followed by an admission that he had no evidence whatsoever for his principal allegation) but rather that, within days, it was reproduced on the Website of Kenneth McVay, a Canadian 'anti-hate-speech activist' with close connections to B'nai Brith and the security forces (we discuss McVay further below).5
Our doubts about Southgate had been increasing since early in 2003. The following sections will reveal why. Our discussion of the 'leadership' of this man will then be followed by a discussion of the alternative to his approach: leaderless politics.


2.2 The unreliability of our 'leader'
Our doubts about Southgate, this self-appointed 'leader' of the national-anarchist movement, first arose in connection with the manner in which he single-handedly destroyed our magazine, Voice of the Resistance. This journal was a genuine attempt to take national-anarchist ideas beyond the Internet and to gain publicity for them by circulating copies to individuals in mainstream politics, academia and other opinion-forming circles. The idea was that the publication would be the journal of the national-anarchist movement as a whole, and that my function would be simply to finance, edit and publish it. Southgate offered to publicize the journal on the autarky.rosenoire Web site and in the national-anarchist online discussion group and, indeed, did this for a short while. We were somewhat amazed, however, to find that he produced no articles for the journal and did not contribute to it in any other way, apart from assenting to our reproducing an article that he had written for another forum. Indeed, he did not even subscribe. His 'excuse' for failing to subscribe was that he didn't have enough time or money. This looked very hollow indeed in the light of his subsequent boasts in his Internet discussion group of numerous trips abroad to sample the delights of foreign beers and, indeed, his willingness to pay for his own rather expensive train ticket to travel a considerable distance across England to meet me (the meeting never took place). In any event, the upshot of it was that we were left to do most of the work ourselves, with a little help from other sympathetic comrades. This was when we first began to sense that something was seriously wrong in the world of national-anarchism.
We invested much time and not a little money in the Voice of the Resistance project. After a shaky start (caused, among other things, by mail mysteriously disappearing before reaching our mail forwarding service, the security services being at the top of our list of suspected culprits) Voice of the Resistance managed to attract a reasonable number of subscribers, was breaking even, and was beginning to look like a potentially valuable asset for the national-anarchist movement. Suddenly, and without any consultation or explanation, Southgate discontinued the entire autarky.rosenoire Web site -- including the Voice of the Resistance section. Given our difficulties with the postal service, this meant that it was almost impossible for new people to subscribe! At this point, without any consultation whatsoever, Southgate unilaterally announced that he was going to produce his own printed publication, Terra Firma. Given the difficulties that Voice of the Resistance had experienced in finding contributors it was plain that there would not be sufficient material to support two magazines, which, of course, would also compete for subscriptions. As Southgate was clearly intent on going ahead with his project and was not prepared seriously to negotiate, Voice of the Resistance had to cease publication -- the time, effort and money that had been invested in the project were wasted, and substantial expenses were incurred in refunding our subscribers their money and in sunk costs. Of course, Southgate's Terra Firma project (like most of his projects) was a resounding flop and (as of January 2005) has apparently still not seen the light of day, except in the form of a mediocre and rarely frequented Web site.
When I expressed my annoyance to Southgate he apologized. I accepted the apology in good faith, noting, however, that there was no offer to compensate me for the expenses that I had incurred as a result of Southgate's apparent negligence.
Voice of the Resistance is not the only radical publication to have been sabotaged by Southgate. He did similar things to several National Front (NF) and ITP-aligned publications earlier in his career (in his incarnation as a white nationalist -- see below).
It was at this point that the thought crossed my mind that Southgate might, in fact, be working for the security services; that his entire project might be designed to attract radicals to a single Internet discussion group where their identities could be logged and traced, where they could be encouraged to engage in interminable 'discussions' in which they would reveal personal details about themselves, and where they could be encouraged to engage in a variety of useless activities with the aim of demoralizing them and turning them away from radical activity. In this regard we had noted that Southgate had taken little action to encourage the growth of the national-anarchist project and, indeed, seemed to be actively trying to dampen any sign of enthusiasm that we showed, for example by describing the entire project as 'escapism', and by refusing to accept subscription payments from me on the grounds that he was winding down the National Revolutionary Faction anyway. We said nothing and rejoined the 'team', determined to watch and learn more.
In the months that followed I limited my contribution to participation in the national-anarchist e-group and to the creation of the nationalanarchist.com Web site.
I became aware that I was being subjected to intense flattery from certain quarters. One of these individuals was apparently one Jeremy Wilcox, from time to time a close associate of Southgate. Wilcox made me suspicious from the outset because of the obsequious and insincere nature of his flattery. He praised my political writings to the high heavens, yet it quickly became very clear that he had not bothered to read them in any depth. Something else didn't quite fit either. Wilcox adopted the persona of a rather stuffy, old-fashioned Christian Identity supporter. He regularly spoke out disapprovingly of the esoteric religious material on certain other national-anarchist Web sites and spoke affectionately of certain Christian 'gals' who assisted him with his own Web site. The Web site he ran was called 'FolkandFaith' -- although its content had negligible Christian content at the time, which might seem unusual given the tendency of most Christians to preach at every possible opportunity. But the really interesting thing about Wilcox was this. I had also noticed that he ran an e-mail account using the name 'G G Allin'. G G Allin is not a well-known figure and presumably Wilcox had assumed that neither I nor anyone else would notice that Allin was a 'rock singer' whose performance involved defecation and sex acts on stage, who spent several months in prison for an unpleasant assault on a woman, and who wrote, while in prison: 'The Jesus Christ they preach about in the Bible is a phoney imposter -- just a crutch for the cripples to lean on. F*ck that weak sh*t! I am the man to deal with. I created myself inside the womb from the fires of Hell. There are no separations between Jesus Christ, God and the Devil, because I am all of them' (asterisks added to protect children who might stumble upon this article). The titles of his songs included such things as 'I'm Gonna Rape You' and 'C*nt Sucking Cannibal'. Hardly the stuff one might expect from the rather stuffy Christian Identity FolkandFaith persona portrayed by Wilcox elsewhere. It might also be mentioned that Wilcox repeatedly referred laughingly to a rather crude joke that I had once made about a goat. It was not a particularly good or funny joke and I would have thought it odd had Wilcox referred to it even twice, but it surfaced and resurfaced, time and time again. I suspected that Wilcox was not being entirely honest with the world about his religious sympathies or, indeed, much else. (We shall have more to say about Satanism and its connection with Southgate later . . .)
Nevertheless, I played along with Wilcox. However, in September 2003 he suddenly launched a vicious and unprovoked written attack on me, misrepresenting my views on national-anarchism and making several demonstrably false statements against me. Southgate has argued that Wilcox merely 'misread' my words, yet Wilcox told three separate untruths and all in an extremely aggressive and uncomradely way:


he mocked and clearly and publicly misrepresented the notion of building isolated communities;
he alleged that I had said that one Rowan Berkeley was a FBI agent when I had said no such thing and do not believe that he is any such thing;
he told an outright untruth about the number of subscribers that Voice of the Resistance had generated, again in a mocking and uncomradely way.
When I protested about these lies, our nationalanarchist.com Web site was summarily expelled from the Web ring that had been administered by Wilcox but which included the principal Web sites aligned to Southgate. This was not, in itself, a great loss as we received very few hits from that source, about 0.1% of our total. What was interesting was the reaction of Troy Southgate.
In the event of a dispute between the owners of what appeared to be two important pro-national-anarchist Web sites one might have thought that the self-appointed 'leader' of the movement would have intervened to mediate. In the event he said nothing in public. In private he circulated an instruction to a few of his closest supporters (we know that it did not go far) urging them to support Wilcox against us.
We were given no reason for this behaviour. Indeed, we were not even formally told of the action that had been taken against us. It seemed that the entire strategy was intended to demoralize us and to turn us away from national-anarchism. And, of course, this would be precisely the strategy that would be employed by those who felt that we had come too close to something that they wanted to hide. Or those who felt that we were converting something that had been intended to protect the Establishment into something that was becoming dangerous to the Establishment. The hope was clearly that we would slink off into the night.
We have not done so. We will not do so.
Numerous provocations followed, many of a minor nature. We will mention but two such provocations.
First, Southgate had given us a clear written assurance that if we linked nationalanarchist.com to his own Web site then he would put a return link to us on his site. This return link suddenly disappeared in flagrant violation of Southgate's agreement with us. We have now retaliated by eliminating all links to pro-Southgate sites.
Second, it was brought to our attention by a comrade that, on 25 September 2003, Michael Lujan, an associate of Southgate, had purchased a Web domain name very similar to nationalanarchist.com. After a letter to Lujan about this elicited no response whatsoever it appeared to us that moves were afoot to cybersquat. We immediately took steps to secure ownership of the principal domain names similar to ours, together with domain names similar to sites operated by Lujan and Wilcox. Lujan's site was eventually used for cybersquatting on our domain; we retaliated by cybersquatting on domains owned by Lujan and Wilcox for one year.
In short, then, our relationship with Southgate has been characterized by one betrayal from him after another over a long period. He has sabotaged publications, he has flagrantly broken agreements, his associates have apparently sought to sabotage our Web site, he has conspired against us. As we shall see, this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to our problems with this fellow.

2.3 The inconsistency of our 'leader'
Southgate seems to find it difficult to hold any particular view about anything for a long period of time, either in the sphere of religion, in politics, or in personal political relationships. One moment he says one thing; the next moment he says exactly the opposite. Thus, for example, in his article entitled ‘National-anarchism: beyond the fascism of the right and the dogmatism of the left’ he espouses a view with which we could strongly identify:

We firmly believe in political, social and economic decentralisation. In other words, we wish to see a positive downward trend whereby all bureaucratic concepts such as the UN, NATO, the EU, the World Bank and even nation-states like England and Germany are eradicated and consequently replaced by autonomous village-communities.6
However, by autumn 2003 we see a very different Southgate. In an article entitled ‘Enemy within: Hizb-ut Tahrir, Al-Muhajiroun and the growing threat of Asian colonization’ he writes the following:
Islamic militants have no time for the traditional culture and heritage of the British Isles and clearly intend to exert their own alien rule (al-Khilafah) over the country as a whole. As another party representative said on a Talk Sport phone-in several years ago, the HUT 'will not rest until the green flag of Islam is fluttering over every town hall in England'.
If these words don't make every full-blooded Englishman, Irishman, Scotsman and Welshman sit up and take notice then what possible hope is there of ever preventing these fanatics from stealing our country beneath our very noses? 7
Our country? But did not the earlier article espouse the abolition of nation-states, favouring their replacement with autonomous communities? Is he in favour of English nationalism or national-anarchism? The truth is that he fluctuates between the two as the mood takes him. (Let us not forget that before the ‘National-anarchists’ were the National Revolutionary Faction, they were called the English Nationalist Movement -- before that Southgate was in the ITP and before that the NF. Before that, he claims, he supported the Labour Party.) If he were a national-anarchist then he would view the Union flag fluttering over the town halls of England as nothing more than a mere proxy for the stars and stripes and would welcome at least some green flags as a sign of progress in the struggle against America’s New World Order. He would regard ‘England’ and all existing nation-states as lost causes. He would regard radical Islam as a potentially powerful ally in the fight against American-inspired globalism and imperialism.
We might add that Southgate’s new-found hostility to radical Islam espoused in the ‘Enemy within’ article is itself a radical u-turn. Only two years earlier Southgate had taken a very different position on Islam: ‘The NRF supports Islam from the perspective that many of its adherents are vigorously opposed to International Zionism, although those groups which act as mere pressure-valves for opponents of immigration will achieve very little if they do not attempt to awaken a spiritual consciousness within their own people.’8 Southgate has informed us that in the past he actually attended a mosque at which Hizb ut-Tahrir was active and, further, that he contacted al-Muhajiroun in attempts to form contacts with the radical Islamic world. Both organizations, hardly surprisingly, appear to have rebuffed him and much of the ‘Enemy within’ article can be understood in terms of sour grapes from Southgate at his apparent inability to make headway in forming ties with radical Muslims.
Southgate’s views on the nation-state and Islam are, of course, not the only example of his ‘butterfly mind’ -- it seems that he is unable to hold a consistent position on other matters concerning fundamental beliefs for long. The ITP has launched a bitter attack on Southgate9 in which it also notes his rapid (apparent) jump from Catholicism to Odinism, commenting on what it views as his bizarre and inconsistent behaviour and, more to the point, to its demoralizing effect on some of his former supporters. Nor is this the only example it gives:
We said that Mr Southgate was not principled. Why? Because it is a fact. Firstly, he was agitating amongst Catholics for their support, and that is why The English Alternative was originally called The Crusader. When they did not respond, they were denounced as 'an apathetic Catholic bourgeoisie' . . .
Having failed with the Catholics, and although having taken a strongly 'anti-Nazi' line for years, Mr Southgate, in the quest to become 'Leader' (of what does not seem to be too important), transformed himself into a defender of 'National Socialist orthodoxy'. Whether this conviction is any deeper than his 'Catholicism' is open to question, but if he does not succeed in becoming 'Leader' of the NS-inclined, it is only a matter of time before they are denounced as 'reactionary' in his time-honoured fashion.

What about Southgate's position on that most fundamental of national-anarchist principles -- a scepticism towards the 'Left'/'Right' distinction in politics? In 2002 he was publishing articles titled 'National-anarchism: beyond the fascism of the right and the dogmatism of the left' and rejecting the left/right distinction like a good national-anarchist. However, in January 2005 he was announcing the formation of yet another of his little organizations -- something called the 'British New Right'.
So, dear reader, what are we to make of this wonderful 'leader' of ours? First he tells us he's a Catholic, then he's an Odinist. First he's attending mosques and trying to make contact with Islamic fundamentalists, then he's cursing these same people as 'fanatics'. First he tells us that he's all for the 'eradication' of nation-states 'like England' and then he's telling us how 'every full-blooded Englishman' should 'sit up and take notice' because the Islamic fundamentalists are 'stealing our country'. First he tells us that he opposes Nazism, then he comes out in favour of 'National-Socialist orthodoxy'. First he tells us that he's beyond left and right in politics, then he participates in the formation of an organization called the British New Right. Can anyone truly be blamed for being just the tiniest bit suspicious about this chap's motives? Can anyone truly be blamed for not trusting him an inch? And yet there are those who call themselves national-anarchists who do trust him and look to him as a leader! Would we not be doing them a disservice by remaining silent on the Southgate question?

2.4 Is he for 'fascism' or against it?
I do not personally much care whether Southgate is a secret ‘fascist’ or not. ‘Fascists’, when they are at their best, can create a lot of problems for the Establishment and thus are by no means automatically enemies of national-anarchism (or any other intelligent brand of anarchism -- it was, after all, the Falangist Francisco Franco who unwittingly gave orthodox anarchism its best ever shot at gaining control of territory in the 1930s). They can also radicalize people admirably. However, if a man purports to be the ‘leader’ of the national-anarchists, and claims repeatedly that he is ‘certainly not’ a fascist, it would be helpful for the national-anarchist movement as a whole to have some clarity about whether he is, in fact, telling the truth. That it is by no means clear even to national-anarchists whether Southgate is telling the truth when he informs the world that he is ‘certainly not’ a fascist makes it very difficult for those of us who are trying to convince a sceptical world that national-anarchists are, in fact, offering something new and different from the fare served by the Adolf and Benito show during the last century.
Southgate has been unable convincingly to rid himself of a certain ‘far right’ fetishism. His use of symbolism such as the sunwheel, his reverence for individuals such as Codreanu and Evola, his involvement with organizations with names such as ‘The Green Shirts’, and other similar traits, all give ammunition to those who wish to smear national-anarchism as a ‘far-right’ faction. Some of his associates and many of his ideas also frequently betray a ‘far-right’ interest. In our writing On a decisive break with 'far-right' ideology,10 we have argued that much could be gained by making a clear and sincere ideological break with the ‘far right’, but co-operating with them on a pragmatic basis when it is in our interest to form a common front with them against the Establishment (as would be the case with the ‘far left’, Islamists, Christians and anyone else). Insofar as Southgate seems incapable of breaking convincingly with the ‘far right’ he simply invites all the practical and theoretical problems of which we warned in that writing.
In this regard, Southgate’s protests that he is not a fascist received a withering response from one (apparently pro-fascist!) post to Southgate’s national-anarchist discussion group on 3 August 2003. The poster began by listing the ‘thinkers’ cited on Southgate’s Web page as being ‘for discussion’ in the group:11


Let's go through them:
Otto & Gregor Strasser (two of the left-wing of the NSDAP)
Pierre Drieu La Rochelle (famous French Nazi sympathiser and fascist;
executed by the Allies)
Karl Otto Paetel (proto-fascist German Conservative Revolutionary, if
I recall)
Frithjof Schuon (Traditionalist scholar who had an association with
the SS)
Ernst Junger (proto-fascist Conservative Revolutionary; big influence
on Nazi ideology)
Ernst Niekisch (National Bolshevik)
Schwaller de Lubicz (German racialist; don't know if he had a
connection to the NSDAP)
Francis Parker Yockey (the brilliant neofascist philosopher)
Mircea Eliade (Traditionalist, member of the fascist Iron Guard)
Otto Rahn (Traditionalist and member of the SS?)
Arthur Moeller van den Bruck (proto-fascist Conservative
Revolutionary)
Gabriele D'Annunzio (along with Mussolini, the founder of Italian
Fascism)
Walther Darre (NSDAP minister for the environment)
Corneliu Codreanu (premiere Romanian fascist)
Julius Evola (along with Yockey, one of the most important
ideologists of European neofascism)
What on earth do all these Nazis and fascists have to do with
National Anarchism? Better purge them from the homepage, or otherwise
people will accuse you of having jackboots and a uniform in your
closet.
But then, your own relationship with neofascism has always been
rather schiz-y. You put together a group called the European
Liberation Front (named after the group founded by Yockey), you're
mentioned in publications on British neofascism (the most recent I
read was Goodrick-Clarke's book) and everyone knows about your former
association with the neofascist National Front and International
Third Position (actually, that group is extreme conservative, not
fascist, but I digress). You founded a volkish hiking group called
the Greenshirts (hmm, wasn't that the name of Oein O'Duffy's Irish
fascist party?).
That may all be in the past - you're a National Anarchist now. But in
that case you should stop reading Evola and get rid of all those
Nazis and fascists from the homepage, and rigorously censor anything
fascistic which comes up for discussion here, and not just from me.
(Including references to all that neofascistic metal and rock music
everyone - including yourself - talks about here all the time). You
can't have it both ways.
2.5 Imperialist too?
Southgate has taken to espousing a brand of 'national-anarchism' that appears to us to be imperialistic and dangerous. In a posting to an Internet discussion group on 7 October 2003, Southgate put forth the following view:

I have often used the words "decentralised imperium" to describe a network of self-contained units within a larger framework, thus creating a greater principle of unity. I think it's complimentary [sic] to both tribe and "empire". Rather like the unity which appears in Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings". In other words, where various tribes come together to maintain their liberty in the face of a globalist oppressor.12
We note that in the past Southgate has also offered qualified support for ‘anarcho-monarchism’, a concept that seems surprisingly similar. The danger inherent in this approach should be obvious with a moment’s thought. The American New World Order has historically been more than willing to use bribes and threats to encourage small countries to do its bidding. Once a ‘network of self-contained units’ becomes an acceptable approach it is clear that a viable Establishment strategy would be to ‘persuade’ the leaders of weaker or less reliable communities to join together into a federation that could then be subverted centrally. A parallel might be drawn with the European Union, whereby nation states were initially invited to join an ‘economic club’ (the Common Market) to further their commercial interests. Once this had been done, this ‘economic club’ subsequently metamorphosed into a superstate and the members were gradually encouraged to sacrifice their independence to this superstate, which has consistently acted in the interests of international capital and against national independence. In short, it became an exercise in national suicide, centralization and globalization. One of the strengths of the national-anarchist idea as we support it is that by decentralizing to remote, isolated, fiercely autonomous communities one can preserve valued lifestyles in the face of a ubiquitous globalizing imperialism -- one could turn one’s back on the filthy outside world of American-style capitalism with all its snares and traps and inducements and duplicity. Southgate’s ‘decentralized imperium’ has nothing to do with this approach. It is simply the first step on the slippery slope back to treachery and imperialism.
Or an attempt by the state to gather information on more statist-minded anti-Establishment activists . . .

2.6 The hidden agenda
It is difficult to associate with the Southgate clique for more than a few days without gaining the distinct feeling that it has a hidden agenda. The strange pseudonyms adopted by some of the group’s adherents (Arktos, Anarktika, Archonis . . .); Southgate's numerous apparent pseudonyms (including, but by no means limited to, Michael Phillips, Les Cotton, Peter White, Charles Pottins and Arktos); the fact that absolutely everyone who is anyone appears to have read and been awed by the works of Julius Evola (a mediocre purveyor of just-so stories, whom they revere almost as a guru); the intense interest in esoteric religions; the interest in certain specific types of music; the neo-fascist fetishism -- these all combine to give one a sense that far more is going on than meets the eye. One’s unease grows when one encounters the clique’s bumbling attempts to use psychological tricks such as flattery -- tricks that certainly led me to suspect that moves were afoot to manipulate myself and others towards hidden goals. Indeed, Southgate has been quite open about the manipulative nature of his project (the degree of openness on this point perhaps suggesting a mouth that is larger than the accompanying brain):

Single out those individuals who may be more sympathetic towards National-Anarchist ideas and start to work on them. Slowly, quietly and with a degree of subtlety. Do not arouse suspicion, make friends with those concerned and arrange to meet him or her outside of the organisation's own events. Make them part of our group without them even knowing who we are. Flatter them, buy them drinks, make them feel welcome, but keep your politics to yourselves. Let some more time elapse and then start to increase the heat even more. Start to criticise the target organisation, perhaps you can pick out something which the membership is clearly not happy with. Do this within your own group. Get one of our people, maybe even two, to argue against you so that no suspicion is aroused. Don't let the person or people you are working on think that you are in league with one another, but make sure that your 'opponents' eventually capitulate and come over to your side of the argument.13

All of these considerations plus Southgate’s repeated rapid changes of direction invite suspicion that he has a hidden agenda -- that his ‘national-anarchism’ is insincere and that he is merely attempting to use it as a front for something else.
The question then arises of ‘what?’ The ITP comes close to making an allegation of Satanism. Satanism and its Allies,14 although not a large work, contains a good deal of material suggesting that there has been, over a long period of time, an attempt by Satanists to infiltrate the ‘nationalist movement’ (the term ‘nationalist movement’ here referring to the organized white ‘far right’). (It also points out that there have been attempts by the security services to penetrate and use the Satanist movement over a long period of time -- the significance of this point will become clearer shortly.) It traces this attempt by the Satanists to infiltrate nationalism back to the doings of Aleister Crowley at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth and shows varying degrees of association between the Occult and ‘right-wing’ white nationalist individuals and groups in subsequent years. The underlying argument need not concern us here. What is of interest is that the book associates Southgate with this infiltration attempt. The ITP has published additional material on the Satanist connections of Southgate on its Web site at http://web.archive.org/web/2005021302104...tupdt.html (accessed 4 May 2004).
Southgate has denied being a Satanist, claiming instead that he is an Odinist. Satanism and its Allies has an answer for this line of argument: ‘Of course, a pagan is not necessarily a Satanist, but it is remarkable . . . how many Satanists regard Paganism and Satanism as interchangeable terms, or the move from Paganism to Satanism as the most logical of processes.’ As the ITP also notes, Southgate's move from Roman Catholicism even to Odinism is quite a jump by any standards!
What evidence do the Third Positionists have about Southgate’s alleged connections with Satanism? Disappointingly, perhaps, Satanism and its Allies does not give much in the way of hard evidence, devoting only a few pages to Southgate’s doings (mostly concerned with attacking him personally) -- although I am aware that moves have been afoot to update the book:


Southgate's association with Christian Bouchet (this association appears to be principally through the European Liberation Front). According to Satanism and its Allies, Bouchet had told the ITP's Derek Holland that he was an admirer of Crowley. It also alleges that Bouchet was 'known in France for shopping people to the police'. I must emphasize immediately that I have no evidence whatsoever to support either of these statements made against Bouchet by the ITP, which I merely report as part of the ITP case against Southgate.
Southgate's interview in Wotan, the monthly journal of the Charlemagne Hammer Skinheads. According to the ITP this has a group of Satanists active in it. Its English section, they say, is run by Herve Guttuso who, they claim, is associated with Order of the Nine Angels, being close to its founder, David Myatt. This Satanic group, they claim, is called the Sacred Order of the Emerald. The ITP claimed that members of the Sacred Order were 'being held by French police for digging up and mutilating the corpse of a 77 year old woman. An inverted cross was driven through her body . . . and her eyes were gouged out.'
Production of a magazine called Tribal Resonance -- the first issue has a gig review of Black Sabbath, positively mentioning an American Black Metal group (Fear Factory) and what the book terms a ‘Scandinavian Satanist group’ (Burzum) and refers positively to various other Satanistically inclined persons and groups.

We can perhaps add a little more evidence that appears, at first glance, to support the ITP’s line on this point.
When attempting to assess a man, much can be learned from those with whom he associates. His ‘national-anarchist’ Web site was, until February 2004, hosted as a subdomain of a larger site -- Michael Lujan’s Synthesis site -- which concentrates on, inter alia, ‘occulture’ and contains material from self-confessed Satanists (as well as numerous articles from Southgate, one of which is a review of ‘Melek-Tha -- "De Magia Naturali Daemonica"’, and a great deal of creepy, Satanic-looking artwork). Various posts by Southgate to the Rose-Noire Internet discussion group display a knowledge of Satanic matters that would be quite remarkable in someone who did not take a great interest in these matters, and it is by no means clear why Southgate should take an interest in these matters if he does not, in fact, subscribe to this religion. Thus, for instance, in a post made on 15 October 2003, Southgate displays his interest in the doings of Satanist Aleister Crowley by telling us:

I've read a fair bit about The Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage over the last couple of years, but never come across anyone who has actually followed its precepts to the letter. Even Crowley, of course, decided to ignore the compulsory six months of solitude and remained in society whilst trying to do the various workings. If memory serves me right I think he was living at Chancery Lane during that period . . . 15
In a subsequent post to the same forum on the same day, Southgate tells us:
John Symonds' THE GREAT BEAST (Macdonald, 1971) is fairly ambiguous with regard to where Crowley was actually living whilst undertaking the Abra-Melin evocations. On page 23 we are told that Crowley leaves home and occupies a flat in Chancery Lane with the specific purpose of shunning his family and going 'into the wilderness' to perform the . Meanwhile, on pages 26 and 27 the author notes that Crwley prepared his oratory (or temple) at Boleskin House 'for the practice of Abra-Melin magic'. But we know that he did some of the evocations at Boleskin, of course, not least because of the effect they had on some of the residents . . .16
The effect of Halloween on Southgate might be likened to that of a full moon on a werewolf -- but worse! It prompts this 'serious political leader' to post 'poetry' to the Internet! This 'poetry' betrays a certain religious predisposition. This is a post made by Southgate to the Rose-Noire Yahoo! Internet group on 31 October 2003 under the heading 'Samhain':
Just a few simple lines that I've been toying around with for something I'm planning to do with my kids (with humble apologies to Will Shakespeare). Happy Samhain!
___________________________________________
"Eye of newt, and toe of frog"
In darkened wood through mist and fog
"Wool of bat, and tongue of dog"
Round yellow flame and burning log
"Adder's fork, and blind-worm's sting"
Upon the wind our dead shall sing
"Lizard's leg, and owlet's wing"
Summer dies and Winter is King
"For a charm of powerful trouble"
Beasts shall pass through veil a-double
"Like a hell-broth boil and bubble"
Human waste reduced to rubble
"Double, double, toil and trouble"
Life renewed in Samhuinn's stubble
"Fire burn, and cauldron bubble"
Nature's forces shall redouble
We can only imagine what Southgate was planning to do with his 'kids' and what precisely is meant by 'Human waste reduced to rubble'. What do such lines have to do with Odinism? What does such juvenile drivel have to do with national-anarchism?
We find reviews by Southgate of Evola posted on a Usenet Satanist group, alt.satanism.17 Likewise, we find an advertisement for the Web site of Michael Lujan, who is, as we have seen, a close associate of Southgate, posted to the alt.satanism newsgroup.18
More interesting still are some of the posts about Southgate that appear in the world of Satanism on Usenet. One of the most fascinating Usenet threads appeared in January 2003:
From: "Draco The Elder" <webZweSpin@ya.net>
Newsgroups: alt.magick,alt.tarot,alt.slack
Subject: Russian Alchemy, A Plowed Down_COLD WAR_Berlin Wall, China To Russian To German To French Diplomacy, And Three Out Of Four Fire! "Heads" Who Kept Oath in The Great Work...
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:15:36 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <b0m55d02tqe@enews1.newsguy.com>
Reply-To: "Draco The Elder" <webZweSpin@ya.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-160.newsdawg.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
...Bush is in limbo. We'll worry about him later.
Does anyone here know how I can get in touch with the woman who helped write
the article posted below?

I believe she is referred to by some as OX SINISTRA or even LEPER. I wish to
congratulate her and offer her my friendship.

http://english.pravda.ru/columnists/2002...29483.html

Remember:

" DEATH IS JUST A PART OF KILLING."
Rev. Nu Monet, High Priest
of
The Church of Kali(Reformed)

The Pravda link referred to an article by Southgate entitled ‘Julius Evola a radical traditionalist’. Clearly the poster felt that the article was not written by Southgate alone but rather with the assistance of a woman who is acting as a close partner and has a Satanist connection. A follow-up post in alt.magick is equally fascinating:
From: glass@panix.com (Robert Scott Martin)
Newsgroups: alt.magick,alt.tarot,alt.slack
Subject: Re: Russian Alchemy, A Plowed Down_COLD WAR_Berlin Wall, China To Russian To German To French Diplomacy, And Three Out Of Four Fire! "Heads" Who Kept Oath in The Great Work...
Date: 22 Jan 2003 10:00:48 -0500
Organization: Bombay Dry
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <b0mbn0$2pc$1@panix2.panix.com>
References: <b0m55d02tqe@enews1.newsguy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com
X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1043247648 2630 166.84.1.2 (22 Jan 2003 15:00:48 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:00:48 +0000 (UTC)
In article <b0m55d02tqe@enews1.newsguy.com>,
Draco The Elder <webZweSpin@ya.net> wrote:
>Does anyone here know how I can get in touch with the woman who helped write
>the article posted below?

>http://english.pravda.ru/columnists/2002...29483.html
Troy Southgate's working with a partner? Interesting. You can probably
reach her through him if needed.

However, the whole Evola vibe's getting fairly big (especially in Russia),
so there are other ways to tap that particular spring if the Southgate
party doesn't work out.

Who wrote the first of these two items? Some evidence is provided in another post made at roughly the same time:
From: AINSUPH@aol.com (AINSUPH)
Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
Subject: Re: I just don't know
Date: 14 Jan 2003 15:11:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <a494eb51.0301141511.1fdc9f7b@posting.google.com>
References: <avut9e0duj@enews1.newsguy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.145.95.205
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1042585895 13069 127.0.0.1 (14 Jan 2003 23:11:35 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Jan 2003 23:11:35 GMT
Dear JASON DEAN SCOTT:

I followed back through your threads of webZewSpin@ya.net to the point
that you signed yourself as iao11@msn.com, and then back through
further threads where you signed yourself in alt.freemasonry as JASON
DEAN SCOTT. I was just wondering why you abandoned your handle as
JASON DEAN SCOTT and started calling yourself
"Draco The Elder" <webZweSpin@ya.net>. It seems that your entire
style of writing, what newsgroups you post in, etc. etc. retain a
certain constancy through your transition from JASON DEAN SCOTT to
"Draco The Elder", although, in the latter rendition, you have
occasionally appeared with an uncertain gender identification. Is it
possible that you are undergoing a sex change operation, and hence,
the new moniker. If so, may I suggest that you are making a mistake.

You should join regular Freemasonry BEFORE undergoing a sex change
operation, then have the operation, whereupon you will become a
REGULAR FEMALE FREEMASON!!!

AIN

Scott’s posts have shown a national-anarchist tendency in the past. He is a real person and in 1999 was residing in Houston, Texas, as might be ascertained from his CV, which he conveniently posted to misc.jobs.resumes and houston.jobs.wanted in November 1999. It is thus reasonable to assume, given his knowledge of Ox Sinistra, that he is or was one of Southgate’s inner circle. A flavour of the man’s mentality might be gleaned from the following post:
From: "Jason Dean Scott" <iao11@msn.com>
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Truth
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:18:26 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <autm8702nia@enews1.newsguy.com>
Reply-To: "Jason Dean Scott" <iao11@msn.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-414.newsdawg.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
I can't believe each and everyone of you were involved in a conspiracy to either shut me up or kill me. I can't stomach it any more. Liars. Fuck y'all. I hope you all rot in the hell you created for yourselves. I spit on each and every one of you; and if you're Sicilian, you know what that means and what comes next.

Michael Lujan, one of Southgate's closest associates, appears to have been associated with the White Order of Thule and is known to have associated with Hendrik Moebus, who has boasted to the press of his former Satanist connections. Certainly, in 1998 Lujan was posting their agenda on Usenet:

Following Faustus' and Grimwald's agenda, The White Order's avowed aim is to put an occultic dimension into the US fascist and racist movements, many of which have adopted a corruption of Christianity called Identity, which declares the white race to be God's Chosen People, condemns the Jews as the children of Satan, and identifies Negroes as "beasts of the field." The White Order offers a substitute religion which it considers the "light" or Luciferic counterpart to the dark of Satan, considering Satan and Lucifer to be representative of two aspects of the cosmos. In organizational terms, then, The White Order is the light or Luciferic counterpart The Black Order's dark, or Satanic fascism. Both work symbiotically. However, as The White Order explains in its brochure Wherefore Satan? An Introduction to the Sinister Aspect of the White Order of Thule,
"We nevertheless acknowledge the importance, nay, the necessity, of giving voice and expression to the 'sinister', or darkside of our nature. ... While we do not profess to be a 'satanic' or 'sinister' order, we have previously acknowledged the dutiful place of what we call the Black Order...
The brochure goes on to acknowledge the potency of Satan as the leading symbolic rebel against Christianity. “Would it not benefit us to tap into the energy latent in such a symbolically, and therefore potentially, destructive symbol in order to aid the natural process that is birthing the New on the ashes of the Old?"
The White Order also acknowledges the place of Church of Satan founder Anton LaVey in giving popular expression to the complex ideas of the 'anti-Christ' philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche whom, we have seen, was a seminal influence on the birth of fascism, and who is a principal influence on the Faustian Satanism of the OSV. Finally, The White Order acknowledges Loki as the specifically Germanic personification of Satan.
Hence, the agenda of The White Order has taken its cue from its spiritual founders, the New Zealanders Faustus and Grimwald, to subvert and utilize Nazism and racism as a means of inaugurating a New Satanic Order upon the ruins of Judaeo-Christian morality, where compassion, humility and charity will be purged as the morality of the 'weak", as per the dictums of Nietzsche, Crowley, LaVey...19

One final piece of evidence supporting the hypothesis that Southgate might be working somewhat more closely with Satanists than is immediately apparent is the logo drawn up by Michael Lujan for national-anarchism. One notes the letters NA in front of a five-pointed star. Lujan has described it thus:

I deliberately chose purple because of its royal and aristocratic connotations, as being emblematic of the sovereign principle in general, which is embodied in the figure of the Anarch. It is also the 'synthesis,' if you will, of the colors red (heat/fire/sun) and blue (cold/ice/moon), thus indicative of the axis on which the polarities operate. The star is, of course, a traditional symbol of Man, and also points to the ethic contained in the phrase "per ardua ad astra"- "Through Struggle To The Stars".
A cynic might also point out that another, simpler interpretation could be applied to the logo: national-anarchism as a front for Satanism. It should be noted that Southgate’s NRF logo was remarkably similar, except there was a gun instead of the letters NA in front of the five-pointed star. A five-pointed star is not, in itself, a Satanist symbol, but as the ITP has pointed out, in this case it appears to be a disguised pentagram, which is.
Now national-anarchists appear to have no a priori reason to object to Southgate practising whatever strange religion he wishes. However, if he is merely using national-anarchism as a means to a further end -- namely to draw people into his own close circle and gradually bring them into Satanism -- then it is perhaps hardly grossly unreasonable of me to remark that he does not seem the ideal person to direct the national-anarchist movement. Where is he trying to lead the world: to national-anarchism or to Satanism?
In fact we shall shortly suggest that one possible answer is ‘neither’ and that a case can be made to suggest that he might have very different motives. Southgate certainly does have strong Satanist and pagan connections but there is some evidence to suggest that simply to dismiss his clique as a secret ‘Satanist front’ would be oversimplistic.
First, if Southgate's national-anarchist movement is supposed to be some sort of secret pagan or Satanist front organization one cannot help observe that it is hardly very secret. Indeed, it seems to positively delight in dropping hints of dark and occult connections at every possible opportunity, presumably to catch the eye of those with Satanist inclinations. In an interview with Wayne John Sturgeon, Southgate (presumably with an eye to the Odinist market) was quite open about his (supposed) religion when answering the question 'Do any religious or spiritual beliefs influence your political theory?':
The NRF is a neo-pagan or heathen organisation, although we do not adhere to any one form. In many ways, we consider religion to be a personal thing and our activists range from Chaos Magicians and Crowleyites through to followers of Mithras and the Norse pantheon. When I left the Catholic Church I became attracted to Odinism, viewing this as the most genuine expression of European spirituality, culture and identity. I am particularly heartened by the growth of organisations such as the Odinic Rite and the Tribe of the Wulfings, both of which are very loyal to the gods of the Northern Tradition. At the same time, however, I agree with Traditionalist thinkers like Rene Guenon and Julius Evola in that most religions appear to contain fragments of a hidden albeit distinct and fundamental truth. In fact my investigations within this field of study are still ongoing. Other interests of mine include the history of the Thule Society and Armanenorden, and to some extent I have also studied the fascinating and scholarly works of highly respected runologists like Guido von List and Occultists such as Maria Karl Wiligut. I also take an interest in Peter Carroll and the I.O.T., polar symbolism [see Arktos by Jocelyn Godwin], the work of Miguel Serrano, Synarchy and Saint-Yves d’Alveydre, and the lost cities and myths of Agartha, Shambhallah and Atlantis.20
(By describing the old NRF as a 'neo-pagan or heathen organisation' Southgate clearly places the religious character of the organization foremost. Lujan has taken a similar line on his Web site, in declaring 'National-Anarchism is the political weltanschauung -- or, perhaps, scalpel blade -- of the Circle de la Rose Noire.')
Second, while Southgate is certainly working with pagans and Satanists, there is strong evidence that he may well be playing a far darker game in which the pagans and Satanists, far from being the villains of the piece, could well be the intended victims. Life is, in short, both more complicated and simpler than it might at first appear. This will emerge in the following sections.