David Michael has alienated his fellow "national anarchists" at the
yahoo group of that name.

Here's a post by Troy Southgate, owner of the group and, according to
Michael, a founder of National Anarchism.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/National-Anarchist/message/26659

>From arktos-anarch@h... Sun Nov 30 03:03:53 2003
Return-Path: 
X-Sender: arktos-anarch@h...
X-Apparently-To: National-Anarchist@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 82933 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2003
11:03:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2003 11:03:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO gr-outsmtp1.homechoice.co.uk)
(81.1.113.35)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Nov 2003 11:03:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 13755 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2003
11:01:45 -0000
Received: from 81-1-114-73.homechoice.co.uk (HELO homechoice)
(81.1.114.73)
by 81-1-113-35.homechoice.co.uk with SMTP; 30 Nov 2003 11:01:45 -0000
Message-ID: <009b01c3b731$8702e420$49720151@homechoice>
To: 
References: 
Subject: DAVID MICHAEL
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:02:53 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 81.1.113.35
From: "Troy Southgate" 
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=90303497
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Darksphere,

The point is - and I've just read David's reply - we are simply not
prepared to work with somebody who uses such abusive and patronising
language towards people who share many of the same opinions. Just look
at the language he used in his most recent message, about being 'a
good boy' (as though he really is occupying the moral high ground,
rather than accepting that he's the very individual who initiated all
this nonsense in the first place). As for the fact that he tried to
explain away this behaviour by suggesting that it was nothing more
than a bad-tempered blip, that's a blatant lie. It went on far longer
than one night and on more than one occasion. And FNF did not lie,
either. David called him a liar after he misinterpreted some of the
comments made on David's website. There is a vast difference between
calculated deceit and simple misinterpretation. I've been involved in
this game for eighteen years and have never seen anybody turn on his
own kind in such a childish and unprovoked manner. Unless, of course,
they are really out to create division and discord. FNF was a fervent
supporter of David's work and went out of his way to help David on
many occasions. In return, David called him a 'liar' and stated
explicitly that FNF was 'no comrade' of his. If this is an example of
David's willingness to create an 'alliance formation' then God help
us. It's hardly surprising that FNF took him out of the webring,
either. Furthermore, we are not prepared to accept David's 'olive
branch' so he can wipe that plastic smile off his face and shove it up
his own arse for all I care. It may as well be a poisoned chalice. And
do people really believe that Michael Lujan was launching an 'attack'
on David's website simply by purchasing a domain under the name of
National-Anarchism? A name, remember, that we were using before
anybody had even heard of David Michael. I think David's extensive
list of N-A domains speaks for itself. He is a very frightened and
determined man. Furthermore, whilst I have no evidence that David has
deliberately set out to disrupt National-Anarchism, his actions
resemble those of an agent-provocateur and I am banning him from this
list before he causes any more trouble. In my opinion, and that of
countless others in this forum, this action is well overdue. I don't
like having to do this, but his presence is having a detrimental
effect and I won't risk that for anyone.

Now to deal with the ideological nature of David's
'national-anarchism'. As many people are aware, I absolutely detest
the kind of dogmatism espoused by Marxists, Trotskyists and their
pseudo-anarchist bedfellows. So therefore it is not my intention to
debate the precise nature of Anarchism that should be applied in
National-Anarchist communities at all, but to point out the simple
fact that David's seven points (all of which I happen to agree with)
do not even mention Anarchism. In other words, what makes David's
'national-anarchism' Anarchist in the first place? The answer is
simple. Nothing. Contrary to what David says, it's not about 'true
socialism' or 'true anarchism', it's about the absence of Anarchism
altogether. David has not evolved towards Anarchist ideas in the way
that the NRF was influenced by Richard Hunt and Alternative Green, he
simply fell out with his former pals in the BNP and then began calling
himself a 'National-Anarchist'. He's simply trying a different tactic.
The fact that he now admits to being 'closely involved' with the WNP -
which openly supports the police and the Establishment and which many
people believe is a State operation to disrupt the equally reactionary
BNP - also speaks for itself. Finally, David's remarks about us
creating 'significant additional requirements' for National-Anarchism
are also incorrect. There are thousands of anarchistic variants out
there, but the fact that National-Anarchism came about was due to the
racial separaist stance of its adherents. We have no problem with
other forms of anarchism or other decentralists, we just want to
stress that National-Anarchism is an essential racialist phenomenon.
That's what makes it different. Anarchism sui generis, perhaps, but
Anarchism all the same.

Regards,

TROY.

Home ·  Funding ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor