14/11/2024
Why do anarchists fear the "N-Word"?
Following the Japanese takeover of the Korean peninsula, many Koreans fled to Chinese Manchuria. Korean support organizations sprung up soon after, with the "Korean People's Government" and the Korean Anarchist Federation being among the larger ones. The former, intended to be a broad leftist coalition at the start, was soon swayed over by Anarchists and merged with the latter to form the "Korean People's Association", a network of mutual aid groups and autonomous governments seeking the welfare of the Korean people, as well as the creation of a stateless society. They were forcibly dissolved two years later after Japan instituted a puppet government in Manchurian.
In 1994, the native inhabitants of the Chapias region of Mexico rose up to overthrow the authoritarian, pro-western government. Their revolution failed to abolish the mexican government, but guaranteed the autonomy of the native people of Chapias. While not using ideological labels aside from the considering themselves Left-Wing, the communities set up by the revolutionaries have proven themselves to withstand the test of time, still around 30 years later despite an ongoing conflict with the Cartel.
In 2012, following the temporary collapse of the Assad regime, the Kurdish people would expel the fundamentalist militants out of their towns and villages, setting up an autonomous region. While not strictly anarchist, the "North-East Syrian Autonomous Region" has proven itself to be a shining example of libertarian socialist ideals. It has also preserved Kurdish culture from destruction by Islamic and pro-government militants. In addition, it has also allowed for cultural autonomy of other ethnicities present in it.
All three of these are commonly citied by (serious) anarchists as examples of anarchism in practice, and I can't disagree with that. There is, however, something most of them ignore: they were all created with the purpose of defending a nation
Be it the pan-native ideals of the Zapatista's, the preservation of Korean culture and the defense of the Kurdish ethnicity, each of these was set up with an idea of defending their nation from an imperialist foe. How come, then, that anarchists typically reject nations as a concept?
Part of it can be attributed to the common view of nationalism in the western world. It's seen as an ideology of tyrants, or skinheads looking to beat up the nearest non-white person. It's also often times associated with racialism, which is funny considering how race usually ignores nationalities and cultures.
Part of it may be the failure of the National Anarchist Movement, an idea made up by a strasserite seeking to establish an all-white state in Great Britain. One can be forgiven for assuming all nationalist anarchists to be like NAM as they have been, historically, the loudest.
But why throw the whole idea of nations, chanting slogans such as "No Gods, No Nations"? Nations are why most historical anarchist projects existed and why people rose up against their opressors. Not to mention, national identity can bring people together and make them care, something necessary for an anarchist community to function.
Maybe with time we'll figure that out
14/10/2024
I will publish my thoughts here :3 Not much to say currently