Activity in a grassroots political movement is the embodiment of warfare.
No, it is not “CBS live” like we saw during the Gulf War. Political warfare is more salient than that, and you won’t see any of it on the evening news. American philosopher Francis Parker Yockey describes warfare not as an act of violence between parties, but the struggle for power.
“Politics is a domain of its own — the domain of power. Thus it is not morality, it is not esthetics, it is not economics. Politics is a way of thinking, just as these others are. … The way politics divides the world is into friend and enemy. These express for it the highest possible degree of connection, and the highest possible degree of separation.”
The most recent example of this type of warfare was last week’s court ruling in David Yeagly v. Jeffery Imm and Daryle Lamont Jenkins.
Daryle Lamont Jenkins operates One People’s Project, and he found himself in court after shutting down the 2010 American Renaissance conference with a variety of techniques. Jenkins won the battle, but he lost war, and now he finds himself court-ordered to pay $50,000.00 dollars in restitution to David Yeagly.
A court battle is normally anything except violent, but in cases like this it is exemplary of what we might conceive of as war. The fact that this struggle for power happened in a court room is not important. Jenkin’s One People’s Project is ideologically positioned against Jared Taylor‘s American Renaissance, and he struggled to control how AmRen was allowed to operate and express in public. Though both parties are ideologically motivated, or perhaps also economically, when the two engaged in a struggle for power it became a political struggle, or, as Yockey explains, war.
“[War] is an armed struggle between organized political units. It is not a question of the method of fighting, for weapons are merely a way of killing. Nor of military organization — these things determine nothing about the inner nature of war. War is the highest possible expression of the friend-enemy disjunction. It confers the practical meaning on the word enemy. The enemy is he upon whom one is preparing to make or upon whom one is making war. If there is no question of war he is not an enemy.”
Jenkins learned that waging a political war can be expensive– to the tune of $50,000.00 dollars, and Yeagly had to wait more than two years to get this far with his case against Jenkins. In this sense, they both are political soldiers. I know it can be hard to imagine Jenkins doing anything even remotely “soldierly,” but physical exertion has nothing to do with being a political soldier. Yockey says that, “the phrase political soldier is only ad hoc, to designate anyone fighting from conviction, rather than from profession.”
Fighting from conviction, as opposed to pay is the only proper way to be a political soldier, but it counts for naught if you can’t pick your battles wisely. When a person is too bullheaded to realize when it’s fruitless to start a fight, or that there is no power to be gained in the process, then he has categorically and definitively engaged in in what Yockey calls an unjustifiable war.
“Politics is activity in regard to power. Units engaged in politics may gain or lose power. Instinct and understanding direct them to seek to increase power. War is the most intense method of trying to increase power. Thus a war which has no practically foreseeable possibility of increasing power is not politically justifiable.”
Jenkins had the chance to settle out of court and save some face, but much to our great satisfaction he decided to try and be a hero. Amusingly, he made himself anything but a hero. After writing for One People’s Project for so long, it looks like he finally drank his own Kool-Aid. The courts did not come to his rescue, and nobody ponied up the big bucks to help him out in court.
I doubt that Jenkins will change his habits or lose his desire to be an activist, but he should know that he looks like a clown. His constant mewling about the dangers of right wing activism under the banner of “One People’s Project” makes him a perfect ass. No, that’s not me saying it, Yockey said it. Well, okay, that is me saying it, but Yockey said it first.
“… one can only say that if a politician talks about a world with ‘one State,’ ‘one Parliament,’ or ‘one government,’ he is the perfect type of the intellectual ass, and should be anywhere except in a position to distort the destiny of a State and bring misery to the individuals in it.”
As the ruling against Jenkins moves into its final stage, it remains to be seen whether or not he will have the financial or emotional means to “distort the destiny of a Sate and bring misery to the individuals in it.” He is currently agitating against the 2014 AmRen conference, but we’ll have to wait and see if he has any hot air left in him after the court fees and damages. Until then, he continues to be the perfect kind of an ass.
Political Warfare: Daryle Lamont Jenkins Out of Commission by Thomas Buhls is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.