The Anti-Globalization movement has failed, what is to be done?

Since the watershed moment of the 1999 protest of the WTO in Seattle it has been taken for granted that the anti-globalization movement is a Left-wing movement by both the Left themselves and various commentators.  That the anti-globalization movement has completely and utterly failed to realize any of it's ill-defined goals during the following years is all to obvious.  At the current time of radical organizing, rhetoric has replaced activism, the Internet has replaced protest, and callous infighting has replaced the once seemingly powerful united front of interest groups referred to as the anti-globalization movement.  In retrospect, it appears that the seeds of it's failure was present in the very beginning.  Those reasons are not at first obvious but an analysis of Left-wing dogmas and myths will become obvious to anyone with eyes to see.  
 
I. The Anti-Globalization that doesn't work

Throughout the world today many truths are to be self evident.  The Marxist dogma that is the most widespread is  that all the workers of the world are united in class interests, which in the words of contemporary liberalism translates into the myth that "everyone is equal."  This logically leads to a universal, albeit global, interest in causes and struggles that may be extremely remote from participants everyday life, such as the Zapatistas in Mexico or the Buddhist monks of Myanmar as having an existential meaning for progressive movements based in the United States and Europe.  The viewpoint of anti-globalists, with some justification, is that the remote far away struggle for freedom is an impetus of local activists to "do something" about it.  It has been the anti-globalists contention that the imperialist spread of capital, war, and ecological destruction of the planet can be averted through the will of a multicultural effort to end injustice.  In real world terms this translates activists reading a few articles about the subject and going on to impress ones friends in conversation with how knowledgeable one is with progressive struggles abroad.  In short, doing nothing.

My goal is not to criticize what anti-globalists say, but rather what underlies the big picture of what they do, the causes they choose to support, and how ultimately the contradiction between what they say and what they do is of no consequence due to the self defeating ideology they impose on themselves. 

Whereas liberals appeal to minorities has always been self serving at best, National Anarchists allow all groups their own place and each culture is allowed it's own legitimate connection to itself.  Unlike liberalism that sells out minorities interests faster than yesterdays old horse, as the sorry state of affairs of African Americans in the United States clearly demonstrates, National Anarchism works for all people, each unto their own.

What liberals, and by extension, many in the anti-globalist movement fail to recognize is that lip service to the oppressed of every culture of the world in the vain hope of garnering their sympathy plays into the hands of the ruling class, in particular the neo-liberals without doing anything to actually help those people.  All it takes is a talking head of the status quo to appeal for money or "action" to be done and by fiat the liberal left has done it's social duty.  The bedrock of this duty is the ultimate outsourcing of true social change, a sort of globalization in action, a method and ethos whose values are accepted as culturally superior to culturally unified countries and people who solve social problems themselves.  Ubiquitous statements such as "diversity is strength" is the watchword of twenty-first century newspeak.  Someone must of decided that it sounds nicer then saying: your culture is weak. 

To ghettoize the interests of a nations own national, cultural, and political interests, requires the demonization of it's true heritage and the erasing from political memory any alternative political system.  In the United States this has already happened. What once had a powerful political following and widespread cultural validity, e.g. States rights, libertarianism, or cultural pride in the Old West and events such as remembering the Alamo, are treated as anachronisms today.    

This then can be considered the fatal flaw in how the Left-wing challenges imperialism, by racing to ease oppression of all people they help none.  Reduced to promoting a token resistance of feel good political activism, they are intellectually and politically neutered by the capitalist system that turns these radicals into their own mouth piece at best, and centerists at worst.   Anti-globalization turns out the kind of people who are not pro-anything at all.

II. The farce of opposition

So intellectually neutralized, aptly summed up in the phrase "think globally, act locally," no truly radical movement is able to breakout of the dogmas inherent to the capitalist system: anti-globalization becomes nothing more then a symptom of consumer indigestion.

With a movement that leads back to nowhere, anti-globalization and it's twin the anti-war movement represent the long tail of social dissatisfaction.  With the movement going nowhere it will ultimately be left up to globalist leaders to partially represent the anti-globalist agenda, which figures like Bill Clinton or Al Gore do currently, that is, herding the proletariat into it's new role, culturally divided and intellectually conquered, into the globalist society in which the interests of the all are subsumed by the interests of the few.  The aegis of those who place their hope on leaders are those unaware of their own power.  Resistance to globalization starts with a new nationalism, a nationalism that represents what it truly is instead of something it is not, as in the case of empire.  Resistance to globalization is ultimately a cultural resistance, a culture that is strong enough to stand up for it's own autonomy and independence and not fear stigmata of being called names and doubt in it's own right to exist as a sovereign free people.  What is so striking about the celebrities of the anti-globalization movement, such as the Zapatistas, is that the actions they were compelled to take for their own nation (that is, cultural identity) has been almost completely obfuscated by the Left-wing leaders of the anti-globalization movement who tend to admire hero's like this from afar rather then do anything heroic themselves.  These are not people making rational decisions of what  community interests are.  On the contrary, these people publish numerous words when what is called for is vigorous action.

III. It's time to Pay your Bill

The Left-wing has failed and will continue to fail to reach any of the goals it has set out from itself because it denies autonomy to peoples, freedom of speech, social responsibility, and even it's own cultural reality for an ephemeral, ultimately meaningless token resistance to capitalism.  Unlike protest mongers on the left, National Anarchists propose solutions that work by appealing to all members of society whose ultimate uniting interest is autonomy, freedom to be who they are, freedom from debt, and free in spirit.  With this goal ever in mind we will break the back of the capitalist system by refusing it's currency, denying every aspect of it's legitimacy, and building a movement to replace the hollow empire.

It's time we remember what it is like to be strong.