Patriots are conservatives, nationalists are radicals

Patriots who practise conservative politics under the impression they are expressing ‘patriotism’, especially when that entails clear Anglophile bias, and who ignorantly appropriate the term ‘nationalism’ assuming both are one and the same ultimately pervert the meaning.

However, there is also a preeminent character flaw typical of those in that neophyte movement and it is ugly for its sheer arrogance. Those writing for United Nationalists Australia — its founding members — have all dedicated ten years or more to the study of nationalist principles. We have been both activists and theorists and yet we constantly go around in circles having to brook the same absurd charges of ‘White supremacism’ and ‘Nazism’ and state our identity and its purpose again and again.

If you cannot fathom the concept of the nation as inexorably moored to race then you are neither patriots nor nationalists but a conservative xenophobe.

We have no intention to ourselves appear arrogant, or snobby, by making such an assertion but rather it is an observation made over many years from examining the inevitable patterns associated with those who gravitate towards nationalist politics.

So, at the risk of appearing contradictory, yes we are unashamedly pro-White but no we are not ‘White supremacist’.

ilangja001p1
Jack Lang, an Australian nationalist

The latter is a defamation employed by both left and right to delegitimise nationalists. By invoking imagery of men in sheets wielding shotguns and dragging Negroes behind pick-up trucks they create a mental association to villainy and barbarity. Moreover, they imply that this is indisputably our aim and if allowed to flourish all code of human conduct would be subverted to industrialised murder born out of base hatred. When a nationalist is presented as a ‘Nazi’ he is immediately repudiated on all fronts. It is an epithet and it is employed to dehumanise nationalists and validate the use of force to quiet us.

When our politics are compared to the very worst constructions of post-War propaganda involving Nazis spinning Jews into lampshades, and using their body fat to make soap, it presents our position as frightening and evil.

If you cannot fathom the concept of the nation as inexorably moored to race then you are neither patriots nor nationalists but a conservative xenophobe.

Very few on either the left side or those conservatives who claim WE are harming THEIR movement on the right side have bothered to exercise the scholastic effort to wipe away the propagandistic rhetoric and research the reality of our position; much less our long history as opposed to their fledgeling existence. For, were they to do so, they would discover a protectionist’ cause that has attained the understanding that a nation is the sum of racial kinship, with race denoting all aspects of the culture that thereafter make up its society.

By accepting that, then they must appreciate that the rule applies to all other races. The goal of a nationalist Australia — disregarding the inevitable vexed argument around theoretical ‘Aboriginal sovereignty’ — is no more than the desire it wishes for all races which is, without resorting to imperialism, to secure the right to pursue their own destiny in their own homeland without hindrance from more powerful states or coalitions of nations intent on exploitation.

image2
Bonza pro-White pineapples

In the age of globalism, it is especially a cogent philosophy. To that purpose, we here at UNA will endeavour to state our principles and objectives in an understandably imperfect kind, as we acknowledge that all learning is growing and therefore all teaching must be fluid. As times change, so do circumstances. As such, new challenges must be met with new solutions.

Nationalists have solutions; patriots are notoriously vague about their objectives. That vagueness is only in the rarest cases deliberate.

Those who believe they are gently acclimatizing ‘the masses’ to nationalism by leading them down the civic route have been responsible for destroying nationalism in the process. When the British National Party (BNP) adopted these ‘mainstreaming’ tactics British nationalism was contaminated beyond cure.

Nationalists have solutions; patriots are notoriously vague about their objectives. That vagueness is only in the rarest cases deliberate.

The BNP’s former leader Nick Griffin acknowledged this and apologised to British nationalists for his failed experiment which resulted in the establishment of the pro-Israeli anti-Islam movement the English Defence League. This, like all civic patriot anti-Islam groups, is mutton dressed as lamb for those seeking to defend blood and soil. That same mistake of mainstreaming was imported here and a few of those who introduced it into the bloodstream of Australian nationalism are currently still active; in some cases stirring up trouble once again.

Likewise, the French National Party under Marine Le Pen revoked the membership of her father its former leader of 39 years, Jean-Marie Le Pen, after controversy arose over him describing alleged Nazi concentration camps as “a detail of history”. The direction Marine Le pen has taken the veteran nationalist party is on a decidedly mainstream course, in the civic patriot vogue.

gettyimages-484584662
Jean-Marie Le Pen continues to shine the light for nationalism in France despite his own daughter turning traitor

Civic patriotism is, as nationalists understand, rooted deep in the interests of preserving Israel. It is a pro-foreign movement that has the audacity to kit itself in the regalia of militant patriotism. It seems to know only two positions: anti-Islam and anti-Leftist. Thereafter, in the case of Nick Folkes and his Party for Freedom, it will covet and appropriate nationalist issues which never gain traction or develop into solid policy under its leadership. At times, they even steal the symbols of White nationalism, yet their civic partners never call them on this.

The rank and file of civic patriot organisations are sensitive to other areas but the agencies they coalesce around do not expand to adapt those issues into their cause. For instance, there may be small vocal outbursts about Australia’s greatest national concern, China, but they peter out quickly. Most civic patriots, in fact, welcome Asian immigration for what they regard as the propensity of Asians to ‘assimilate’ into our culture; a concept that figures frequently in their rhetoric.

Likewise, many in its leadership entertain personal relationships with women of Oriental descent, which gives an immediate insight into why they take such an aggressive stance against White nationalists. On the other hand, comment on the high crime rates attributable to African migrants who create shocking headlines draws not just anger from civic nationalists but calls for “deportation” (the government is currently acting on the public mood and proposed the mandatory deportation of migrant criminals). So near, yet so far, one might say. What then is the missing link?

Civic patriotism is the vehicle of the pro-Israel agenda

Much has been written by nationalists about the civic patriot movement being a vehicle for Israeli interests. Nick Griffin, for one, wrote a lengthy investigative piece tying together Dutch politician Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom with an expressly pro-Israel agenda. Thereto, he traced Israeli money and influence to the English Defence League. In Australia, the Q Society, and its political arm the Australian Liberty Alliance has written into its core policies support for Israel, as does Danny Nalliah’s Rise Up Australia party. These are just a few examples.

Why would this be? How can organisations that call themselves patriotic and cloak themselves in the national colours possibly be patriotic when they are in the long-term serving the interests of a foreign nation and its agenda?

120914-diwarnai-bentrokan-pembangunan-musala-di-sydney-disetujui2-618x412
Party for Freedom’s George Jameson is so patriotic that he waves the flag of a foreign nation — the very nation that got us all into this mess

Support for Israel is absolutely necessary if the international coalition led by the United States is to successfully enforce its will in the Middle East. Much of the contretemps that beset that region do so because of A) Arab anger over the subjugation of Palestine to the [illegal] expansion of the state of Israel B) the need for Israel and its allies to sustain a climate of conflict among Israel’s neighbours to keep them from unifying against Israel. That is, at any rate, a very basic outline of the situation.

Israel automatically becomes an ally in the reckoning of civic patriots because it is perceived as being an enemy of Islam. Moreover, conservatives (and even those from Labor’s side of the house) support military interventions which involve sending young Australians into combat on Arab soil. A strong opposition to Islam is a prerequisite to condition Australians to support such policies.

Nationalists at their fiercest oppose the state of Israel, on this and numerous other grounds, and at their most moderate simply wish an end to contact altogether.

Why would this be? How can organisations that call themselves patriotic and cloak themselves in the national colours possibly be patriotic when they are in the long-term serving the interests of a foreign nation and its agenda?

In our last chapter, we made reference to instances where civic patriots abandon their narrative that Australia is accepting of diversity ‘minus Islam’. It is natural that any group supportive of Israeli, and more accurately controlled by Jewish interests, will be hostile to the basic tenets of nationalism; the primary solution for which calls for ending immigration and gradual restoration of a White Australia.

Yet, as we shall argue further if Australia is not White, then how are we even a nation? Aboriginals, despite leftist revisionism, were never a nation. The abuse of our own history in terms of the nation’s settlement and especially in key narratives such as the battle of the Eureka Stockade has been introduced to aid a policy of deracinating post-colonial Australia. Regardless, Australia was perhaps the only nation to openly pursue a policy of protecting its White identity. And that IS Australian identity.

We make the comparison with China. Could we really regard China as being China if we were to swap the racial characteristics of a Chinese man with those of a Papua New Guinean highlander? Would this image gel in our reckoning? Can Africans truly be Greeks when Africans are so unmistakably of a different race altogether? The argument that race is a construct has become disseminated as an incontrovertible truth but not when applied to any other living animal. If we apply those same arguments to the animal world we find they are a fallacy. Only in certain parts of the world where a western, decidedly liberal notion of humanity reigns as gospel does this idea take seed.

The Primary Solution

All problems we face in Australia currently stem from one area — immigration. When the floodgates were opened to non-White immigration in the 1970s Australia’s aplomb was abandoned to quaintness and the era of our nation being predicated purely on an economic basis overtook. There is a marked difference between the economics of a nation and a nation as an economy. That definitive line has been so skilfully obfuscated by the globalist architects that the idea does not even occur to most. We are at a critical time.

If there was ever an argument that Australia is viewed by the oligarchs of industry and capitalism purely as a resource and its people simply in terms of consumers it can be made now. From academia to the media, to the government every effort is being made to eradicate the memory of White Australia and inculcate pluralist sensibilities. Who do these pluralist sensibilities benefit?

Tim Soutphommasane horizontal close up
Tim Soutphommasane, Australia’s Race Discrimination Commissioner who is a French-born Laotian who taxpayers fund to the tune of $300k

First up, they try and tell us that they benefit (White) Australians. The arguments are absurd, and begin with cuisine — the benefits of foreign cooking — and advance to the ludicrous — that we need masses of non-White immigration because we are “ageing”. That line about an “ageing population” and “declining birth rates” is ubiquitous anywhere White people have created a civilisation. Supposedly, those economically deprived, scientifically backwards peoples are more adept at sustaining life than those who transcended the gathering of the basic needs of sustaining life to organise societies so ordered and advanced they enabled us to reach the stars. In reality, it is only the immigrants that need us. What do we get from the deal? Well, to facilitate such a society we need laws to prevent us objecting to that society when we inevitably realise that our opportunities and way of life are being handed over to aliens. This resulted in laws that can be loosely termed anti-hate laws and which solely benefit, in practise and theory, non-Whites who migrate to Australia.

In fact, Australia currently has a non-Australian born Race Discrimination commissioner, Tim Soutphommasane. This person is paid an annuity of $300,000 by the Australian people to sustain a narrative about bigotry that he can then go on to address as a grave and ongoing concern that always grows worse. Yes, a man never born here, who has no kinship with White people and in fact every reason to despise us, is paid out of our own pockets to fault us on a racial basis. He has authored four books which are all centred on themes of Australians being fundamentally racist and why migrants like him are so important to us backwards White trash.

Oddly enough, those civic patriots who call us Nazis also object to this man and what he represents overall. However, they are in the thwarted position of being virulently opposed to the idea of a return to a White Australia. Notwithstanding, the very premise that merely to entertain a multiracial society requires legislating against its host population in stern draconian terms should be enough alone to question the justice of such a change.

If there was ever an argument that Australia is viewed by the oligarchs of industry and capitalism purely as a resource and its people simply in terms of consumers it can be made now. From academia to the media, to the government every effort is being made to eradicate the memory of White Australia and inculcate pluralist sensibilities. Who do these pluralist sensibilities benefit?

Alternately, it is what this man is paid to PROTECT that is equally deserving of outrage. Australia has always had its own problems with crime, but they were never on the epidemic scale we read about in the world news. There was a time Australians shook their head at the news coming out of, say, New York. The legendary crime rates achieved a kind of mystical quality for us. But now, in 2017, we live that same reality with a dull apathy and it is nearly always non-Whites who are perpetrating these crimes. From Africans as young as 12 carjacking, home invading, and rioting in the streets with machetes; to Middle Eastern crime gangs engaged in daily shootouts on what were only thirty years ago quiet suburban streets. We have bizarre stories from nearly every racial community.

Indeed, this is the much-flouted crime scenario that all White nationalists point at. But one must realise that immigration has led to all manner of ancillary issues: such as homelessness; the introduction of otherwise quarantined diseases; religious and ethnic conflicts that have been imported by these alien races; and the challenges of having to compete with them. It is no secret that many of Australia’s selective schools are stacked with Asian and Indian students.

The Primary Solution sweeps all of this, and every ill manifestation of multiracialism we have not included here, into the dust pile. It is the beginning, too, of protectionism; and a policy of self-sufficiency that is absolutely achievable given the extraordinary resources of this nation — resources currently being sold off at a rate that would make your hat spin.

This, of course, means that leadership and management roles will inevitably take on a brown and yellow colour. Australians are, before our eyes, becoming the underclass in their own country for a confluence of reasons. These changes are ground into our faces by the elites. Non-Whites have a great proclivity to breed and especially when they can do so with Australian welfare to enable them. The ever-growing strain on the welfare net will result in an end to welfare altogether. By welfare, we speak inclusively not just of the safety net that was paid by Australians to ensure their own security, but Medicare, child support and finally the pension.

The Primary Solution sweeps all of this, and every ill manifestation of multiracialism we have not included here, into the dust pile. It is the beginning, too, of protectionism; and a policy of self-sufficiency that is absolutely achievable given the extraordinary resources of this nation — resources currently being sold off at a rate that would make your hat spin.

You cannot end the spread of Islam without a total approach to immigration. There is no way a multiracial society can justify, or will ever ratify laws, that seek to exclude one group but permit the others. And how can they be so obsessed with the problems of those adherents to Islam and yet blind to all the problems stemming from every other alien race and culture?

Again, the complex problems created by this nightmare of diversity have one very simple solution: and Untied Nationalists Australia calls it the Primary Solution: an end to all immigration with the exception of White Europeans who desire to join us. Once we have done that, we have a chance to address the long process of reversing its effects. There too, we have solutions. But they will be covered in due course.

empty-north

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s