Nothing prevented Saturday’s bi-state ‘International Freedom of Speech’ day, which is of itself ironic. However, in this muddle of libertarian and identity politics, attended by the usual provocateurs, when speech has no substantial content the point of whether or not it is free is moot.

The two-state ‘event’, which we cannot find any evidence of being internationally recognised despite its bold appellation, although there is said to a London event, was held in both Melbourne Docklands, where Jewish supremacist and mega Zionist Avi Yemini was joined by Senator Fraser Anning, with a crowd of around 50 free speech advocates, after the first got underway at Sydney’s Wiley Park, in Lakemba.

We will address the Wiley Park leg shortly, but first-up Anning’s speech would reveal a lot about this mysterious ‘International Freedom of Speech Day’. Senator Anning’s maiden speech, like Pauline Hanson’s before him, caused sparks when he called for a return to a “European Christian” immigration system. Yet, it did not take long to forge an allegiance with the Zionist ALA. This seems to be an inevitable pattern when it comes to outspoken politicians on the “right side”, especially those who create a false hope that they’ll support a return to the White Australia Policy.

Addressing a crowd of around 50 persons, made up of ALA and others, Anning declared, “ALA is the only democratic party in this state.”

He then got down to business and we’ll place a transcript of his speech verbatim on this page. What will become apparent is his pro-Zionism as he told the sparsely peopled audience, “My Facebook page was taken down because I said things like ‘We should stop funding the Palestinian authority’.

“This year we gave the Palestinian authority $43.8 million. They use that for a thing called pay-to-slay where innocent Israeli citizens, women children and men, if you are Palestinian you kill some of these, then you’ll get an award from the Palestinian authority.”

Addressing a crowd of around 50 persons, made up of ALA and others, Anning declared, “ALA is the only democratic party in this state.”

Australia shouldn’t be paying any money to that region, for sure, but that’s not what Anning’s point was – he doesn’t want it paid because, according to the very Zionist logic, innocent Israelis are being killed by evil Palestinians who have some screwed-up notion about wanting to stop their land being stolen by Jews.

The only attempt to shut down Fraser’s freedom of speech came from a longhaired ginger dressed in black who was shouted down by Avi and his supporters who chanted, “Zuck off!” a reference to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerbeg, who they blame personally for de-speeching them on his social media platform.

Obviously, we’re not interested in anything Avi Yemini had to say, but we’re sure it came out of his mouth at twice the speed it was processed by his modest brain.

Meanwhile, Blair Cottrell did not attend the Melbourne rally. Instead, he drove to Sydney to yell at gimps in a windy park through a Chinese manufactured megaphone. He shook hands with the likes of marijuana advocate and serial instigator Nick Folkes who is back from cannabis country with his small multi-racial cast of resurrected Party for Freedom members (or as we dubbed them, Peanuts for Freedom) as he joined a line-up that included some uninteresting woman and Cottrell’s lawyer, John Bolton.

Blair is a man who never lets standards get in the way of the company he consorts with (Folkes centre, Bluebeard taking a fan snap on the right)

Present also was Neil Erikson’s partner in crime, Rino Grgurgovic, aka Bluebeard, along with members of the Lads Society Sydney. If there was a Pictionary definition of “idiot” then Bluebeard’s picture would be posted there in all its pot-bellied glory, stink lines included. There would even be a colouring-in version for autistic kids.

Obviously, we’re not interested in anything Avi Yemini had to say, but we’re sure it came out of his mouth at twice the speed it was processed by his modest brain.

Here, things get interesting, because we have for the first time in ages the Sydney Lads’ leader and former Squadron 88 Fuhrer Mark McDonald Campbell. Yes, he claims that is his real name, which would be like having a surname Hatfield McCoy, but we’ll indulge the little New Zealand rodent; hand-picked and appointed specifically by Tom Sewell.

The Fellowship of the Chicken is reunited. Matey Mate, Hollywood Nazi on the right, with his Zionist mate and colleague, Nick Folkes

It’s grouse Matey Mate is back with Nick because it’s like a reunion of the old fellowship of the chicken which was centred around the deep-seed Liberal muckraker and sometimes poultry farmer Howard “I’m not a financial member of any party” Crawford.  Howie even “liked” Nick’s post about the rally on his Facebook page which means so much for any of them retiring.

But what is more significant about these two is that it proves that Matey Mate, far from being owned by ‘The Lads’ is a random equation infecting the numbers. Any belief that he is not a two-way transistor between the meddlesome world of the Zionist spiv and the “youth” who have gravitated to Sewell’s boys’ club betrays an inadvisable trust in the skunk. Matey Mate’s record speaks for itself, and his intrigues run deep. It wouldn’t surprise UNA at all if he was receiving secret funding from a government agency. Likewise, given the ongoing theatre, and all the incongruities of his allegiances, policies, platform and behaviour, who is handling Nick Folkes?

Thus, with a gale blowing, and nobody infringing on their ‘free speech’, Bolton led the proceedings by opening up with a spiel about Tommy Robinson and Lauren Southern; all this while the antifascist voyeurs tracked them with what must’ve been the cheapest drone on the market – a Chinese knock-off bought for a lobster from the markets. Those assembled in the park appear in an image smugly uploaded to the Anonykatz Facebook page from a vertigo-inducing height and with a visibility that rendered the whole exercise even more futile than what was happening down below.

Here, things get interesting, because we have for the first time in ages the Sydney Lads’ leader and former Squadron 88 Fuhrer 8Mark McDonald Campbell. Yes, he claims that is his real name, which is like having a surname Hatfield McCoy, but we’ll indulge the little New Zealand rodent; hand-picked and appointed specifically by Tom Sewell.

The Antis will try to say that the object of the exercise was to view crowd numbers. But that’s a lie, they wanted to see who was there, but their cheap and nasty drone failed them. Lulz

Nick Folkes, no doubt nicely toasted on seventh-generation Indica skunk weed, then grabbed the bullhorn to foghorn about his freedom of speech, or should that be, his excess of it. Folkes is an idiot and no matter what anyone believes about personal liberty the whole world would be better off if a special law was passed limiting him to the use of sign language.

He told the blowing wind, “It’s a pity in this city we can’t get thousands here.” We’ll address that shortly, but meanwhile, he defined freedom of speech as, “…about being an individual and not having the state control everything I do.”

Singling out “dogmatic communists” he aired his angst about how they “want to take freedom of speech and it’s an attack on the only civilisation in modern history that brought around freedom of speech is the British Empire.”

Perhaps they should tell that to D.H Lawrence or any of the other writers whose books were originally banned in England.

It’s worth noting too that both Folkes and Anning cited “communists” as being responsible for taking away their freedom of speech while last we checked Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, who led a charge to censor Anning and stripped him of staff funding and extra staff is a dyed in the wool conservative.

He told the blowing wind, “It’s a pity in this city we can’t get thousands here.” We’ll address that shortly, but meanwhile, he defined freedom of speech as, “…about being an individual and not having the state control everything I do.”

And while Folkes gasbags about freedom of speech he seems to forget when he attempted to shut down Australia First Party president Jim Saleam’s freedom of speech at the Reclaim Australia rally at Martin Place in Sydney during 2015 when he connived with the marshals to have him removed. Likewise, the marshals forbade AFP from distributing any materials at the rally but didn’t impose any ban on the kosher groups.

We do not know what Cottrell had to say and we don’t care. It is very clear that he chose long ago the path of civic patriotism. And for all the fascist talk from the Lads Society once again Matey Mate and his offsider Alex had no problem embedding themselves with Zionists and supporting an event that is fundamentally pro-Israel.

John Bolton, Zionist, anti-Islam activist, and most likely chief organiser of International Freedom of Speech day in Australia

John Bolton is probably the key to Cottrell’s attendance since as a lawyer he has taken up his appeal pro bono against charges of inciting serious contempt against Moslems. Did Blair really drive all the way to Sydney just to help his mate out, or did he have other business? Was he asked not to attend the Melbourne leg of the rally, or would Tom Sewell, the chock-heeled boss of the Lads Society have forbidden it? It’s hard to be sure once you try to figure out who put this thing together and why.

United Nationalists Australia has attempted to identify who the principal organisers of the ‘International Freedom of Speech Day’ are. Our strongest lead is actually John Bolton. He released a YouTube video on October 1 in which his concerns about freedom of speech link primarily to former EDL head and Zionist Tommy Robinson and Lauren Southern who was prevented from entering the Moslem enclave of Lakemba during her tour of Sydney. Bear in mind, the Lads Society provided security for Southern both at Sydney and her Melbourne show.

During that tour, Southern appeared with Stefan Molyneux in a video filmed at Sydney’s Botanic Gardens in which she detailed how police prevented her exercising the simple right to walk the streets since her presence would be seen as a provocation. She claimed there was hypocrisy at play because mainstream media, which were actually filming her, were put under no such restrictions. Nonetheless, Southern began by explaining how her team had contacted police to advise them she would be journeying down with her crew.

We do not know what Cottrell had to say and we don’t care.

One could say it was stupid tipping them off, but one could also cynically suggest that she got the reaction she intended. If she was fair dinkum about slinking into a Moslem neighbourhood incognito — and let’s face it, most Moslems like most Aussies wouldn’t have known her from a bar of soap — there were countless other areas that are chockers with the followers of Mohammed; Punchbowl being one; Beverly Hills another. Either she was worried they might get creamed or else she’d calculated the police response and just how marvellously it would dovetail her narrative.

It was with this same expectation of publicity that Bolton chose Wiley Park near Lakemba to stage his rally. He stated so in his video in which he grimly warned against anyone inciting violence or attempting violence against his people. He clearly spelt out it was a test of “freedom” to be in the area. In the end, no one attempted anything, except some numbskull Antis who took their cheap-arse drone for a spin in the drizzle.

Nevertheless, Bolton seems to be the most identifiable organiser of the day. UNA attempted to contact Mr Bolton by email and ask him but he had not replied at the time this was published.

So, Bolton is at the centre of this theatre that has drawn together the usual faces. But he is Cottrell’s lawyer and Blair is synonymous with allegedly suggesting that every classroom in Australia should have a copy of Mein Kampf (We are not sure if that quote is apocryphal or not). How does that then fit in with Bolton’s worldview? We quote him from the video, “As Australians, we are a melting pot. Women and men in Australia are equal. People of every race in Australia are equal. It’s abhorrent that people want to divide us.”

Well, isn’t Blair Cottrell one of those trying to divide us? I know we are. We’re proud to admit it since the only “us” we recognise are actual Australians, which means we aim to divide their “us”. So, if that’s the case, does he support freedom of speech by those who want to repudiate his statements of values as a bunch of gay libertarian crap? Did he not just call such abhorrent? On his Weebly blog, among an impressive list of professional credentials, Bolton describes himself as “conservative” but “politically independent”. We see a lot of that around the anti-Islam scene. And John is no stranger to that arena. In 2017, he joined the Peanuts as a speaker at their rally against a proposed Islamic school in Penrith.

Nevertheless, Bolton seems to be the most identifiable organiser of the day. UNA attempted to contact Mr Bolton by email and ask him but he had not replied at the time this was published.

Among those were ‘Australian Patriot Uprising’ Commandant Matt Lowe and his non-Aryan Sergeant Schultz, Toby Cook.

Matt Lowe took over while Nick Folkes was on hiatus. He and fat boy Toby, who we understand to be a former mental patient, essentially formed the core of this absurd Facebook club along with Shermon Burgess, who himself made a quantum leap from strict kosher patriot to fully-blown neo-Nazi with such a vengeance that it defies credulity. Just as the movement was adopting a conspicuously fascist style, Folkes stepped sideways, Lowe et al moved in, but now they’re gone and Folkes is back along with the bagel brigade. But it remains of Mr Bolton to explain just what these glaring inconsistencies mean to him because being such a bright lad he cannot have failed to be aware of them. By the same token, Bolton cannot be unaware of what Blair Cottrell represents to the mainstream, while Nationalists know the truth and these associations of his only confirm: the man is a civic patriot and always will be.

Likewise, International Freedom of Speech Day is demonstrably just another Zionist initiative, and it has nothing at all to do with Nationalist politics. It cannot be since the two fundamentally conflict.

We now return to Nick Folkes’s comment about “it’s a pity in this city we can’t get thousands here”. It’s a shame that after all this time the dumb bastard hasn’t worked out why.

The last any significant support was galvanised for a comparable cause was the Reclaim Australia rallies. If we’re talking about Sydney alone, then the 2015 rallies were the ceiling. But let’s focus on that, shall we? How come they failed to capitalise on the kind of public support they saw from that concept? Arguably, it was a number of reasons. Firstly, too many civic micro-parties played tug-o-war with it, such as the ALA, and the unregistered PfF and those parties were avowedly Zionist. But while other factors occurred, especially in Melbourne where the street jouster mentality of the UPF had turned off the mums and dads (or “peasants” as Blair Cottrell charitably labels them), the simple fact no one seems to recognise is because they never actually stated what it is they wanted.

Likewise, International Freedom of Speech Day is demonstrably just another Zionist initiative, and it has nothing at all to do with Nationalist politics. It cannot be since the two fundamentally conflict.

In short, there was no message to be telegraphed other than, “We don’t like Moslems and we are afraid”.

What was it they wanted; a total end to Moslem immigration? Not really, if you attended the rallies and listened to the speeches, despite the slant the hard-left and globalist media put on it, they asked only for “assimilation”. Who was it that this petition was directed at? Was it the Moslem community, who were not represented and never addressed? Was it the politicians? There were frequent calls for “politicians” to “do something”. That’s a mighty naïve expression of faith right there, trusting a ‘politician’ working for an internationalist world-order controlled by corporations. The politicians are dedicated universally to pumping this country full of as much non-Anglo human content as can be mustered. This is the idea.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten has approached Scott Morrison to agree to a bipartisan commitment to a “big Australia”, and a big Australia means unfettered immigration.

The little-known corporation Consolidated Land & Rail (CLARA) has as its mission statement: “CLARA is an Australian private group formed to deliver a program to change Australia. We seek to undertake a re-balancing of our settlement and deliver new ways of imagining, planning and building cities, transport and infrastructure.”

This is insidious stuff: a private group with endless land assets knocking up micro-cities and connecting them with rail all over Australia. Who is to live in those cities? Well, CLARA says, “Australia’s population is projected to increase 69% between now and 2061 — up from 24.7 million to 41.5 million people, that is 16.8 million more Australians needing a home.”

In short, there was no message to be telegraphed other than, “We don’t like Moslems and we are afraid”.

Australians…? They seriously just called that projected figure Australians when they’re constantly harping on about the declining birth rate among White Australians?! No, that’s an import figure, and what’s more, CLARA seems to know something we don’t because they’re already building their cities and rails to accommodate this massive increase which will come from Asia, the Sub-Continent, the Middle-East and Africa, but really largely from China, and to serve the new Sino-Australia.

How can such a newish population in any way be Australian? By their importation, they signal the end of Australia and the creation of an artificial nation not founded on culture, race or custom, but on consumerism and serfdom to oligarchical concerns.

Given all this is happening, tiny little voices squeaking about “freedom of speech” in an ill-defined way don’t seem to grasp the issues especially when, like Bolton and all civic patriots, they accept a “melting pot” so long as it doesn’t come with Moslems and their “sharia law”.

But it also explains why Nick and Co can’t get massive numbers to their rallies despite the size of the cities because they are lost in a wilderness where their concerns are outnumbered by the demographic realities of those very cities.

The Nationalist message is very different and it is uncompromising and unwavering. And the key to the activism resides in that message and its purity something those who complain about “keyboard warriors” not attending these hopeless rallies cannot get their heads around.

Given the divide we suffer in major cities, the only logical thing to do is seek out our people where they reside, and where they are receptive to our message and that might not be in the sexy surrounds of an urban environment. It might be spread apart and out in the dust 200 kilometres each way between. But the cities are lost and those Whites remaining and who’ve adapted to this prefabricated metropolis are from the virtue-signalling hypocrite elites. Which is another thing Anning, Bolton and Yemini don’t understand about their “free speech”, especially when they equate it with social media — the political element of their “speech” is a product of the commercial.

Identity politics is a device by which aspirational consumers signal their social status. The greatest advocates of all these guises of progressive politics are in fact the corporations who splinter it all up into a consumerist matrix. It’s not even accurate to suggest that Facebook targets them on the basis of their politics, although it’s not so unfair an accusation to level at Twitter. Facebook operates on a combination of algorithms and human moderators and while the inconsistencies of their adjudications are frustrating they are more random than they seem. But if they really want to get down to an understanding what they lack is not a freedom of speech but a market share.

The topic of “freedom of speech” is too complex to be condensed for a mass audience at least in the fashion the civics are doing it. What their “freedom of speech” is banging up against is this very global order. There are no worries for Moslem Arabs discussing the finer points of socially unpalatable aspects of an extreme reading of their religion at meetings in Lakemba, for instance. They are no challenge to that order. But as Christopher Shortis found out when he, Cottrell and Neil Erikson were convicted of inciting serious contempt against Moslems, it sure isn’t so lenient when it happens the other way. While Moslems are allowed to discuss extreme ideas to characterise them as extreme, which is what the Bendigo Three did in their video, is considered the more extreme acts of the two. Indeed, we may consider naming the monster now to be heretical speech.

And once one makes a concession to unfettered freedom of expression where does it end? We cannot argue for the unconditional freedom of speech which would demand things like sex with baby giraffes or to legalise cannibalism. And as society fragments along the lines of those directing from the Bilderberg Group, it seems that sick ideas are gaining respectability on a daily basis. We’re already at the stage that we’ve repudiated nature and argued she is wrong, that there is no such thing as race or gender, and one woman described as an author and educator argues that parents should gain permission from their babies before changing their nappies. These are the signs of a society on the way out and that’s where the oligarchs want it so that it can be replaced by a new serfdom. When the serfs speak up about anything that may draw attention to this then, of course, that speech is no longer but very, very expensive.

As Nationalists we do not fight vigorously for freedom of speech, we strive to emphasize the hypocrisy of those who wish to silence us and demonise us in the name of an inclusive and progressive democracy in which freedom of expression is implied.

Senator Fraser Anning expressing his fear that Israelis might be being murdered by Palestinians

Senator Fraswer Anning’s Speech, Verbatim, Docklands, Melbourne, Oct 6, 2018 (don’t say we tried to take your free speech)

“ALA is the only democratic party in this state. These African gangs who are attacking people, destroying property and bashing different people and getting away with it is probably some of the worst things I’ve seen and I’m sure it’s not the fault of the police, I’m sure their hands have been tied by somebody further up. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right for any nation, it’s the first thing that goes and then normally what happens in a communist society they take your freedom of speech first, so occasionally we have clowns like this who deny you your right to freedom of speech,” (enter bozo ranga) to disrupt the event. Avi grabbed the mic and led the small gathering of ALA supporters and others in a chant of “Zucc off, mate!” Anning, continued, “So the first thing that goes in a communist country is your freedom of speech, just recently, as Avi said, both our (Facebook) pages were shut down. The premier in Queensland asked our members there – and three state members – to denounce my speech or lose funding for staff members. Now, that’s a travesty of justice, it was illegal, she eventually took those staff members and took that funding because they did not want to renounce me. My Facebook page, as far as I know, was taken down… we’ve never called for any violence… neither Avi or myself have called for any violence against anyone and never will. My Facebook page was taken down because I said things like ‘We should stop funding the Palestinian authority’ (loud claps from Zionist Avi and his ALAers). This year we give the Palestinian authority $43.8 million they use that for a thing called pay-to-slay where innocent Israeli citizens, women children and men, if you are Palestinian you kill some of these, then you’ll get an award from the Palestinian authority. And that’s where our tax dollars are going and when I called for that, in the senate, all three parties, the Liberals, Labor and the Greens vote against me every time. They’re the same people who the day after my speech were all crying and hugging and ringing their hands and they never damped a tissue but they pretended to cry then they denounce me — but they’re the same three parties who regularly vote against the motions that I put up to stop funding the Palestinian authority but also I call for getting the White South African farmers out of South Africa (Avi leads clapping) and again they vote against me so they’re hypocrites, they took two words out of context then they decided they would try to make some mileage out of that but they made their impatient speeches but the next day when the polls came out, even the ABC poll, they found around 80% of Australians were supporting me so, ah… (Applause) so they’ll have to eat their words a little bit. So we’ve got some big problems to overcome, we are supposed to have a conservative government but then they’re here five years but we still have 18C on the books, which takes away your freedom of speech. What’s happening there? So really what’s happened is that the parties that used to represent us have moved so far to the left that they don’t represent us anymore. There’s a vacuum on the right. We saw that in 2016 in America when Trump came like a freight train and hit poor old Hillary Clinton. She didn’t see that coming (laughter). He’s been a great man for America, he’s done a huge amount of work for America and America has never been better now economically or any other way you like to look at it. So a lot of this, this trying to take away our freedom of speech is coming out of the United Nations. Now, I’ve been calling for us to get out of Paris and to get out of the United Nations. They have no business here, they have no business with us, and their politicians like Marise Payne who’s over there now signing away your rights to everything, ah, she has no business doing that on your behalf. She’s signing a thing called the Immigration Compact, now, and that will effectively give your rights to who comes into this country – it will be handed over to the United Nations so you can imagine what’s going to happen with our society. By the way, that speech, that part with the final solution, what was actually said was ‘the final solution to our immigration problem is for the Australian people to have a vote via plebiscite’. And I will still continue to push that agenda because we’ve had votes on all sorts of things like same sex marriage and everything else, why should we not have the right to have a vote on not just how many people will come here but who comes here, what the makeup of this country will be like later on. So really I think the big fear is that good Australian men and a lot of them only boys died on battlefields all over the world. They died in freezing bloody muddy trenches in France and Belgium and other places and in the jungles of New Guinea and they died for one thing and that is for your freedom and for your rights. They stood up in front of bullets and they took bullets a lot of them and they’re not here with us anymore and the least we can do is to do what good people like yourselves are doing now and stand up for our freedoms and I applaud you all for being here and we’ve got to keep up the fight.”



Anti-Australians are celebrating news of a nine-year-old girl in Queensland who refused to stand for our national anthem as in her mind it excludes Aborigines.

The parents of nine-year-old Harper Nielsen who attends Kenmore South State School are claiming their pesky daughter was given detention following a “silent protest” when she refused to stand for our national anthem. The school has denied their allegations. The fourth-grader told the Daily Telegraph she boycotted the national anthem on the basis that “Advance Australia Fair means advance White Australia”. She added, “When it says were are young it completely ignores the fact that indigenous culture was here for over 50,000 years before colonisation.”

How this became news is about as much of a mystery as is where babies come from since her parents, both who look like they graduated from Chairman Mao 101 on an Australian Unions scholarship, went out of their way to ensure it became news. The very name ‘Harper’ we would wager is her parents’ dedication to liberal author Harper Lee, who wrote To Kill a Mockingbird.

Media has since lined up to sensationalise the frumpy pre-tween automaton when they should be interviewing her parents whom the good money’s odds say put her up to it for their own interests.
Let’s just hope Harper learns to despise her parents when she reaches her rebellious teen years which aren’t far off

At the tender age of nine, this child is merely parroting what’s been inculcated into her by the two agents of social decay she calls mum and dad (assuming they’re as traditional as to permit these stereotypical designations). These two Trotsykites are raising their brat to conform to all the desires of the misanthropes who comprise the Bilderberg Group.

The Bilderberg Group is a complex topic the reader must investigate independently. While we add a link to a useful webpage, we can only generally describe them and their goals. We invoke them here simply to alert the reader that this ‘news’ is hooey calculated to create tension and division.

Media has since lined up to sensationalise the frumpy pre-tween automaton when they should be interviewing her parents whom the good money’s odds say put her up to it for their own interests.  

Firstly, isn’t it odd that when globalists wish to paralyse this nation through moral invalidation they imply Australia is “all White” and thus all institutions, every significant cultural article, and each strand of our national aplomb is “White” and must be recoded. However, when they wish to own it and to repudiate an increasingly agitated White Australia this country is “multicultural (multiracial)”.

So there are two states of being for Australia and the two can only mutually exist if the paradox is permitted by lazy thinking. The Bilderberg Group advocates population control. Sociologist Hadley Cantril describes employing “Psycho-political operations” as “propaganda campaigns designed to create perpetual tension and to manipulate different groups of people to accept the particular climate of opinion the CFR seeks to achieve in the world.”

This is what we’re seeing all around the western, or to put it bluntly, the White world. This is because another goal of the one-world, one-government, and one-system controllers is the abolition of nation states. It’s little surprise then that the Bilderberg group boasts among its membership such luminaries of globalism as Henry Kissinger, Angela Merkel, Alan Greenspan, David Rockefeller, George Soros, Donald Rumsfeld, Ben Bernanke, and Rupert Murdoch just to name a few.

download (5).jpg

Rupert Murdoch is a glaring presence. The Bilderberg Group uses its media, such as CBS (which it is known to invite along to its secret meetings on the promise of secrecy), to promote mind-wash. Given that the group is not a conspiracy invented by right-wingers, it’s interesting to note that the left has virtually nothing to say about them, which isn’t all that surprising when as we’ve consistently pointed out, they stopped thinking independently long ago. This is why you can witness such incongruous behaviour as self-described “anarchist” Professor Rob Sparrow (aka Slackbastard) championing the cause of the Bilderbergs while believing he’s supporting a cadre of fellow travellers in a global revolution of non-existent “workers”.

Slackbastard swooped like a chicken hawk (or is that like convicted paedophile antifascist Alex Gollan?) onto this child’s story. Rob posted on the SB Facebook page, “mAAAAAAd props to the 9yo grrl for refusing to follow the herd — you rock!” We’re sure glad he isn’t her English teacher.

Sociologist Hadley Cantril describes employing “Psycho-political operations” as “propaganda campaigns designed to create perpetual tension and to manipulate different groups of people to accept the particular climate of opinion the CFR seeks to achieve in the world.”

Meanwhile, the clichés of fake indigenous activism over at Blackfulla Revolution (another FB group) used her case in a rhetorical bush breakfast when they tried to juxtapose the controversy over Herald Sun cartoonist Michael Knight’s spoof of Serena Williams’ recent dummy spit, with Harper’s story by offering up a yawning ‘meme’. Apparently, one is permissible (and racist) and the other is censored (and anti-racist).

Um, no… not even close. We know you’re the sanctified professional underdogs of this country but even you mob ought to be obliged to be accurate now and then

Michael Knight is a satirical cartoonist and well in his rights to exaggerate his subjects, and the other was never censored but instead given a platform which was picked up internationally giving Harper and her hippy parents their 15 mins of social justice-connected fame. It’s also led to her being viciously trolled, which is an inevitability her parents should’ve considered before putting her up to this attention-grabbing media stunt.

Depicting coloured people in cartoons will soon be as dangerous as depicting the Prophet Mohammed 

Fake Nationalist Pauline Hanson even got an opportunity to try and steal back some ground lost to Katter Australia Party’s senator Fraser Anning. She slid out of her money chamber to offer a predictable quote about how she’d give the tot “a kick up the backside”.

Thus, a supposedly pressing social issue has become a kind of perverse entertainment in which the invalid nation state is tossed like a bone for two dogs to fight over. The messages behind these stories are quite startling. The furore over the depiction of Serena Williams now posits that people of colour, no matter how badly behaved, are beyond criticism by Whites; much like depicting the Prophet Mohammed will get your throat slit by a fundamentalist Moslem.

In the case of Harper’s media narrative, a phoney sense of expression on the issue of the supposed plight faced by indigenous Australians is given artificial oxygen. For, if there is a voice united in sounding about the indigenous cause, what is that cause? What is it really? Once they’ve figured out all that maybe they can ponder who it is they’re petitioning.  Is it a collective conscience? Is it political representatives?

Fake Nationalist Pauline Hanson even got an opportunity to try and steal back some ground lost to Katter Australia Party’s senator Fraser Anning. She slid out of her money chamber to offer a predictable quote about how she’d give the tot “a kick up the backside”.

If they really believe that any side that stands for office in Australian parliament will ever have the tools at their disposal to right a social wrong they’re back in the Dreamtime. They haven’t noticed that whichever government is elected serves the internationalist Anglo-American-Zionist bloc which is a faction of the One World Government cabal. The members of the Bilderberg Group aren’t interested in emancipation for the world’s peoples unless it leads to their military industrial complex profiting from war.

If it’s the collective conscience then that is filled now with the self-interest of countless ‘minority associations’ which see themselves as the primary ‘victim’ of White Australia, so in that sense, they’ve pushed the Abo out of the queue.

The oligarchs don’t want Aboriginal tribes achieving native title over lucrative mining assets they want to flog to China because assets are not for the serfs. It’ll never happen. Instead, it’s better to have the serfs beating each other in an irreconcilable conflict that has its flames nefariously fanned by those controlling the actors who are simultaneously condoning and condemning either one or both sides.

As to little Harper, maybe she can figure out whether she wants to stand for the parenting payment that helped raise her, or the Medicare benefits which keep her fit, the state education she receives, the accoutrements of the White race that she denounces that she couldn’t live without, such as her toys, computer, phone, technology in general, and the medium she has used to spit in the face of her own race. Because, little girl, you wouldn’t last long if you were shanghaied off and dropped in the middle of an outback Aboriginal community. Your parents’ rhetoric wouldn’t save you from the fate suffered by their own flesh and blood on a nauseatingly repetitive basis.

Perhaps she could also benefit from an education which permits an untarnished understanding of the origins of our country and how the indigenous people had no claims on it as a nation since they were disparate tribes and NOT a nation. Just maybe she might realise that those people were destined to be conquered by the rules of the human animals: if it wasn’t by the British Empire, it would certainly have been the Dutch or the Chinese. Moreover, she benefits nothing from those like her parents adding to the division of our people; only the certainty that the bigger gap they create in our nation the more inevitable it is that another force will seize on that and push right on through to take us over. In fact, it’s happening now.

Indeed, this little girl, so fresh off the potty yet so quick with the universal condemnations of her own country, should like to spare a thought for the current Chinese invasion now underway in Australia and just how much those in Beijing are likely to give a shit about the Aborigines that she and her parents patronise so.

But she is, as we say, a child. No kid could have the sophistication to make any sort of informed judgment on such matters. Likewise, no nipper could be filled with such patriotism as to look forward to assembly just for an opportunity to stand for the flag. These are kids, they’d rather be off playing.

None of this was ever about thinking… just reacting.

National Australia Bank employing Bilderberg logic in their ads: promoting multiracialism while brushing over the fact a practising Moslem would wholeheartedly revile their whole stinking usury system



New laws come into effect in NSW this week. Anyone “inciting violence” on the basis of race, minority religious status, sexual orientation, or this bogus Orwellian construct of “intersex people” face $11,000 fine or three years in jail.

United Nationalists Australia declares this the ‘Newspeak laws’ since anyone threatening violence against anybody is or should be, dealt with under existing laws. However, these laws, which were lobbied for hard by “minority organisations” adds a special status to anyone in these favoured political categories. This makes the rest of us (White Australians) an increasing sub-class subject to greater social restrictions and with less access to similar legal consideration.


Nationalists have long felt the “un-person” status by crossing the social rubicon and calling out occupied multiracial Australia. The Police are disinclined to act upon threats against us by extremist groups linked to institutions of globalist organized-thuggery such as the Construction Forestry Mining, Maritime and Energy Union (CFMMEU). Likewise, complaints based on incitements to violence, such as those by members of the clandestine terror group Antifascist Action, are ignored by a compliant state apparatus.

Now, the discussion about the ethnic cleansing of true Australians as defined by the European settlers of this land and who created this nation that all these rapacious other races swarm to will have to be necessarily handled by the more articulate and savvy among us. The reckless and immature propaganda purveyed by the likes of Antipodean Resistance only ever helped create these laws just as much as it managed to cause its British counterpart and inspiration National Action to become a proscribed organisation in England.

Make no mistake, the signifiers used in mainstream anti-White propaganda are unashamed in highlighting the fact these laws are aimed at White Australians. A screengrab from a June ABC report on the laws uses an image of patriots standing with Aussie flags to illustrate the story and secure in the reader’s mind just who these political amendments to the Crimes Act 1900 target.

The red arrow points to the subjects of this bill. Yes, White Countries have a habit of legislating heavily against their own people in favour of every other non-threatened race on the face of this yellow, brown and black planet

The bill is called the Crimes Amendment (Publically Threatening and Inciting Violence) Bill 2018 and we probably have Nick Folkes, Neil Erikson, Mark Campbell-McDonald, Shermon Burgess and Ralph Cerminara to thank for it. There are three schedules the first of which inserts section 93Z into the Crimes Act while the second “…removes certain offences from the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 and makes a consequential amendment.” The third makes any of the described offences against the special citizens a summary offence.

Under the act, it won’t matter if threats are made in the heat of the moment, or if no violence is carried out. The bill concerns what it terms a “public act” which is defined as:

(a) any form of communication (including speaking, writing, displaying notices, playing of recorded material, broadcasting and communicating through social media and other electronic methods) to the public, and

(b) any conduct (including actions and gestures and the wearing or display of clothing, signs, flags, emblems and insignia) observable by the public, and (c) the distribution or dissemination of any matter to the public.

That is a fairly hefty set of criteria and as you can see open to wide interpretation and given the summary nature of the act it pretty much places all the power in the hands of the offended person(s), or group. The already litigious ‘minority’ groups will now be further emboldened to examine any context under which criticism is made for an interpretation of threat, violence, or vilification. This will be particularly so after the maiden speech by Katter’s Australia party senator Fraser Anning whose truths about the state of immigration and cultural disintegration has triggered the globalist jack-booters in the left-wing media to an even greater volume of anti-White hysteria.

And who is largely responsible for bringing these laws about? Aside from the NSW Liberal & Nationals we have a coalition group called ‘Keep NSW Safe’. Who comprises this group? They are as follows:

  • Federation of Indian Associations of Australia (Curry store owners)

  • Australian Hellenic Council NSW

  • New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies (Big surprise there)

  • Australian National Imams Council

  • Chinese Australian Services Society

  • Korean Society of Sydney

  • Australian Kurdistan Veteran Association

  • Assyrian Australian National Federation

  • Chinese Australia Forum (which works for Beijing’s interest to infiltrate Australian institutions)

  • International Coptic Union

  • Vietnamese Community in Australia – NSW Chapter

  • Australian South Sea Islanders

  • Hindu Council of Australia

  • Basmala Australia Inc (An Islamic mob)

  • Armenian National Committee of Australia

  • The Australian Egyptian Council Forum

  • South Asian Study Group, University of Sydney (Asian invaders taking jobs, shifting into high-rise apartments bought by rich Chinese parents, creating homelessness for Aussies)

  • Sikh Youth Australia (Gets to carry knives on religious grounds)

  • Cambodian-Australian Welfare Council of NSW (Pol Pot’s former soldiers)

  • NSW Council of Christians and Jews Inc. (Evangelical warmongers)

  • Australian Hellenic Educational Progressive Association (More Socialist Greek traitors)

  • Muslim Women Association (Burka battle axes)

  • Australian Cook Islander Community NSW

  • Australian Federation of Ukrainian Associations (Shame)

  • National Sikh Council of Australia (Like, India is >>>>THAT way!)

  • NSW Council for Pacific Communities

  • Philippine Community Council of NSW (Fuck off)

  • Warren Mundine (Get on out of it)

As you can see, these pork-barreling “communities” cobble together at the first chance to alter and affect the national character with the aid of the traitor political class. It would be like us shifting over to Arabia and forming the Australian Council of Pork-Munching Beer-Swillers, and then campaigning for the right to strut nude up and down the front of the country’s mosques in only our thongs and terrycloth hats.

However, what is also amusing is that these laws potentially threaten a little-publicised tactic used by the left itself. There are those among the anarchist and antifascist milieu who actually adopt ‘racist’ guises to harass and intimidate ideological opponents; one or two are even known to contribute to mainstream media. In fact, the anarcho-anti-globalist brown shirts are the readiest and willing to use threats and to vilify on the basis of race and religion, which is one of their myriad hyper-contradictions. It will be interesting to see how these laws affect that sector’s black ops.

Meanwhile, it will pay to be very measured in how our side communicates, but more to the point, such restrictions can only refine our language and grant our message precision.

Once upon a time stating the obvious didn’t land you 3 years lag




Queensland Senator Fraser Anning has popped the cork on the multiracial genie bottle. In his maiden speech to parliament, he heroically called for a plebiscite on a return to the predominantly European immigration policy of the pre-Whitlam consensus.

While Anning focused mainly on the Moslem problem skirting over the far more dangerous Asianisation of this country his speech was nonetheless the clarion call that most Australians have been bursting to hear.

Highlighting the failures of multiracialism, a system which was imposed on us by successive governments from Whitlam onwards, Mr Anning insisted we return to a “European Christian” immigration system.

In fact, we should be thinking more in terms of a blanket halt to immigration but we nonetheless appreciate Anning’s comments. Just as Andrew Bolt recently described Australia as having turned into a “hotel” with unfettered immigration, so Mr Anning argues “Ethnocultural diversity… has been allowed to rise to dangerous levels in many suburbs. In direct response, self-segregation, including White flight from poorer inner-urban areas, has become the norm.”

Mr Anning somewhat injudiciously suggested such a vote would be “the final solution to the immigration problem.”

Naturally, these words were not uttered with the intention of stirring up the ghost of National Socialist Germany, but the globalist-controlled media immediately contextualised it within the narrative of “the Holocaust”, invoking the usual signifiers of gas ovens and striped concentration camp uniforms. The ABC’s Adam Masters described his use of this expression as either “ignorance” or “dog whistle politics to the ever-present racist undercurrents in Australian society.” He then went on to give a historical account of Nazi Germany’s policy towards the Jews.

Highlighting the failures of multiracialism, a system which was imposed on us by successive governments from Whitlam onwards, Mr Anning insisted we return to a “European Christian” immigration system.

The ABC rushed to quote rabid anti-Whites as if their opinion holds greater truth than one who names the elephant in the room, quoting the Malaysian-born lesbian Labor senator Penny Wong who unsurprisingly said of the White Australia Policy, “We’ve rightly consigned that policy to the dustbin of history.” Crackpot Greens’ leader Richard Di Natale “demanded” an apology from Anning. We demand Mr Natale’s mother delivers an apology for giving birth to such a treasonous snail.

Anning’s most surprising critic was Pauline Hanson, his former party leader, who joined the multiracialists in condemning him by suggesting his words came out of “Joseph Goebbel’s handbook”.

Nationalists have all along argued that Pauline Hanson is a fraud: a conservative working for the interests of those such as her “friend” the mining oligarch Gina Rinehart who infamously penned an egregious poem to the virtues of mass immigration as an excellent means for increasing profits for those like her while eroding pay and conditions for workers.

Hanson went on to declare “We are a multicultural society and I’ve always advocated you do not have to be White to be Australian.”

Bob Katter, who leads Katter’s Australia Party in which Anning serves as a senator told a reporter that Hanson was “abandoning the territory that made her infamous or famous.”

Hanson went on to declare “We are a multicultural society and I’ve always advocated you do not have to be White to be Australian.”

This, we hope, doesn’t signal an unprecedented stampede towards Katter’s Australia Party. Katter is about as genuinely Nationalist as an Indian store clerk. But what it hopefully will do is lance the great boil so that Australians can see the true pus of a terror state we’re not fighting but actually living in.

Hanson, the “Patriot Queen” slammed Fraser Anning and compared him to Goebbels

Not only has it brought forth the usual stampede of skewed editorials from the brown shirt journalists of globalist media but it is sure to have triggered the state apparatus that controls our thoughts and crushes us under its jackboot if we question the cleansing of White Australia.

Many consider that Mein Kampf is the narrative for the Nationalist whereas, in fact, it is more like Franz Kafka. The serious Nationalist inevitably becomes targeted by the deep-state: demonised, victimised, persecuted and ground-down like a peppercorn.

We are right to compare the globalist journalist as “brown shirts” since especially among the former Fairfax Media stable of political assassins, their so-called journalists actively engage in the persecution of any target that crosses the Rubicon of state intolerance towards dissent; stepping out from behind their keyboard to pursue practises that would land anyone else in prison: employing stalking tactics, defamation, and conspiratorial collusion in false allegations.

Lauren Southern, the Alt-Right YouTube celebrity who many pretend Nationalists spent their money to hear instead of listening to actual Australians with something to say, nonetheless encapsulated much when she said that “Melbourne should be nuked”.

Many consider that Mein Kampf is the narrative for the Nationalist whereas, in fact, it is more like Franz Kafka. The serious Nationalist inevitably becomes targeted by the deep-state: demonised, victimised, persecuted and ground-down like a peppercorn.

Even for a Canuck who’d whizzed through the country, she managed to figure out there is a deep corruption in the state of Victoria that hedges against anyone challenging the dogma of multiracialism.

And this is the thing. Malcolm Turnbull, who does a very poor impersonation of a Prime Minister, condemned Anning’s speech on the grounds terrorists will be emboldened by his words. What terrorists? Our entire system is a terrorist, and it gives carte blanche to terrorists especially those who identify as “antifascists”. One of our United Nationalists Australia’s team has been a target of such a terrorist and a victim of the state that condones him.

Won’t someone PLEASE think of the Holocaust!


Dave Gullis is a member of the Australian Communist Party and Antifascist Action Sydney. He is known to live in and around Enmore, in Sydney’s inner-west and is usually in the company of an Aboriginal woman.

In October last year, he began a campaign against our editor, first threatening his life and then attacking his home. He returned a third time on a curious date that coincides with a wider conspiracy but that is something UNA will report on much later.

11188276_877885448935926_5245648042568850460_n - Copy
State-condoned terrorist Dave Gullis is also a romping stomping sodomite 

At first, we had no idea who we were dealing with. We ran a citizens campaign on this page and it resulted in him being identified by a Facebook page. Dave Gullis may or may not be his real name. When contacted for information, the then CFMEU denied any knowledge of Gullis arguing that his penchant for CFMEU clobber did not make him a member since it was for sale to anybody – as if anybody would want to wear their crabby rags. However, in late August he was spotted by a witness at the NSW State Labor conference in company with CFMMEU representatives.

An attempt by our editor to have an Apprehended Violence Order issued against Gullis was thwarted by Newtown Police who told him that it wasn’t their job to play detective. In fact, at no stage did the cops show the slightest concern for our man and we believe that a political directive was issued from above to do nothing.

Ex-Antifa comedian Shayne Hunter was bashed by Gullis (who at one time tried to sexually molest him) for “endangering Antifa”, which is a testament to the logic of Antifa and the state that sponsors their terror

Surprisingly, we learned only recently that Newtown Police — pardon the pun — were telling porkies when they denied knowledge of him. At around October last year, a young lad was at Newtown Station with some mates. He was wearing a Make America Great Again cap. Gullis allegedly challenged him over the hat and assaulted him. One of the bloke’s friends caught a pic of old matey and supplied it to police along with a post on Facebook promising a reward of $500 for information leading to his identification. It was classic Gullis, fat, stupid, and wearing his crappy CFMEU terror-wear.

After Gullis assaulted a random Alt-Righter the kid posted this

Perhaps the greatest lead of all, and one that UNA was ignorant of at the time was the release of a video by Antifa defector and comedian, Shayne Hunter. In the video, titled ‘Punched by a Communist’, Hunter describes being confronted and assaulted by Gullis at Newtown library. He went so far as to confirm that Gullis is a member of Antifascist Action Sydney and the whacko Commie party. Gullis punched him for “endangering Antifa” by outing them as brainwashed loonies. He too reported Gullis to Newtown Police. Hunter believes Newtown Pigs were actually keen to charge Gullis, but were unable to trace his address. We say they’re full of excrement and deserve the Golden Doughnut Award for excellence in uselessness. It is our considered opinion that Newtown, which is like a mini Victoria, bends over backwards to accommodate the anti-White fruitcakes bred and manufactured at the nearby Sydney University anti-White factory.

Hunter also mentioned that Dave Gullis is an invasive, grabby, rampant homosexual, a revelation which had us all rolling around the floor cacking ourselves.

Again, we make the point, that here we are in the West, travelling around the world blowing up countries because we say they are ruled by authoritarian dictatorships who suppress freedom of expression and allow only government-approved thought. Well, how are we any different? Our state is a terror state only you must cross that Multiracialist Rubicon to discover that you can quickly become a un-person for challenging the ethnic cleansing of White Australia.




A union thug that attacked the home of a United Nationalists Australia editor, as well as harassing the President of the Australia First Party was spotted with CFMEU delegates at Labor’s 2018 NSW conference.

Previously, the CFMEU had denied any knowledge of Dave Gull when approached by one of the complainants and advised him to instead contact police. He did this and an apprehended violence order was issued by Newtown Local Court. However, it proved an impossible task to track Gull to his address and NSW Police refused to assist in tracing him which meant the order could not proceed; leaving the impression of state sympathy with this mindless brute. It also draws a very distinct line of connection between the ALP and Antifascist Action.

Cleary, the CFMEU knew his whereabouts all along and questions now arise about their knowledge of his actions against the UNA editor.

Our editor refuses to let this matter rest knowing that Gull is a dangerous animal who should not be allowed to roam the streets freely menacing citizens with differing opinions from his own. It is therefore interesting that intelligence provided to UNA places him in the company of CFMEU delegates who were reportedly strutting around arrogantly at the Australian Labor Party’s (ALP) state conference at Sydney Town Hall on Saturday, June 30.

The CFMEU clearly kids itself that it holds a position of influence within the Australian Labor Party. The rank and file, such as Gull, also have a cognitive dissonance when it comes to understanding that the multimillion-dollar CFMEU no longer represents hard hats like him but is an auxiliary for a globalist party with central policies that conflicts with the interests of Australian workers they supposedly represent.

Interesting, too, is that by the terms of admission to the NSW ALP Conference that “observers” who registered for the event must also be ALP members. This presents the strong likelihood that Gull is also an ALP member and Labor, therefore, had his address on file, something which will need to be surrendered so that due process can be pursued against this totalitarian nightmare of an individual.

Bear in mind, that by having knowledge of Gull’s actions – which the CFMEU did – only amplifies accusations of that militant organisation’s reliance on violence and intimidation in the pursuance of its political ideas.

11188276_877885448935926_5245648042568850460_n - Copy.jpg
Dave Gull in his CFMEU night stalking outfit
Gull goes on the job at one of our editor’s homes in December 2017. Despite this video evidence, NSW cops did what they do best — NOTHING
Gull was caught on camera again at his third visit to our editor’s home, having previously attacked it with a firehose and threatening to “kill” him

If anyone has knowledge of Dave Gull please contact us by email @

Dr Jim Saleam: Fascists and Conservatives

Dr Jim Saleam: Fascists and Conservatives

Some people, who may be good patriots and who may yet make good nationalists attached as they are to the Alt-Right and to other patriot structures, have made favourable references to the Australian 1930’s paramilitary group, the New Guard. They have suggested it could be a fountainhead for Australian nationalism. I consider the New Guard – the exact opposite.

The New Guard, formed in 1931, was an armed and violent conservative movement which set out to undermine the Jack Lang government of New South Wales. In Lang, they saw ‘communism’. After all, he repudiated the war debts to London, stood up for the mass of the unemployed and pushed for credit expansion to ease the Depression. Lang stood for Australia first, for the struggle of the productive classes. Meantime, the New Guard espoused ‘unswerving loyalty’ to the Empire, ‘sane finance’ (deflation) and a managerial government run by ‘the best families’. The New Guard programme represented the class war from above dressed up as patriotism.

In 1933, the leader of the New Guard, Eric Campbell, met Sir Oswald Mosley of the British Union of Fascists. Mosley considered the New Guard to be fascist. He was wrong. And by this time too, Campbell was openly calling himself ‘fascist’. He was wrong too.

Colonel Campbell does the one-arm backstroke under hypnosis by a visiting American entertainer

What is the problem?

Well, the New Guard certainly went about uniformed and did violence, offering fascist salutes and saying it was fascist. It said it wanted to crush communism by violence and it claimed to be militantly patriotic.

But the New Guard was connected throughout its four-year life by subliminal sentiments, imperial and class ideological references and organisational threads to the Old Guard conservatives, the rich colonial-imperial bourgeoisie who wanted to hang on to their wealth against the challenge from the people. Social change, Australian economic independence, the Labor Party – all was communism. The Old Guard would rely upon the state apparatus and a secret paramilitary apparatus and putsch for power if need be. The New Guard, its bastard child, would do the street violence. It was no challenge to capitalism either.

Irony entered in. In July 1932, Lang was sacked by Sir Phillip Game, the governor, such that New South Wales be ‘saved’ from communism and civil war (sic). Four years later, Game was in London, making sure in his capacity as Commissioner of Police, that Mosley’s fascists could not be an effective challenge to the British elite. Two countries. Same imperial elite. Same interests to be defended.

For me, Jack Lang, brother-in-law to Henry Lawson, was the real deal. He was the champion of the people. He railed against international finance capital, against those who could not act and think as Australians in the banks and the corporations. In his extreme old age, he remained the fighter for White Australia. If there is a fountainhead for nationalism, it was Lang and not the New Guard.

The “communist” NSW Premier who was ousted for putting White Australia first – what sort of fascists would do that to such a ridgey didge Patriot?

In what must be suggestive of ideological place, I recall a chat some years ago with a Klub Nation reactionary, one of the shysters who recently conned his way into the Aussie Alt-Right phenomenon. He told me that the New Guard was a real nationalist movement and that its opposition to ‘leftist’ Lang was correct. It was ‘fascist’ too, he said – as if I would be turned on. So the circle completes and we again, in the immediate period, find ourselves assessing the relationship of fascism and conservatism – from the past.

Of course, there is a large academic literature these days that explains how fascist and conservative groups, under the pressure of events and the challenge of the Left in 1930s Europe, might share external features. Decades ago, the study was fresh and it was easier for political newbies and others to confuse the two. No more. Names like Martin Blinkhorn, Eugen Weber, Stanley Payne, A. James Gregor, Roger Griffin, Roger Eatwell can be traced by the curious today and it’ll be explained. Conservatism and fascism were mutually exclusive things.

Nonetheless, in my decades of political activity, I have continually come upon conservatives playacting at being militants and at being ‘fascists’ and even ‘Nazis’. It took me time to understand their essential ‘bs’.

When I was a high school kid, I came upon Eugen Weber’s Varieties Of Fascism. It taught me that fascism in one vital sense was a synthesis of nationalism and socialism. It varied from country to country, in how it arranged that synthesis from source-material and in what it looked like, but that synthesis was a key element of it. So, I tried to apply that knowledge to people I met.

I remember blundering into a Brisbane meeting of Eastern European ‘fascists’ in 1972. They gave each other salutes, chatted about fighting the Labor communists (?!) and doing violence – and then talked over how to help the Liberal Party stay in government. The Liberal Party? It seemed the Libs were going along with the USA to roll back East European communism and they would help the Libs make it happen. They were not alone in that sort of notion.

Consider the colourful – if ridiculous – Australian Nazi phenomenon during the period that the extreme-left in Australia gained some size (1969-75). Some of these so-called Nazis believed that they would ‘prove’ themselves to the conservative moneybags by fighting those commies in the street and, out of desperation at being unable to stem the Red tide any other way, the conservatives would ‘call them in’ to save the country. A Liberal-Nazi government would form to fight communism and perhaps even win the war in Vietnam! I remember asking one of these Nazis if that meant the Liberals would allow some socialist reforms of banking and the multinationals – but I was told that was communism too. “Are you a communist?”, he asked me. Much of the time, the Nazis took cues from the Special Branch political police in attacking the Left, yet considered that normal, a primer before the curtain was raised on their taking power. Nazis in Queensland thought Premier Joh was Australia’s von Hindenberg, the patriot who would team up with the tough boys to save the country. Delusional maybe, but all this demonstrated the essential linkage between the conservatives and would-be fascists. These fascists (sic) considered themselves as conservatives with one difference: they reasoned the conservatives weak and unwilling to do the dirty work – which meant someone had to break the law to fight those Reds!

Joh Bjelke Petersen was tipped to be the next Liberal Party Nazi leader… or something

However, there was for me, one good bump in the conservative road. I also met the émigré Hungarian fascists who had a different story. They told me that you: “cannot have nationalism without socialism and socialism without nationalism”. They said most of the émigré fascists (Eastern Europeans by and large) were flunkeys of the Liberals and that the Libs were the quintessential party of capital. They even told me that if ever they returned to Hungary, they thought it best that the property socialised by the communist regime from the aristocracy and the old wealthy elite– stay in state hands! Maybe they were communists like me?

In the late 1970’s, I was in Sydney, a member of the first nationalist groups when we met those Liberals known as ‘the Uglies’. Their descendants still survive as rabid free marketeers. This gang posed then as the toughest of the tough and the hardest of the hard Right. Or so they said. They told the nationalists that they were us and we were them, except they were going to take over the Liberal Party and ‘come out’ when the day came. The day never came and generation after generation of young people has heard their story. The nationalists worked it out. The Uglies were spinning a yarn to suck people in and neutralize them forever. The Liberal machine would mince them up into becoming Libs and run them as lures for other ‘radicals’ who might upset the conservative applecart.

There was a twist. This Liberal lot also told us that they were secret ‘fascists’ and even ‘Nazis’. After all, Menzies who had been an ‘Appeaser’ of fascism in the 1930’s had let into the country the East European collaborators after 1949. They said Hitler really knew how to screw communism by fighting it in the streets. Why he finally grew up and attacked the Soviet Union. Nazism was the highest form of patriotism because it defended its principles violently. But Aussie people didn’t really know all that so its secret message would stay the glue that will bind us – while we take over the Liberal Party. I started to think: is the Soviet Union even the enemy? Why fight them for the USA? And why are these Uglies all the way with Uncle Sam? How does their taking over the Liberal Party help the nationalist cause? We, nationalists, wanted an independent Australia and their programme isn’t nationalist. They said they just hated the ‘wet’ Malcolm Fraser, but supported everything he said about deregulation and ‘fighting communism’. After 1979, they followed Margaret Thatcher; she would beat communism by privatising everything, they said.

The dirty truth (part of it at least) came out in 1978 when the leader of the Uglies (Lyenko Urbanchich, a Slovenian collaborator with Germany and Italy) called for the recruitment of Vietnamese and other Indo-China ‘refugees’ into the Liberal Party as supporters of the war against communism. We, nationalists, were concerned with our European identity not communism as threats to the nation, so the division was in the open. Even so, they kept telling us for years they were ‘fascists’, just like us, ad nauseum. When one of us quipped to an Urbanchich follower, we would prefer a Soviet White Australia to a capitalist multiracial sewer, the old Slovenian guru finally said that Australian nationalism was bolshie anyway (1987). Thanks for that!

Lyenko Urbanchich called for Vietnamese and Indo-china refugees to join the Liberal Party against communism

In the mid-1980’s, a wag in the nationalist Australian National Action, of which I was the Chairman by then, came up with a goodie: the conservative Liberals will tolerate Nazis, but they will never tolerate nationalist-socialists.

Did these Liberals ever want the nationalisation of the banks? Did they want free education and socialised medicine? Did they want our mineral wealth controlled by the nation? Did they want direct democracy? Not at all. They adored free dog-eat-dog enterprise and government by parliament. They abhorred ‘dole bludgers’ (read: anyone who lost his job), considered themselves the born-to-rule elite and they regarded the working class person as not their equal. They never thought in terms of the fiercely independent nation with a destiny of its own, but revelled in the dependent country beholden to great allies.

Not too much ‘socialism’ in their national socialism? I suspect that in so far as they liked (sic) Nazis and fascists, it was all about the fascist regimes that went to war against communism and then only so far as they did fight communism as a system. Such social change that the fascists did implement was ignored in that argument. Past that, these conservatives weren’t part of fascism at all, but no end of game-players calling themselves ‘fascists’ would hang around them. They could sit around and talk and talk and dream – and do the dirty work of the conservatives.

What I did see in most of those who wanted to talk about fascism in those days of the 1970’s and 1980’s (and in possibly even now?), is that they wanted to discuss regime-fascism and how ‘good’ it was. They liked pretty pics of parades, invasions of the USSR, a few criticisms of ‘Jewish capital’ (but seldom, gentile capital), the myth of the great leader. In so far as any of it had some transcendental relevance to any Australian struggle, none seemed that interested in the mechanics of revolutionary action. This alone should have suggested that their talk of fascism was a block in the way of action! Fascism was for them just a myth to be talked about in a club of such people with Libs in attendance who could provide a ‘political’ outlet for them.

It became clearer to the nationalists. There had always been a real demarcation line between historical fascists and conservatives. If there had been anything positive in fascism that ‘line’ was it. And fascism’s essential sin (not the only one I would add) had been its alliances with the conservatives. Its revolution was bowdlerized before it got going. In that regard, I do remember meeting in the 1980’s an Italian who fought for the Italian Social Republic. He opined that the Mussolini regime till 1943 had been an illusion, a travesty of fascism’s potential. The Italian civil war brought the people into play against the industrialists and the landowners, the church and the monarchy, those whom the regime had previously indulged. That sounded different!

Of course, the discourse of a revolutionary fascism hardly gets a look-in with the debate on fascism, locked as it usually was, into a look-in at the regimes and their wondrous (sic) surface-appearances. The curiosity for me was the deepest fault of fascism in the 1930s and 1940s – that it temporized with the conservatives and the joke in the contemporary world was that the would-be fascists confused the two and pimped for the conservatives as errand boys.

The joke is still being played out in small circles.

I write as an Australian nationalist. My interest in fascism would be literary only if it was not for conservatives who put out bait and for a few people who muck about with fascism in the hope it might offer them something. The latter is more of the problem. Do they still mean regime-fascism? Or do they mean that synthesis of nationalism and socialism that the fascists, to their credit, attempted? And if they do mean that, did not the Australian radical nationalists and our labour movement achieve that synthesis but in our language and in a popular-democratic form? If that was true, why have the discussion about fascism at all?

I would conclude this article with a commentary about Australia from Antonio Grossardi, the Consul General in Australia of Fascist Italy. He said:

“Australia…since the day of its federation has lived…in the rosy certitude that it was the wealthiest, most capable, privileged and hard working country in the world, a type of Earthly Paradise,” God’s Own Country”, such that with a blind and constant faith in the present and future resources of the country, it abandoned itself to social-proletarian experiments of all sorts without taking into account the obstacles, the costs and the possibilities of success.”

Grossardi thought such was the wealth that the Australian people enjoyed they could afford to launch “continuous experiments in social-democracy”. This included a pragmatic labour party, distant from the ideological strife of the Old Continent, bent on enriching the poor rather than taking from the rich like the old socialisms. He went on to describe Australia’s social security system unsurprisingly as “overly generous”. Such comments beg comparison to the Italian reality at the same time, where the Fascist government was only beginning to introduce the rudiments of social welfare.

I am not surprised really that the regime-fascists thought ill of us. Australia is not the Old Continent, but a New Continent – and our challenges are our own.

It’s all too familiar





Shane Burley of the Black Rose Anarchist Federation website has favoured observers of alternative politics with an article outlining his Twenty-Five Theses On Fascism.

By James Hillman

Without conducting a tedious point by point examination of his theory of Fascism in the post-modern era we will nevertheless confront Burley’s hysterical, reactionary screed on the historical continuity and mass appeal of so-called 21st-century neo-Fascism.

This brand of Anarcho-Idiocy should be laughed back into the oblivion of cyberspace by all right-thinking people, however, as we all know, the basic principles of this anti-Fascist argument are being adopted by globalist-capitalist public relations officers to further the interests of the international commercial elites.

It would appear to the casual reader that Shane Burley is singing from the same hymn sheet as the evangelists of hyper-consumerism, indeed his thesis puts him in a very safe space; his views would tend to endear him to the proponents of totalitarian humanism with their dreams of a global village inhabited only by consumers.

Antifa: The guardians of the political vacuum caused by the retreat of the Left

These 25 talking points, even though they are repetitive and obtuse in parts scream Bourgeois adventurism with every line, Burley puts so many theoretical roadblocks in the path of grassroots radical action, applies so many caveats to working-class mobilisation that we might imagine him, in silk cravat and frock coat, swooning on his embroidered chaise through the effort of writing his polemic.

This brand of Anarcho-idiocy should be laughed back into the oblivion of cyberspace by all right thinking people, however, as we all know, the basic principles of this anti-Fascist argument are being adopted by globalist-capitalist public relations officers to further the interests of the international commercial elites.

The basic threads in this neurotic, overly tightly wrapped tapestry of nonsense are that Fascism is everywhere hoovering up doctrine and practical political measures from all tendencies; that even though the Left have all but submitted to the global money power and abandoned radical action the anti-Capitalist efforts of anyone not explicitly identifying himself as an Anti-Fascist must be de-platformed, physically attacked and, if possible, utterly destroyed.

The neo-Fascist elements gravitating toward the Alt-Right are just as much blocking force in the road to radical change

Under Burley’s model it is forbidden to hold views which amount to a Third Position, it is unacceptable for anyone to  carry out activism in the political spaces lately abandoned by the Left; “Fascists” should be prevented at all costs from agitating against capitalism and war, for working-class unity or in solidarity with movements of national liberation in the Third World.

In essence, we have a theory which places the Anti-Fascists in the role of ideological squatters, a loose assemblage of people who occupy political spaces merely so that nobody else may utilise them to radicalise and mobilise the working class and marginalised people.

All that these Anarchists are doing is behaving in a manner identical to their globalist-capitalist sympathisers, this approach is akin to the mentality of the property speculator who buys up cheap apartments and leaves them empty as they appreciate in value; it drains his capital in the short term and denies working people a place to live, creating a social deficit in the hope of future profit.

In essence we have a theory which places the Anti-Fascists in the role of ideological squatters, a loose assemblage of people who occupy political spaces merely so that nobody else may utilise them to radicalise and mobilise the working classes and marginalised people.

The post-modern Left as exemplified by the Black Rose writers are holding political spaces aside for some future, utopian mass movement of a cosmopolitan character, in the process draining the political capital of the radical Left through their violence toward opposing tendencies and their tolerance toward, if not outright collusion with capitalist interests.

It is no wonder that Civic Patriot groups are intruding upon the politically vacant, yet energetically policed spaces notionally held by Anti-Fascists; for all Shane’s blather about entryism and co-option of Left tactics it is plain to see that the Civics are moving in upon a political vacuum, effectively a clean slate upon which to write their own dogma once the rabble squatting there has been run off.

Team Idiot, the Civic Patriots, will take any opportunity afforded them, to muddy the waters and dilute the core nationalist message of White survival

There is a danger here too that other tendencies, with whom the Nationalists have much in common, in their efforts to take the reactionary anti-Fascists head on and break their hold on these spaces would similarly occupy them only to leave them ideologically vacant.

We refer here to the issue of subcultures and the club mentality, as opposed to radicalised cadres prepared to settle into the unflattering roles of, say, anti-war protestors, city councillors or grassroots advocates for the White ethnic group.

There is simply no time left for playing the Antifa at their own games, we cannot afford another fifteen year cycle of clubs and gangs, of edgy internet banter, ironic Roman salutes and any of the other artefacts of the great meme wars of the early 21st century, or the brothers wars of the 20th.

Anti-Fascists such as Burley rely heavily on strawman arguments, misinformation, fiction and the creation of satirical dramatis personae for publicly identifiable dissidents; the Fascists to which he refers are largely caricatures invented by the left for their own ends.

In reality we cannot fight fire with fire, we cannot adopt the same tactics used by the Anti-Fascists lest they produce identical outcomes; bear in mind always that the reason they adopt this hysterical, authoritarian position is that they are, in principle, totally against the idea of any form of politics at all.

We could point out here that the Australian pioneer ethos, that wellspring of the Australian Nationalist movements is fundamentally a form of Anarcho-Syndicalism and that, contrary to their utterances, the Anti-Fascists oppose any and all manifestations of that primal national character, that they are anti-political to the core and as such cannot ever fully occupy the political landscape and develop a coherent, much less a democratic movement.

It falls upon Nationalist dissidents and their allies to not only challenge these ideological squatters and enablers of the money power, to fight them for the power vacuums in post-modern politics, but it is incumbent upon us to radicalise and motivate our people to hold them and establish concrete political principles and a framework for collective action with which to fill the void.

There is simply no time left for playing the Antifa at their own games; we cannot afford another fifteen-year cycle of clubs and gangs, of edgy internet banter, ironic Roman salutes and any of the other artefacts of the great meme wars of the early 21st century, or the brothers’ wars of the 20th.

The time to move is now, the real Left is in retreat and the field of struggle is being squatted by ragpickers, retards and Bourgeois dilettantes, meanwhile immigrants flood in, the suburbs degenerate into something reminiscent of A Clockwork Orange and the globalist money men consolidate their power as they count their loot.

Anti-Fascists refuse to confront the real problem because the solutions are incongruous with the arcane codes of conduct underpinning their fantasy world