THE GREAT PURGE OF 2017: A LOGICAL EXPLANATION

THE GREAT PURGE OF 2017: A LOGICAL EXPLANATION

Readers would be well aware of a change in attitude toward dissident viewpoints, at management level within Google and Facebook.

Where previously these companies exercised a degree of tolerance toward most points of view, the commercial realities of allowing anti-capitalist, anti-globalist or even just plain stupid material to take hold on their platforms have been brought into sharp focus over the past few months.

From around the first week of April, reports began to appear in the mainstream press concerning a backlash of sorts by advertisers on the Google-owned YouTube platform; the issues raised included concerns over “inappropriate” videos being preceded by corporate advertising and a lack of control on the part of sponsors over where their ads were appearing.

Companies such as Toyota, McDonald’s, Pepsi, Starbucks and many other globalist brands pulled their advertising from YouTube due the fact that their videos were being attached to, among other things, clips espousing Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism; this resulted in a hit in the order of 4% to the share price of Google’s parent company, Alphabet Inc.

cfd

The remedial action taken by Google, in this case, is not yet clear, they have spoken about re-writing the algorithms in their operating software to better tailor the targeting of advertising and made some comments about allowing advertisers greater freedom to tailor the placement of their ads on YouTube, as well as the millions of other, third-party sites overseen by Google.

It remains to be seen whether the measures taken by YouTube will make a difference to the user experience, or lure back lucrative advertising contracts; we may never really know the outcome but there has long been a policy in place where they do not allow posters of controversial material to monetise their channels as YouTube partners.

William_Gibson_by_FredArmitage
William Gibson predicted the corporate takeover of cyberspace

Facebook, it would seem, has decided to act quickly in heading off any potential advertiser walk-out by permanently banning a swathe of controversial, nationalistic or civic patriot themed accounts and the personal pages of anyone associated with banned material, notable among them our own UNA Facebook account.

Where previously these companies exercised a degree of tolerance toward most points of view, the commercial realities of allowing anti-capitalist, anti-globalist or even just plain stupid material to take hold on their platforms have been brought into sharp focus over the past few months.

Now, much has been made of this purge by self-styled, online anti-racists and their mirror images in what we call the “right wing Antifa”, those conservatives who zealously pursue and harass nationalists and true patriots.

These serial pests, shut-ins, and obsessive compulsives are crowing loud and long about their tactics of mass reporting of any dissident thought having brought down pages such as UNA, UPF and Reclaim Australia, to name a few.

Looking at the situation logically, while having a basic grasp of how Facebook actually works and its record on such matters since the inception of the platform, we can only come to one conclusion: this cull of dissenting points of view, this purge of ideas which contradict the globalist capitalist line must have been done in the name of the almighty dollar.

Rupert Murdoch, Michael Bloomberg
Fifteen years ago we were worried about the old media barons taking over the internet

After all, the White trash of Antifa and their ideological brothers and sisters in the civic patriot groups have been mass reporting genuine dissident material 24 hours a day, 365 days a year since the days of Myspace and message boards. Their numbers have actually greatly decreased over that time so the decision to kill off unpopular ideas on Facebook is clearly a commercial decision, not the result of a tactical breakthrough by a few, numerically irrelevant Trolls.

What is also clear to the logical observer is that cyberspace, to all intents and purposes, is no longer a neutral space, that corporations rule the internet, that what is commonly called “political correctness” is now an integral part of globalist lifestyle branding and that the only social engineering being attempted is within the consumer “culture” of the multinational corporation.

Looking at the situation logically, while having a basic grasp of how Facebook actually works and its record on such matters since the inception of the platform, we can only come to one conclusion: this cull of dissenting points of view, this purge of ideas which contradict the globalist capitalist line must have been done in the name of the almighty dollar.

The fashion in which the Facebook software tailors the user experience with targeted advertising, friend and page recommendations based on the browsing history of the individual user makes it unlikely that a person is ever going to see any content which may offend them, unless they go looking for it on purpose or something slips through on the feed of a friend.

sjw-freakshow-lauren-southern
No, uppity Social Justice Warriors had nothing to do with the great social media purges of 2017

This analysis also proves the fears regarding net neutrality, long held by futurists the world over; granted in the early years of the noughties it seemed as if Newscorp and traditional media might take over the web and turn it into something like Foxtel, however, the reality is that middle-of-the-road neo-liberalism now reigns supreme online.

The move to rid Facebook of commercially problematic content may be a way of appeasing the direct demands of its corporate partners, or it may simply be an expression of good faith by a company long criticised for hosting “extremist” points of view, we cannot say for sure.

It all makes sense to anyone in business, the inclusion of all individuals into the global consumer class and the accommodation of all their whims, tastes and fancies is obviously the best way to make money and the best use of the internet as a sales tool.

Globalist corporations support same-sex marriage, for example, because marketing these days largely revolves around concepts of lifestyle and a mix-and-match set of personal values drawn from the prescribed life choices of the cosmopolitan consumer culture; the more variations this culture can accept the more product the corporations can shift.

The move to rid Facebook of commercially problematic content may be a way of appeasing the direct demands of its corporate partners, or it may simply be an expression of good faith by a company long criticised for hosting “extremist” points of view, we cannot say for sure.

It is impossible to monetise ideas such as nationalism, patriotism, traditionalism and even Communism because they all rely on making us versus them distinctions and prescribe in-group loyalty above all else. If the consumer culture can be described as a smorgasbord, where the individual chooses his own identity from a range of possible components then its opposite must be a set menu, where a strictly limited number of options are available and the group assigns an identity for all.

enhanced-buzz-1504-1379943854-7
Liberals used to think this way

This is the heart of the matter and the real implication of the great social media purges of 2017, we must take the globalist-capitalists at their word.

They accuse Nationalists and true patriots of fostering division and unrest; a breakdown in social cohesion is their greatest fear but it is not the nation, the physical communities of towns and suburbs or the family they seek to protect, it is their global consumer monoculture, the deracinated, classless society held together by money and the material things it can buy.

We at UNA are, fortunately, on the record as being long term skeptics of social media, we use it when convenient but scarcely miss it when it is no longer available due to the fact that radicalisation of the proletariat and marginalised people via Facebook never seemed feasible to us.

What is more the people we seek to turn on to our brand of radical Australianism are not to be found on Facebook, where it is well known that something in the order of 80% of traffic is generated by around 10% of users; they are in the outer suburbs of our cities and the rural hinterland and outreach to those Whites with ears to hear has always been our primary concern.

alfred-e-neuman.jpeg

THE ZIOS ARE BACK AND THEY WANT TO RECLAIM AUSTRALIA

THE ZIOS ARE BACK AND THEY WANT TO RECLAIM AUSTRALIA

What do you do with the UPF? If you’re Facebook, you shut down their main page. So what do THEY then do? They migrate as much Zionist supporting material as they can to sister pages and to their Reclaim Australia – West Australia Rally page.

In every quote to the media, however, you will find their leadership claiming to be ‘nationalist’ and not ‘patriot’ which is such a conscious delineation that its intention is coldly clear to true Australian nationalists.

True Australian nationalists would never bill an event in the following terms, “We are asking people of all walks of life, COLOR (sic) and ethnic background to stand as one against extremism”.

On the same page (RA-WA) you will find a link to a True Blue Crew flag march where Whiteness is heavily emphasised. Then it’s back to the kosher meal of every possible Zionist-related entity they chug up – Britain First and Tommy Robinson shares right there in among them.

Well, they know by now; surely they aren’t naive. They know that promoting ultra-Zionists like Avi Yemini is a contradiction in terms to the single-minded cause of fighting Islamic extremism. Ultra-Zionists like Avi and his fellow countrymen create such extremism. They do so both by having manufactured ISIS, so as to pit them against the unfriendly Moslems on their list – and by continually stoking bloody conflict in the region.

The perennial program of destabilisation establishes a power balance that benefits the security of the state of Israel and services whatever objectives its allies may have in the region. But it also does something else – and has done so since the 1970s – it creates a mass migration of Middle Easterners into Australia.

True Australian nationalists would never bill an event in the following terms, “We are asking people of all walks of life, COLOR (sic) and ethnic background to stand as one against extremism”.

Simple equation: Avi Yemini + Reclaim Australia + Dumb Aussie Supporters Who Hate Islam = Much More Moslems Entering the Country.

What does this portend for the ‘nationalism’ that they claim to be championing, having knowingly appropriated the term from staunch supporters of a new White Australia Policy? It kills it because those same Zionists do everything possible to eradicate such nationalist beliefs. They do more though — they align with the Left to attack serious nationalists such as we saw recently with Fairfax’s criminal toll Luke McMahon, who is known to have ties with Zionist-convert Neil Erikson.

Erikson, along with Nick Folkes, Howard Crawford, Scott Moerland and others have campaigned heavily against true nationalists. We are not at all surprised to find the UPF making the self-defeating move to once again associate with these cagey globalists in the hope of puffing up their waning profile.

Thus, nationalists for a White Australia become treated worse than kiddy fiddlers, and the planes keep flying more and more Indians, Chinese, Africans and MOSLEMS from the Middle East. The cathartic activity of stoking enmity against Islam merely gives a moral license to our globalist government to support military crimes in the Middle East which benefit Israel.

In this battle, all those values that Australians regarded as part of their birthright are trampled on. Zionists in Australia, while demanding racial and religious homogeneity at home, are forever insisting on total diversity for Australia and all White countries.

Simple equation: Avi Yemini + Reclaim Australia + Dumb Aussie Supporters Who Hate Islam = Much More Moslems Entering the Country.

This diversity has transformed our cities into utterly foreign destinations. The quarter-acre home has been replaced by towering (shoddily built) concrete toolboxes crammed with Chinese and Indians; the odour of their spicy cooking permeating the streets.

Australia needs reclaiming from all of this, not just one particular branch of this allegedly diverse community.

It is not the Indians, Africans, or Chinese who are losing their identities. They’ve never had it so sweet. While White Australians are slowly being discouraged from even considering ourselves Australian, this new population get dual identities. They get to be Indian AND Australian; they get to be African AND Australian, and they get to be Chinese AND Australian.

Islam is just a symptom of this single world government that has its master Zionist America. But while all these terms we throw about ‘Zionist’ ‘civic patriot’ and whatever might confuse the casual punter it is all quite simple. Unless you live in one of those last posts White Australian areas that are only ‘gradually’ being de-Europeanised you only have to take a walk, open your eyes, and smell the pungent waft of curry.

What difference does Islam make if – in the highly improbable event of removing it – you do so only to find yourself a stranger in your own country, shivering and alone among a new population of aliens? What will you reclaim then?

Wake up to the Zionists — you are being used.

C1ePePgVEAAVEM4
Avi Yemini, the ultra-Zionist who is now the darling of the civic patriots now calling themselves Australian ‘nationalists’

NO, PAULINE, THAT IS NOT THE WAY TO SAVE AUSTRALIA

NO, PAULINE, THAT IS NOT THE WAY TO SAVE AUSTRALIA

Pauline Hanson has bulk to learn when it comes to understanding the expectations of those who voted for her.

Regardless of what the cucks trumpet on her behalf, this is not about treating Australian identity like a piece of paper stamped by a government department that anyone can own. By that we mean it’s not about coming from anywhere you like as long as you ‘assimilate’ and don’t practise Islamic teachings.

It doesn’t work like that in China, or Japan, most African countries or anywhere that hasn’t turned itself into a colossal tin of human Smarties.

But Pauline either doesn’t get that message or is so wrapped up in proving she is not what most of us know she isn’t any way that she went out of her way to air-kiss a woman who has no place in Australia let alone in our parliament.

We speak, of course, of Kenyan-born ‘lawyer’ Lucy Gichuhi, who takes over the Family First senator’s seat vacated by Bob Day.

401E0D6B00000578-4486898-image-a-69_1494304916163
See. She’s no racist. But she should be. We are of course talking about the black woman.

Yes, Pauline, we are meant to be encouraging highly skilled individuals like Lucy to return to Kenya and share her gift with her own people and own nation. That way, her people benefit, and we get to have our own nation back. How many colourful and vibrant souls like her and that African thing with the glasses that hates Australia are we meant to cop just because we are part of this anti-White organisation called the United Nations?

By welcoming her, particularly when your presence is supposed to connote some sort of nationalism (lol) you are not only behaving against the interests of your voters but you are complicit in the ruination of Australia.

But then Pauline clearly doesn’t have a clue, and as we’ve argued ourselves hoarse here explaining, she is just a woman with a meal ticket in politics. She hasn’t made one single contribution to politics which isn’t purely symbolic and symbolic of all the things she actually doesn’t stand for.

8135976-3x2-700x467
Erm, yeah, and then there was this. She actually sacked her Asian candidate for being “homophobic”

THE ALLURE OF FOREIGN RULERS IS THE HEART OF POPULISM

THE ALLURE OF FOREIGN RULERS IS THE HEART OF POPULISM

According to Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, “Putin should not be admired by anyone”. This stern warning which is backed with all the authority of a man lecturing his wife’s son comes in response to Pauline Hanson’s latest appraisal of the Russian leader.

Confident that Hanson hasn’t the foggiest outside the whispered instructions of James Ashby and Malcolm Roberts, we’re putting this down to another excruciating attempt to accrue relevance vis-à-vis, foreign demagogues.

Similarly, the Trump phenomenon – which we’ve recently decried as a fraudulent ploy to deceive White Identitarians into supporting Trumpism – is also a go-to man for a Hanson covering up her party’s internal entropy.

Far from an exclusive happening to our own shores, it’s this two-man show that reveals itself all around the civic world with the same annoying recurrence as an accursed fly on a hot day.

It comes to us always in the same package: “we want a strong leader like Putin,” “we want Putin’s style of leadership,” “we need someone like Trump,” “Trump is a strong leader,” and too many ghastly variants thereof.

It’s remarkable that this one, quite broad and yet at the same time quite simplified quality of strength, is presented in such a fashion as though it’s an exotic viand to be searched out and acquired by adventurous merchants, brought back to us in all haste so we can sup of this ‘strength’ and ‘strong governance’.

Also remarkable, is that the actual political considerations between the two leaders and goals of their respective countries – which are manifestly at odds in many areas – are so blatantly ignored which hazes the proper definition of what the Hansonites and associated

Also remarkable, is that the actual political considerations between the two leaders and goals of their respective countries – which are manifestly at odds in many areas – are so blatantly ignored which hazes the proper definition of what the Hansonites and associated

It comes to us always in the same package: “we want a strong leader like Putin,” “we want Putin’s style of leadership,” “we need someone like Trump,” “Trump is a strong leader,” and too many ghastly variants thereof.

download (13)
A strong leader? Yep, that’s me!

It’s remarkable that this one, quite broad and yet at the same time quite simplified quality of strength, is presented in such a fashion as though it’s an exotic viand to be searched out and acquired by adventurous merchants, brought back to us in all haste so we can sup of this ‘strength’ and ‘strong governance’.

It’s likewise remarkable that the actual political considerations between the two leaders and goals of their respective countries – which are manifestly at odds in many areas – are so blatantly ignored which hazes the proper definition of what the Hansonites and associated

It’s remarkable too that the actual political considerations between the two leaders and goals of their respective countries – which are manifestly at odds in many areas – are so blatantly ignored which hazes the proper definition of what the Hansonites and associated fiends are even after anymore. As the spud fields aren’t known for producing Machiavellians, we would save these civic patriots the trouble of questing after that which they won’t acquire by recommending some essential reading in the form of Roger Hargreaves’

It comes to us always in the same package: “we want a strong leader like Putin,” “we want Putin’s style of leadership,” “we need someone like Trump,” “Trump is a strong leader,” and too many ghastly variants thereof.

As the spud fields aren’t known for producing Machiavellians, we would save these civic patriots the trouble of questing after that which they won’t acquire by recommending some essential reading in the form of Roger Hargreaves’ Mr. Strong, supplemented by Mr. Clever; the teachings are simply codified and full of quaint illustrations – imagine the infused wisdom the flag-wavers could learn from these benevolent characters.

Nevertheless, it’s perplexing as to why we want or even need a leader like Trump or Putin. You can’t have a leader like them without mimicking them in some way or another, and you can’t mimic them without looking like a total dill.

Surely a ‘strong’ leader does not mimic, but acts from his own competent self; and surely if one did have that competency of leadership they would act on it and not be asking where it is or why we don’t have it, much less trying to cheaply copy and paste it from overseas. Hanson’s bellowing for such leaders while not matching them on any level is likely as close a personal confession we’ll get that she positively doesn’t have in her what the people think she does.

Surely a ‘strong’ leader does not mimic, but acts from his own competent self; and surely if one did have that competency of leadership they would act on it and not be asking where it is or why we don’t have it, much less trying to cheaply copy and paste it from overseas. Hanson’s bellowing for such leaders while not matching them on any level is likely as close a personal confession we’ll get that she positively doesn’t have in her what the people think she does.

That’s why the sickly obsession with these men, personality envy if you will, is so rampant: the allure of foreign rulers make up for everything our own equivalents lack; it’s a dazzling show to trick the masses. That Hanson’s goons post images of her everywhere with the appropriated slogan “Make Australia Great Again” shows the authority is borrowed and tied to offshore markets – again, mimicking.

Nevertheless, it’s perplexing as to why we want or even need a leader like Trump or Putin. You can’t have a leader like them without mimicking them in some way or another, and you can’t mimic them without looking like a total dill.

But when something is over exaggerated these patriots will never cease to amaze us by under exaggerating, if not flat out ignoring, other events that strike anyone else as rather important. A prominent case in point being Putin’s crucial intervention in the Syrian Civil War. It’s in this Arab country that otherwise vocal Putinophiles are quieter than the Russian President’s critics.

Yes, they appear to keep mum over the fact Russia has cosy relations with Ba’athist Syria and, worse on the patriot Richter scale, Iran. Now, what does that mean? It means that outside theatrics, patriots know and care about their idols as much as Dan Evans knows and cares about being sober.

9a35716d6a74c13913b1c49eeb0e61f9a0ed89eb
Pauline Hanson, super-nationalist!

The extent of Russia’s cordial relations with the Islamic world (part of it at any rate) is hardly a minor matter, yet here we are scratching our heads as to why Putin isn’t persona non grata to those drooling over his perceived magnificence. His choice in international friends is a little halal, no?

That Hanson’s goons post images of her everywhere with the appropriated slogan “Make Australia Great Again” shows the authority is borrowed and tied to offshore markets – again, mimicking. But when something is over exaggerated these patriots will never cease to amaze us by under exaggerating, if not flat out ignoring, other events that strike anyone else as rather important.

A prominent case in point being Putin’s crucial intervention in the Syrian Civil War. It’s in this Arab country that otherwise vocal Putinophiles are quieter than the Russian President’s critics. Yes, they appear to keep mum over the fact Russia has cosy relations with Ba’athist Syria and, worse on the patriot Richter scale, Iran.

Yes, they appear to keep mum over the fact Russia has cosy relations with Ba’athist Syria and, worse on the patriot Richter scale, Iran. Now, what does that mean? It means that outside theatrics, patriots know and care about their idols as much as Dan Evans knows and cares about being sober.

Now, what does that mean? It means that outside theatrics, patriots know and care about their idols as much as Dan Evans knows and cares about being sober. The extent of Russia’s cordial relations with the Islamic world (part of it at any rate) is hardly a minor matter, yet here we are scratching our heads as to why Putin isn’t persona non grata to those drooling over his perceived magnificence. His choice in international friends is a little halal, no?

A prominent case in point being Putin’s crucial intervention in the Syrian Civil War. It’s in this Arab country that otherwise vocal Putinophiles are quieter than the Russian President’s critics. Yes, they appear to keep mum over the fact Russia has cosy relations with Ba’athist Syria and, worse on the patriot Richter scale, Iran.

Now, what does that mean? It means that outside theatrics, patriots know and care about their idols as much as Dan Evans knows and cares about being sober. The extent of Russia’s cordial relations with the Islamic world (part of it at any rate) is hardly a minor matter, yet here we are scratching our heads as to why Putin isn’t persona non grata to those drooling over his perceived magnificence. His choice in international friends is a little halal, no?

Now, what does that mean? It means that outside theatrics, patriots know and care about their idols as much as Dan Evans knows and cares about being sober. The extent of Russia’s cordial relations with the Islamic world (part of it at any rate) is hardly a minor matter, yet here we are scratching our heads as to why Putin isn’t persona non grata to those drooling over his perceived magnificence. His choice in international friends is a little halal, no?

The fatal flaw in Australian populism is that it can’t grow an organic, incorruptible base. Instead, we’ve shown to be inundated with scoundrels, hacks and, probably most insulting to the people, opportunists. As the nativism gives way to popularity and egoism so do the tenets of pure Nationalism. Populism co-opts its way into the established order of things and, lo and behold, we have but a different shade of globalism. Hanson’s own economic and immigration policies attest to that.

Nationalists hope the lesson is slowly sinking in that any so-called ‘saviour of the people’ placing too much attachment in foreign politics is more than likely not too sure about their own individualistic capabilities back home.

screen-shot-2016-02-22-at-12-37-57-am
Dan “the conservative capitalist” Evans (R) and the biggest grub on the Internet (L)

COMMIES KVETCH WHILE NATIONALISTS NOSH

COMMIES KVETCH WHILE NATIONALISTS NOSH

Well, comrades, the Bendigo Three have made their initial appearance in the Melbourne magistrates court on trumped up, political charges relating to the now infamous mock ISIS beheading video shot in 2015.

The Nationalist contingent arrived just as the doors to the court building were opening, once we had negotiated the police cordon outside and gone through the rigmarole of the security screening we repaired to the foyer coffee shop, to wait.

See that is the main feature of the Victorian justice system, the glacial pace at which it moves; in the end, the hour and some minutes we waited were well spent as we mingled with the supporters of the three accused men.

Even though there is a serious divide between Nationalists and Civic Patriot groups the mood was upbeat and the conversations between members of the different groups were civil, convivial even.

patriot woman
A lone patriot protester who should have been INSIDE the court rather than confronting the few dozen protesters outside

Two feral spies from the No Room For Racism grouplet were skulking about early in the piece, attempting to take video on their phones but were quickly spotted, confronted by some Nationalist women and sent packing.

Things were going swimmingly on our side as the stereotypical chanting of the anti-racists could be heard wafting in from the street like a bad smell; that was until the arrival of “Antifa Neil” Erikson and his new bum-chum “Serbian George” Jameson, who were inexplicably dressed in white Haji style robes and carrying Muslim prayer mats.

Contrast this with the Nationalist and Patriot supporters who opted either for suits and ties or smart casual wear out of respect for the defendants, the court and each other.

This pathetic duo of impostors and their minuscule band of hangers-on were a sad sight to behold as they stood to one side of the foyer, ostracised by their former comrades and guarded by a detachment of riot police.

Eventually the defendants were called to the chamber but the demand for seating in the courtroom outstripped the limited supply, as a result a sizeable contingent of Bendigo Three supporters had to remain in the foyer while the hearing took place, the wait was quite short and the news was relayed back that the case had been adjourned until late May.

The court was soon empty and the foyer once again full of Nationalists, Patriots and police officers; keen to get on with their operations the senior officers and public order squads marshalled us into their cordon and gave us their instructions on how we were to exit the building.

Walking quickly, as directed by the coppers we were marched out into the blazing morning sunlight to be greeted by the usual screaming mob of retired teachers, spotty student types, meth-head looking spastics and superannuated union representatives.

Some thirty in number this foolish assembly of movement has-beens and their juvenile acolytes might easily have been mistaken for a long lost element of some 1970’s era Vietnam war moratorium march.

As these “Anti-Racists” struggled weakly against the police cordon we were struck by the absence of one notable contingent: the Antifa or Black Bloc hooligans.

We suspect that there has been a split between the Anarchists and the union-backed rent-a-crowd which is run out of Trades Hall, this is the third rally in succession at which there has been no Antifa presence to speak of.

In any event, the Anarchists would have been up against it had they tried to harass or attack the Patriots and Nationalists, many of our people expressed disappointment at the lack of argy-bargy and the tiny turnout of leftists.

As we walked down Lonsdale street and the Bendigo Three were mobbed by the media, one smart-alec lefty decided he would try to video some of the Patriots, only to have his phone slapped out of his hand by a tiny blonde haired woman and almost copping a punch in the head from her boyfriend.

After Erikson, Jameson and their cast of morons had beaten a hasty retreat in a Taxi the media circus moved into Healey’s lane, behind the court complex and as the police contingent departed we stood for some time talking and enjoying the cool, shaded cafe area.

Soon it was time to bid goodbye to the Patriots and folk who’d stood beside Chris Shortis and Blair Cottrell; the Nationalists sought out a pub, enjoyed a counter lunch and spent the rest of our time together socialising and enjoying the afternoon.

We look forward to the next hearing in May, which, despite the ordeal for the defendants will no doubt be another good opportunity to get together with our comrades; we wonder how the state will proceed with its case and we are curious to see if the Left can still muster a credible counter rally in Melbourne?

Screen Shot 2017-03-09 at 3.37.05 pm
Chris Shortis was the embodiment or radical nationalism on the day

NATIONALISTS HAVE NO USE FOR THE FAR RIGHT

NATIONALISTS HAVE NO USE FOR THE FAR RIGHT

Well, comrades, we called it straight after the 2016 federal election, time after time since then we have hammered home the point: Pauline Hanson’s One Nation are simply an organ of the Liberal party.

The preference deals struck by the Liberals with PHON for the coming Western Australian state election revealed, for all to see, the real game; it is also rumoured that the Kevin Andrews faction in Victoria is eyeing a similar arrangement.

We hardly need to point out the implications of these arrangements, our readers are more than capable of putting two and two together and coming up with the correct sum; so too, it seems, are some of the One Nation candidates in the West.

Margaret Dodd, PHON candidate for Scarborough has emphatically stated that she will defy party orders and choose her own preferences; Ms Dodd went so far as to describe the One Nation leadership as bullies.

So too, the Nationalists have gone to great lengths over the last 12 months to expose the links between so-called “far-right” groups and the Liberal party; by virtue of having made ourselves accessible to disaffected members of these groups, as confidants with a reputation for getting things done we are privy to all the goings-on in patriot and right wing circles.

Liberal party operatives have their sticky little fingers all over the far-right circus, this we have shown, through our own activism, to be absolutely true; from Party For Freedom to the Burgess-Erikson circle of provocateurs and the remnants of the Victorian street movements, all signs point back to Liberal fixers.

Margaret Dodd, PHON candidate for Scarborough has emphatically stated that she will defy party orders and choose her own preferences; Ms Dodd went so far as to describe the One Nation leadership as bullies.

What is also absolutely true is that the Nationalists, far from wanting supremacy over the far-right, want to see it pushed back and taken out of the lives of workers and marginalised people; to be clear, we want nothing from the right, its personnel, its ideals and its ludicrous talking points are of no use to us.

Veteran Nationalists we have spoken to are aghast at the simply mindless bigotry of many far-right figures, the sort of negative, angst-ridden “ugly Australians” you would expect to find portrayed in an SBS expose on racism.

9dc486b0029288d16273df2704dc45e4
Margaret Dodd understands that giving the Liberals preferences defeats the purpose of creating opposition

When we see literal race mixers, men with Asian wives and children at home, spewing venomous invective at immigrants and their advocates who among us could fail to be disgusted?

We do not merely point our fingers at these charlatans and scream “hypocrite!”, as people devoted to our families we are genuinely revolted by anyone who would put their loved ones through such humiliation, to the Nationalists this is an unforgivable transgression.

Likewise, we have no sympathy for the loyal followers of these would-be far-right demagogues, the people who, in full knowledge of the bad character of their spokesmen still continue to traipse around after them, defend these degenerates and delude themselves that they are part of a “movement”.

When we see literal race mixers, men with Asian wives and children at home, spewing venomous invective at immigrants and their advocates who among us could fail to be disgusted?

Readers may also have seen reports of the recent Q-Society fundraising events in Sydney and Melbourne; apart from the fact that this club is centred on bolstering support for the Zionist entity and that information to hand suggests a Kahanist element at work behind the scenes, we wonder if our comrades spotted the other obvious con-job going on?

We have long said that the only function of the conservative demagogue is to betray the workers and direct their votes toward the Liberal party, no clearer example of this could be found than on the list of speakers at the Q-Society functions.

16998221_1478762628810019_7467990098763364922_n
Embarrassing times for the Q Society

The presence of senator Cory Bernardi and MP George Christensen is self-explanatory in the context of this article, the addition to the bill of working class 1970’s cultural icons, Gary “Angry” Anderson and Larry Pickering is particularly galling, even upsetting for Nationalists of a certain age.

These men are cynically trading on their history as formerly respected artists, voices of the old Australia, that ghost society which now lives only in the memories of those White Australians born before the 1990’s.

Anderson, the rock and roll outlaw with his trademark Jacky Howe singlets and boiler suits and Pickering with his smutty cartoons lampooning the high and mighty of Australian society were much-loved figures; it is plain to see that both have long since abandoned their roots, sold out and now represent the big end of town, the globalist liberal project and the Israel first crowd.

These men are cynically trading on their history as formerly respected artists, voices of the old Australia, that ghost society which now lives only in the memories of those White Australians born before the 1990’s.

This is the hook to the swindle being played upon the workers and marginalised people by the far-right, two artists with whom the true Australians could once relate are effectively the bait in a political trap for well-meaning and genuinely patriotic Aussies; their brand of politics, though, directs that patriotic feeling to blatantly anti-Australian ends.

The more polished performers on the far-right circuit also give workers the impression that status could be gained by throwing in their lot with the Anti-Islam groups, that Whites could conceivably advocate on behalf of their people without being labelled as “racist” due to the admission to the fold of selected Asians or other “Uncle Toms”, to borrow an American pejorative term.

Unfortunately for the unwary, well-meaning Whites, this is not the case, it is merely another deception being perpetrated by opportunists and manipulative, anti-White globalists.

Nationalists know that under present conditions there is no “safe” way to advocate on behalf of White Australia; no amount of nostalgia, fluffy multiculturalism or false piety can obscure the fact that to take up the politics of White Nationalism is not only social suicide, but that it puts the Nationalist on a collision course with all elements of the globalist liberal mainstream, including the far-right.

At some point, our brand of politics will become safer as the right wing degenerates are rolled and their parties deactivated for good.

Until that time the Whites who are concerned for the fate of White Australia have only one option, the somewhat precarious life of the dissident White Nationalist in the struggle with the globalist establishment.

1480728284152
National Party Whip George Christensen no more. As of this blog’s publication, the fat bastard has resigned

WHAT IS OUR PROBLEM?

WHAT IS OUR PROBLEM?

Readers of our social media pages over the past week will have noticed another flare-up in hostilities between us Nationalists and the self-styled “far right”.

We will not get hung up on details here, scroll down and it is all there for the world to see, the reasons behind this enmity, however, bear repeating.

At this point in time we are prepared to declare that the patriot movement, by the actions of its prominent spokesmen is now an anti-Australian movement; that said we do reserve some sympathy for the White workers and marginalised people who have been gulled by these rats.

In their desperation to defend themselves against the superior politics and quicker wits of the Nationalists, the patriot talking heads have devised ever more bizarre and convoluted additions to their already shambolic platforms.

Indeed, these Wombats have taken the definition of Australian identity into territories not even explored by the most drug-addled, schizophrenic examples of the Leftist ideologue.

“Anything but White!” may as well be the new catch cry of the patriot movement; it is this total negation of the true Australian identity which sets them apart from the Leftists; at least the left-leaning anti-Whites, in their genocidal rage against the “system” mostly agree with our definition of Australianism.

In their desperation to defend themselves against the superior politics and quicker wits of the Nationalists, the patriot talking heads have devised ever more bizarre and convoluted additions to their already shambolic platforms.

The White issue is inescapable, while we do not play identity politics in the Nationalist milieu the concept of Australian identity is set in stone as far as most people are concerned; even the self-hating White in his aboriginal flag T-shirt seeks to atone for his whiteness and, by doing so, at least acknowledges his heritage.

Far from being self-hating Whites, with a clear sense of identity, the senior patriots just seem to hate consciously White people in general; we struggle to find another interpretation of their thinking since, aside from Muslims, they only criticise people who are comfortable in their own skin, or repentant of it, as the case may be.

hasnon
The queen of Civic Patriotism with two little piccaninnies

Nationalists may regard psychoanalysis as Jewish pseudo-science but there does seem to be a degree of almost Freudian projection at work among the patriots.

Given the obviously poor life choices, bad habits and curious allusions to mixed heritage shown by many of the patriots we shouldn’t wonder at their inferiority complexes, paranoia and antipathy toward people with firmly held convictions regarding race, ethnicity and nationality.

The Muslims too, when all is said and done, exhibit a strong sense of both group and individual identity all couched in solid notions of race and ethnicity, a state of mind which appears to really upset many on the far right.

Nationalists may regard psychoanalysis as Jewish pseudo-science but there does seem to be a degree of almost Freudian projection at work among the patriots.

The world outside social media, cyberspace being the only real territory held by the patriots, is rapidly transitioning into the “age of identity”; that is to say that globalisation, far from eliminating difference, is bringing the different races and ethnic groups into contact with one another.

Mass immigration of non-traditional groups into White lands has become a global exhibition of the often massive and intractable differences between the different human sub-species; even from an aesthetic point of view, a million Asians moving in and residing around us has markedly changed the way most Australians see their society.

2ad7c71600000578-3174846-image-a-6_1437885236127
Danny Nalliah runs a Zionist-supporting, multi-racialist Civic Patriot party called Rise UP Australia

Some people are able to convince themselves that these differences are a good thing, others, such as the Nationalists regard immigration as a negative on that basis; it is another thing to altogether, as the patriots do, claim that Australian identity is “whatever you want it to be.”

This is our problem, this is why we fight them and why we hate them. Nobody but the patriots seek to obliterate White identity as a component of authentic Australianism, the Left, for all their shrieking and garment rending over the colonial era subscribe to the same general Australian folklore as do the Nationalists, only the different conclusions we choose to draw from that lore set us at odds.

The real class struggle, the Nationalist cause if you will, is the globalist liberal project, at present the Left, in general terms, are unwilling, or unable to wean themselves of rank and privilege under that system, so they are not a threat to the status quo in the immediate future.

Some people are able to convince themselves that these differences are a good thing, others, such as the Nationalists regard immigration as a negative on that basis; it is another thing to altogether, as the patriots do, claim that Australian identity is “whatever you want it to be.”

Generational change is under way, of course, and the Nationalists would expect some sort of counter-reaction to globalist-liberalism from the Left; the children of the “Gen-X” bourgeois lefties are, after all, as much affected by the scourge of globalism and mass immigration as those of the White workers and marginalised people.

In the event of a resurgent Left we would, of course, be able to present a competent political struggle against them, should we, in fact, find ourselves in disagreement; we are done with arguing with their parents who have, almost to a man, abandoned the field.

At this juncture, though the main anti-Nationalist and anti-White tendencies are found on the far right, so it is there that we must take our struggle until their nihilism, falsehoods, treachery and negativity are no longer a factor in dissident politics.

images-2
The Civic Parrot manifesto in its entirety