Pauline Hanson is successfully mobilising Australians against the “pay the rent” campaign being pushed in conjunction with the all out propaganda assault on the Australian psyche in preparation for a referendum on the so-called “Voice to Parliament”.
They were hoping the referendum would be a rubber stamp, but grassroots opposition from ordinary Aussies is a problem. So they sent in the “fact checkers” to pick at minor details in order to justify a headline declaring she’s wrong
From their ABC:
With the referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament drawing nearer, One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has called on her supporters to sign a petition to the Senate opposing a “race-based rent tax” aimed at benefiting Indigenous Australians, labelling it as the “worst type of discrimination”.
Across social media and on One Nation’s website, Senator Hanson and her party claim that the “rent tax scheme”, known as Pay the Rent, would “see Australian property owners pay a weekly ‘rent’ tax to Indigenous groups based on their ancestral claim to the land”.
As a consequence, “millions of Australians” would be “thrown further into poverty as their rents balloon or families pay more on top of their ever-increasing mortgages”.
The online petition states that the “tax on property owners as suggested by former Greens Indigenous affairs spokesperson Senator Lidia Thorpe” is “a form of discrimination that penalises property owners simply because of their race”.
Hanson understands the implications of far left policy and rhetoric. She has a good record of predicting the future and where the current stage of the Permanent Culture War is headed. Thus she is preparing Aussies to fight the next cultural battle, even as we mobilise to fight the current one.
The extreme left must ensure that its base believe its opponents are wrong, no matter what:
But the claims, also shared to Facebook, are incorrect.
There is no proposal for a race-based rent tax. Pay the Rent is an Indigenous-led scheme, first put into practice in the 1970s, which is not, and has never been, administered by a government. Donations to the scheme are voluntary and are used to support Indigenous people and projects.
Masks and vaccines were voluntary at first, then you needed them to just keep a roof over your head. The voluntary to mandatory pipeline is standard political process.
While Senator Thorpe, who now sits as an independent, is understood to be a supporter of the longstanding initiative, neither she nor her former political party has suggested that it be made government policy.
According to an article published in the New Economy Journal — a non-peer reviewed monthly journal from the New Economy Network Australia (NENA) — Pay the Rent is, “in essence, a private reparations system“.
It’s not a tax, it’s a “private reparations system”.
“The idea is that, without a treaty, non-Indigenous people continue to live and meet on stolen land, and, in recognition of this, we ought to pay our rent,” states the article, written by NENA managing director and PhD candidate Duncan Wallace.
“The money goes to an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander organisation or cause, and preferably to the traditional owner group whose land we live or work on.”
Word carry meaning. Claiming Australia is “stolen” from aborigines implies a demand for “reparations”. First you ask nicely via a “private reparations scheme”, then when you have power you make it law.
These so-called “fact checkers” seem to be hoping that their readers have no understanding of how years and often decades of lobbying leads to political change and the passing of law.
A history of Pay the Rent, compiled by the Australian Jewish Democratic Society (AJDS) with the help of Gunnai/Mara elder Robbie Thorpe, notes that the concept originated in 1837 when a Quaker settler paid interest on one-fifth of his land value as “yearly rent”.
It was later developed as a policy of the National Aboriginal and Islander Health Organisation in the 1970s, with the money funding Aboriginal-controlled health and other services.
Importantly, the AJDS notes that Pay the Rent was developed not only as a way to provide monetary compensation, but as “a forum for which non-Indigenous people could commit themselves to redressing colonisation through non-monetary actions as well”.
The Pay the Rent Grassroots Collective, which organises a Melbourne-based Pay the Rent scheme, explicitly states the initiative is not a tax, as suggested by Senator Hanson, but “one element of restorative justice”.
It’s not a tax, it’s “one element of restorative justice”. Don’t these people know that Sir Humphrey was the bad guy?
These “fact checkers” are literally closing their eyes, bashing the keys and hoping that we’re all just dumber than they are. It gets worse:
“Governments have a responsibility to use taxation to meet the welfare needs of all people living in Australia, including First Nations peoples,” the organisation states.
“But rent is different to tax: it is paid directly to traditional custodians of the land, both as an acknowledgement of their sovereignty, and in recognition of the continued occupation of their lands without treaty.”
No. This “rent” is a tax by another name. The differentiation they are making here is a tax which bypasses the government and is paid directly to aboriginal rent seeking organisations. The so-called “fact checkers” are thus caught in a lie.
They finish by padding their argument with more vain whims that their readers are politically clueless:
While Senator Thorpe does support Pay the Rent, as evidenced by a testimonial on the website belonging to the Melbourne-based scheme, she does not appear to have ever endorsed making the initiative a government-led “tax”.
In fact, the quote attributed to Senator Thorpe states: “Pay the Rent is from grassroots for grassroots. No strings attached to government agenda. It assists Sovereign grassroots fight the many campaigns and struggles we face everyday.”
Similarly, CheckMate could find no reference to Pay the Rent on the Greens website.
Earlier they skimmed over the fact that Lidia Thorpe is now an Independent, but they completely ignored the context of her divorce from the Greens. Thorpe has explicitly stated multiple times that she is an “infiltrator” on behalf of the so-called “black sovereign movement”.
You do not do this if you want to merely convince enough people to kindly give over their hard earned cash, you do it to make “pay the rent” law.
Thorpe also explicitly stated that she quit the Greens in order to more openly advocate for the “black sovereign movement”. Judging by public statements from Greens politicians there doesn’t seem to be a great deal of difference between them. This implies a difference in tactics. They want the same thing, Lidia just wants it faster and more in your face while the Greens favour political expediency.
Thorpe is thus a useful foil for the Greens. She can play the lunatic while the Greens appear more sensible. Ultimately they are both pushing in the same direction.
Lastly with regards to Thorpe, the fact that she has not yet revealed which way she will vote on the so-called “voice” indicates that she is herself tactically astute. We have every reason to believe that she will change her position regarding “pay the rent” from voluntary to mandatory when it becomes politically expedient.
A recent example of this process was how Western politicians all magically switched their position from only supporting civil unions for sodomite “couples” to legislating government sanctioned anal marriage. It was a remarkably swift paradigm shift from the start of the 2010’s to the end of the decade.
Okay.
Let’s go back to a little passage hidden in the middle of the article. I didn’t even bold it the first time around:
A history of Pay the Rent, compiled by the Australian Jewish Democratic Society (AJDS) with the help of Gunnai/Mara elder Robbie Thorpe, notes that the concept originated in 1837 when a Quaker settler paid interest on one-fifth of his land value as “yearly rent”.
They were probably hoping XYZ News wouldn’t fact check the “fact checkers”. Behind practically every seemingly authentic and organic cultural shift which influences a change of the law which fundamentally alters the nature of Australian society, a jewish ethnic lobby is at play, and ample evidence exists for this.
For example, jewish lobbies were instrumental in overturning the White Australia Policy. They coordinated the attack on Australia’s obscenity laws, an attack which was articulated as fundamental to undermining the cultural hegemony of the Christian, White Anglo majority. They didn’t even like us living in free standing houses.
More recently, the jewish ethnic lobby backed the conviction of Andrew Bolt under 18C and pushed for its retention.
Thus they have changed the literal face of our cities, from being full of White Christians living in our own houses and free to do and say as we please, to being full of promiscuous yet barren Apartment Australians who have to walk on eggshells every time someone pulls some gumleaves out of their pocket at the start of a meeting.
Zionist organisations are also crucial in trafficking hundreds of thousands of arabs and africans into Europe, and were behind the 1965 Hart-Cellar Act in America, which has led to the demographic replacement of White Americans.
Essentially jewish ethnic lobbies work to undermine the ethnic homogeneity and cultural hegemony of the White Australian majority, against the will of the Australian people. With more minorities in the country, they feel safer, they do not stick out as outsiders so much when they don’t take the day off on Sunday.
Because holocaust.
So in summary, the ABC “fact checkers” have been caught out lying; attempting to obfuscate the meaning of the word “tax”; demonstrating wilful ignorance of the political process and tactics; and they exposed the machinations of jewish power in the process.
