Lone Patriot published an excellent essay on X on 13th June 2026 analysing the likely effects the hate group laws will have on young men should the High Court challenge against them fail in September.
His analysis is done through the academics lens of game theory and he takes the time to systematically lay out the risks, benefits and trade offs for both the government and White nationalists in their respective attempts to stop the rise of, or to facilitate the rise of, White Nationalism in Australia. Comparing the strategies available to both sides with or without said laws in place.
The conclusion drawn is that should the law be upheld as constitutional then only a few people holding White nationalist views will feel like they have any agency left to express or advocate for their views through “individual online propagation” but that the majority of people will not be able to effectively have their views communicated to the world and that this will increase the risk of lone wolf violent acts. With a lack of peaceful options to pursue he concludes that violence will become “unfortunately logically ‘rational’ for some hardliners, fringe actors, etc”.
The question that arises from this analysis is, will there be a peaceful alternative to recommend to the majority of people, should the High Court uphold the recent banning of the White Australia Party or the NSW law banning “Nazi idelology”?
I believe the answer is yes, though history shows very few will take it. Better to have something to offer though, however undesireable to most, than nothing at all.
The way forward will be through peaceful martyrdom.
Violence without organisation, structure and leadership is futile. The government always has the advantage that their system is already in place, with large numbers, far superior weapons, better funding and coordination than anyone wanting to build a revolutionary force from scratch. Especially in modern times where mass electronic surveillance can ensure that any potential leaders can be arrested the moment they even have more than a couple of men meeting together for a fun run.
This leaves only peaceful martyrdom: Simply choosing to speak the truth publicly, regardless of the laws and accepting the consequence of going to jail for years on end for doing so. This will be most effective, if when activists do so, they use the most benign and inoffensive language possible and reserve harsh language only for the magistrates and judges after sentencing. The goal being to not seek arrest, but to stop fearing it and to assert the moral high ground if it occurs.
Faith in God, life after death and eternal judgement are an distinct advantage for those considering following such a path. The penalties in Australia for speaking the truth about race and religion are now many years in jail. A large part of this life can be spent behind bars now and if you believe you just have nothing after it, then duty to race may not be a sufficient motivation to accept the consequences for continuing to speak the full truth in public.
For those who do choose this path, though, they can be assured of it having a positive effect.
Lone wolf acts of violence achieve only negative responses from the public and do nothing to further the cause of the perpetrator unless the government is sympathetic to the larger group for which the violence was taken. So the Christchurch massacre did nothing help the cause of White nationalists in New Zealand (or anywhere else) because the government not only hates White nationalists but Whites in general and is looking for any excuse to clamp down hard on them all.
Whereas every Muslim terror attack perpetrated over the last 25 years in the West has only strengthened Islamic ideology, because treasonous governments refuse to clamp down on the group as a whole regardless of the actions of the individuals within it.
Thus Muslims become more empowered and invunerable, even though the outrage of the general public is the same to all acts of terror, regardless of which group the terrorist comes from. The different treatment of the ideologies underpinning the lone wolf (or small cell organisation) actors, by the government results in opposite outcomes for the furthering of each ideology. The difference has now become so stark, that the hate group laws passed in January 2026 was the government’s response to White nationalists after terrorism committed by muslims.
With lone wolf peaceful martyrdom, though, there is only a positive outcome for the ideology that the person comes from and for the group as a whole. Public sympathy always results when seeing perceived injustice. Seeing a man going to jail for years on end for politely and fearlessly expressing his opinion in public only makes that opinion appear more valid to the public.
The government, on the other hand, receives no benefit from the laws it has passed, if there are people who are willing to go to jail for defying them. To use a Christian example, the more people who walk proudly to their deaths on the cross, the less effective crucifying Christians becomes and the more resentment builds against the government for doing it. In comparison, although White nationalists “only” face up to 15 years jail for speaking the truth about race and nations, the principle is the same.
Rising public resentment towards a government is the goal of every movement that wishes to replace it and nothing creates more resentment than perceived injustice against a man peacfully standing up for what they believe in, regardless of the consequences.
The ideology of multiculturism itself is also building resentment as its effects and consquences become more evident every day. Murders, grievous bodily harm and rapes against Whites by non-whites for racial and religious reasons has seen resentment rise all over the West and this has recently erupted into mass spontaneous mob violence in Northern Ireland.
Mass spontaneous mob violence has a different effect on the general public than lone wolf terrorism or small group terror attacks, because in the former case the public themselves are committing the violence and people nearly always justify their own actions. Spontaneous mob violence can and has brought down governments, regimes and ideologies. But because it is spontaneous it can’t be planned, it can’t be organised, it can’t be counted upon. But its causes can still be identified. The government is already providing one cause simply by continuing with policies that defy human nature. Seeing more of their fellow White brethren being harshly treated for simply peacefully and politely telling the truth, will only add another cause.
In the case of lone wolf violence, lone wolf martyrdom also helps to counter the incentive. Even though few will have the courage to deliberately keep speaking the truth in public for fear of spending years in jail, those that do become a means for other individuals to live vicariously through them. As long as people feel that someone is still speaking for them, then they can live with not having the courage to speak up themselves. It’s a strange fact about human nature that most people find it easier to lash out violently in response to oppression than to speak the truth in the face of it. Having someone still speak for them, goes a long way to subduing that urge.
Should the High Court challenge against the “hate group” laws fail, then risking peaceful martyrdom will be the most effective way forward. Whether public pressure at the ballot box overturns the laws or whether the public one day snaps, becomes a rampaging mob and overturns the government by force, cannot be forseen. But the key to enhancing the public’s sentiments into an agent of change will be the courage of individuals to keep speaking the truth and being prepared to accept the consequences for doing so.
You can find Stephen Wells at Telegram and purchase his books here.
