What We Need is a Crusade

Adam Piggott
-
0
What We Need is a Crusade
Look, we all know that our nations, societies and cultures are in a very bad place. We abandoned God and instead we worshiped materialism. Money is all that counts now. Check out any front page of an internet newspaper and almost every article will be geared towards how much money is involved. We are slaves to our sin. We’re all responsible, of course, but some are more responsible than others. David Warren is a Boomer journalist. He is also a Roman Catholic. He is also ground zero for why the Boomers as a generation are irredeemable. This is Warren’s take on the current Gaza conflict. It took my breath away. My jaw was on the floor.
Bourgeois America hasn’t changed, and neither did bourgeois Germany. Our middle class remains well-meaning. However, the spineless masses simply stepped aside, as they step now that the devil is loose again. Sentimentality is a happy, worthless memory for the majority of a cowardly people. What happens to Jews today at Harvard and elsewhere is “none of our business.”
In other words, the middle class, of which Warren is a proud member, are all good when it comes to the Jews. The working stiffs, however, are a bunch of anti-Semites. Notice how no mention is made of the upper classes in this regard.
The governing parties in the USA and Canada wish to present themselves as reasonable, and take a middle position between Hamas murderers, rapists, and kidnappers, and the Israeli Jews who are defending themselves. While the Israeli Defence Forces go to unprecedented lengths, taking serious casualties to spare “Palestinian” (Arab) civilians, Hamas does whatever is in its power to maximize the carnage. The more civilians who can be cast as victims, the more the publicity machines of the Left can be fed. (Israeli ceasefire offers are consistently rejected.)
Wow. Just, wow. This is literally AIDS. But then, Boomers and AIDS are synonymous. Can it get any worse? Sure it can.
This is what happens when bourgeois, sentimental, cowardly Westerners make diplomatic accommodations with Satanicorganizations, such as Hamas, the PLO, Hezbollah, Houthis, the Syrian regime, the Iranian Ayatollahs, ISIS and various other “Islamists.”
My bold. There is no more Satanic class in the world then Jews. The Jews rejected Christ. Those that didn’t became Christians. Ergo, all Jews today are Satanic. It’s pretty bloody simple. Especially if you’re a Roman Catholic. Unless you’re a Boomer, and then it’s head explode time. Saying Christ is King is illegal now in South Dakota. Because the Jews. But hey, keep holding on to your Boomer Roman-Judean-Catholicism. The Boomers have to die out. There is no other way around it. You could take this clown to the Gaza Strip and show him in real time Jews murdering civilians and he still wouldn’t be able to make any value adjustments on this subject. The very worst thing that ever happened in the history of humanity was giving the Holy Land to the Jews. What we need is a good old fashioned, no holds barred, Crusade. And not against the Muslims. Originally published at Pushing Rubber Downhill.

Third World Australia: Organised Squatting is now a Thing

David Hiscox
-
2
Third World Australia: Organised Squatting is now a Thing
When a national TV show airs advice on how to squat and get away with it, it’s a good sign you’re living in a third world country. They found Australia’s version of this guy. The only surprising thing is that people are surprised that squatting is becoming a serious problem. Australian houses are not worth their purported, artificially inflated value, and rent is too high. Ordinary working class and middle class Australians with jobs are living in their cars and in tents. Of course people are resorting to squatting, and it is utterly predictable that the Cultural Marxists in the Dying Media are amplifying the message of a literal Marxist to deflect from the underlying issue – mass replacement immigration. It really is very simple; demand is outstripping supply because immigration is at record levels while the building industry is going bust, thus prices are going up. Rather than reducing or ending immigration, the elites are trying to incite a class war. From SBS:
Rental advocate and law graduate Jordan van den Berg is setting people in Australia up with empty properties to squat in. Jordan van den Berg knows it’s definitely not the antidote to the housing crisis, he does not encourage breaking and entering and believes bigger changes must be made to make housing more affordable. But is he encouraging squatting and setting up a database to help people connect with houses that appear empty and unused? Yes, he is. “It’s hard to see all the abandoned homes when there are tent cities appearing nearby”, he says. Many housing solutions take years to build, van den Berg adds, but the problem is now. “People are struggling now. People need housing now.” You might know Jordan as Purple Pingers, the man behind ‘shit rental’ videos and his website where punters can review rentals, agencies and real estate agents.
Purple Pingers delights in skewing libertarians and conservatives on their hypocrisy: Libertarians and conservatives are vulnerable to this kind of baiting from a midwit Marxist precisely because they make themselves vulnerable, by refusing to acknowledge that mass replacement immigration is the underlying cause.
“If the government won’t do anything about the rich hoarding empty homes, make them,” he said in a TikTok video where he is standing in an empty house…. “It’s unjust to have people sleeping on the street when we have multimillion-dollar homes lying around vacant,” he told The Feed.
Note that people who claim that linking housing affordability to immigration ‘demonises immigrants’ are more than happy to demonise landowners.
The houses are located around population centres, usually in capital cities, and about 60 per cent are in Melbourne, Australia’s second-largest capital city. The selection and state of the houses are mixed, but many of the properties are worth upward of $1 million, based on Domain sales Jordan has found online, he says. Some are even worth as much as $4 or $5 million.
As stated, Australian houses are not worth millions of dollars, they are artificially inflated due to mass replacement immigration. As even Jordan concedes, a brief perusal of the figures demonstrates that squatting is not the solution to Australia’s housing crisis:
There could be up to 136,000 empty houses in Australia, according to recent estimates from the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 2023.
Even if Australia were to fulfil the anti-property rights agenda of the WEF/UN by forcing owners to let people live in their unused or ‘underused’ properties, it would be a one-off fix that would not even meet current demand. Current plans to build more homes still will not meet demand, and the plans are unfeasible anyway. Moreover it is naive to believe the government’s promises that the current “spike” in immigration is a one off, to make up for all the mass immigration we missed out on during Covid. Expect half a million a year to be the permanent baseline net overseas migration figure. Basically, you can file this current drama away in the folder “How do we stop Aussies linking mass replacement immigration to housing affordability?” The Dying Media is throwing a host of distractions at Australians but each issue can be linked back to mass replacement immigration. Why are house prices so high? Because demand is outstripping supply due to mass replacement immigration. Why are rents so high? Because rents are indexed to property values. Why are landowners and boomers unfairly advantaged by owning property? Because the value of their houses has been artificially inflated by decades of mass replacement immigration. Why is so much wealth in Australia tied up in property investment rather than invested in wealth generating business or manufacturing? Because property values are artificially inflated….. You get the picture. This basically works for any factor linked to the cost of living, inflation, housing affordability. The only exception to this is the question of central banking and fiat currency. That’s just as off-limits as immigration, for no reason whatsoever.

Return of the Hungry Horses

Viv Forbes
-
0
Return of the Hungry Horses
When I was young (many decades ago) we lived on a small family farm at Wheatvale near Warwick on the Darling Downs in Queensland, Australia. Our lifestyle was close to the organic self-sufficient nirvana that today’s green zealots babble on about – we produced much of what we needed and needed most of what we produced, using mainly solar power plus a bit of hydrocarbon and wind energy. But life was no picnic. Our farm supported our family of four, 30 dairy cows, one bull, eight draught horses, two stock horses, a cattle dog, two cats, two ponies, plus a few pigs, calves and chooks and, at times, a returned service Uncle recovering from the malaria he caught during the war in Papua New Guinea. We sometimes had a farm hand – farmers got “trusties” from the Palen Creek Prison Farm. They were a bit like the horses – ate a lot, worked as little as possible and sometimes stole things. So Dad stopped the trusties and all the work fell back on the family. Foxes killed hens occasionally and crows stole eggs. The farm grew weeds, burrs, native pasture, wheat, oats, sorghum, corn and lucerne. The lucerne was used to make hay which was collected on a wagon, carted to the hay shed and unloaded with pitch forks. Most of the farm produce was used to feed us, plus the horses, cows, pigs and chooks. Horses are not ruminants and do not use hay and grass as efficiently as cattle. We learned the truth of the saying “Eats like a horse”. Our farm produced little surplus for others – we sold milk/cream regularly and occasionally some grain, pigs and calves. Green energy powered most activities on the farm. Dad and Mum and my big sister milked the cows by hand twice a day, seven days per week and we all cut weeds with hoes, picked corn by hand and used pitch-forks to stack hay. Mum knitted woollen jumpers for winter. There were no old people’s homes – grandparents rotated around their kids’ homes (my mother had eight brothers and sisters). We had tanks catching rainwater from all roofs, plus a windmill which pumped stock water from a small dam (when the wind blew). Our heavy horses were used to pull a plough, a sundercut, a planter-cultivator, a set of harrows, harvester, mower, hay-rake, wagon, dray and slide. Kids walked to school or rode ponies or bikes. We had an old reaper/binder in the shed and there were still some sulkies being used. There were even some huge wood-burning steam-powered traction engines that drove stationary threshers used to separate grain from chaff. We had no electricity, no phones and just one battery-powered radio. We listened to Russ Tyson and the news on the ABC after the milking (7am), “Blue Hills” and the Country Hour at lunch time (we called it “dinner”), and a serial story after “tea” at night. Our emissions from hydro-carbon fuels were very low. We used a bit of kerosene in lamps for the house and lanterns for the dairy, and a few gallons of petrol for the old farm ute which we drove to town every fortnight to buy bread, groceries, boots, work clothes and unmentionables. We used no coal-powered electricity, no phones and had no diesel or petrol-driven machinery such as tractors, trucks, generators, pumps, chain saws or quad bikes. But we had lots of breathing, belching, farting farm animals eating the crops and emitting large quantities of the “greenhouse gases”, carbon dioxide and methane. However, the climate was much the same as now. We still had destructive weather events – droughts and floods, storms, crop-killing frosts and desiccating heat waves. We hated winter as little vegetation grew, cows were hungry and produced less milk; and there was frost on the grass when we yarded the cows before sunrise. Most people lived and worked on farms – labour was abundant and cheap, food was expensive, and towns were much smaller. The local town had a bacon factory, a butter factory and a flour mill. Our life was one of continual repetitive manual labour which produced minimal surplus for landless labourers who sometimes struggled to afford food. We had not much money, they had not much food. This all changed after WW2, when a revolution in food production was triggered by two brilliant Americans: Henry Ford who flooded the world with cars, trucks, utilities and Fordson tractors; and John D Rockefeller whose Standard Oil flooded the world with kerosene, petrol, diesel and lubricants for all those engines. As a result of this hydrocarbon revolution, most of the hungry horses and farm labourers were made redundant by machines and they suddenly disappeared from the farms. This allowed farms to sell much more surplus food to town dwellers. Moreover, the tireless tractors could work night and day with bigger machinery, allowing more land to be cultivated when the weather and soil conditions were just right. Farm exports grew and the real price of food began a long decline; cities were fed better and urban populations grew. Today, with bigger machines, more fertiliser and more water our farms produce even more cereals, dairy products, meats and fibres for animals and humans. The yields are also improved by the increased CO2 plant food in the atmosphere. But now vote-seeking politicians are dictating that more farm produce must be consumed as ethanol by the hungry iron horses of today – millions of cars, trucks, tractors, bikes and stationary engines. In the year 2000, most of the huge US corn crop went into food for people and livestock; but by 2013, 40% of a bigger crop was consumed making biofuel, with questionable savings in emissions once the whole process is considered. In other countries, the ethanol and biofuel madness has seen native forests and food plantations cleared to make space for ethanol crops. Even more land is being sterilised by solar panels, wind turbines, access roads, big batteries and power lines. Today’s hungry green horses gobble far more food than our Clydesdales ever did. Even here in food-producing Queensland, the party of the workers promotes policies that reduce the supply of food to the tables of the workers to produce more ethanol to burn in cars, bikes, SUV’s, yachts and limos, and even for the “going-green” US Navy when it visits. This pro-ethanol policy pits plant farmers against animal farmers and green politicians against food consumers. It will ensure that every feedlot, piggery, chicken house and family farm will see a reduced supply of animal feed because grains and sugar cane have been diverted to motor fuel. The “Ethanol Tax” will be paid at meal times where the prices of cereals, milk, cream, sugar, treacle, syrup, pork, bacon, eggs, hamburgers and steak will be higher than they would have been without ethanol coercion. This ethanol madness threatens to take us back towards those hungry years before the kerosene-powered tractors arrived and draft horses ate half the farm output. Ethanol political coercion is the problem – it shows there is no real need/demand for it. It is a vote-catching exercise pandering to certain electorates and certain farmers. People who wish to use ethanol-laced fuels on environmental, economic or religious grounds should be free to do so, but with no coercion or subsidies. The increased use of biofuels has forced global food prices up by 75% – far more than previously estimated – according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/jul/03/biofuels.renewableenergy US Corn used for ethanol: https://afdc.energy.gov/data/10339 Europe burns more than 17,000 tonnes of rapeseed and sunflower oil every day and this has resulted in spiralling food price rises: https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/06/20220623-te.html The global demand for biofuels has led to deforestation with the inevitable release of significant amounts of smoke and carbon dioxide. Millions of acres of monoculture plantations are spreading across the globe on land once teeming with bush and wildlife. And not a peep of protest from green zealots. This is biofuel lunacy. There is no moral, scientific or economic justification to legislate ethanol folly. The hungry horses are back, but now they live in upper-class stables in the green leafy suburbs. And half the farm is now covered by solar panels and many birds and bats have been sliced by the whirling blades. Originally published at Richardson Post.

Remigration, a Policy Idea

Mark Moncrieff
-
11
Remigration, a Policy Idea
Source.
Editor’s note: We have encored this article by multiple times, and it deserves another run considering the debate between Joel Davis and Drew Pavlou over the weekend on the subject, “Is diversity our strength?” Pavlou made the straw man that remigration cannot be achieved without killing millions of people. Thus he became the meme. Below, Mark Moncrieff makes a considered argument as to how remigration can be achieved peacefully and effectively.
Earlier this year I was talking to a friend about immigration and he told me that whether I liked it or not they are here now. The implication being that immigrants are here forever. I didn’t accept what he said then and since then I’ve been thinking of a policy that if implemented would turn things around. That policy has been mentioned by Generation Identitaire, which is where the term “remigration” comes from. Their idea is that just because a foreign population has arrived that does not mean that they will be there forever. After all when we think about immigration that is the assumption that nearly everyone makes. But their point is valid, just because they have arrived does not mean that they will stay. However that is the end of their idea, but it was enough for me. Why do Immigrants come here? Do they want better scenery? Do they love us? Do they want to be a part of us? Do they love our culture? Our way of life? Some do. But most come here because we have a better standard of living than they did in their homeland. So what they really love about us is our money. If that’s true, and I don’t see any reason for it not being true in most cases, why don’t we pay them to leave? Of course we could not have our current levels of immigration, we would need either a small or zero immigration policy. It has been suggested by others that we have a replacement immigration policy, whereby immigrants are let into the country one for one as people permanently leave. However my policy is here. We would also need secure borders, where those who violate immigration law are either removed back to their country of origin or imprisoned and then returned. Any wishy washy approach would make this an endless drain on resources. My proposal is that anyone who has a lawful right to live in Australia, citizen or permanent resident, who also has the right of return to their ancestral home be offered A$100,000 to return to that country. In return they sign a legal pledge that they renounce their Australian citizenship or permanent residence and that they not return to Australia for 5 years, and that any travel to Australia after that not be longer than 60 days in any year. Any longer stay would need the authority of the Minister of Immigration. If any stay lasted longer than 60 days without the Minister’s approval or they returned within 5 years then they are liable for the return of the A$100,000 and are to be subject to any criminal punishment that breaking Australia’s immigration law may invoke. The only people not eligible would be those people who do not have a right of return to any ancestral homeland. What may surprise many people is that many countries allow people to return even generations after their family left. Some countries believe you never leave, if you are of that nationality, then you always will be. One criticism is the expense, for A$10 billion dollars, 100,000 people can be paid to leave. But if that person was an Afghan that money would be more than 140 times the per capita income of the average Afghan, that makes someone a very big fish in a small pond. In Indonesia that would be more than 25 times the per capita income. For the United Kingdom that would be more than twice the per capita income. This money effectively becomes an indirect form of foreign aid, it simply goes directly into the economy instead of being used up by Government. So it can be paid for out of funds currently devoted to foreign aid and to multicultural pursuits. Another criticism that could be made is that it is racist. Unfortunately the world economy is uneven and an African would benefit to a much bigger degree than someone of European descent. Racist I don’t think so, but it certainly is discriminatory, of course many things in life are. It even gives people choice, not everyone who immigrates is happy with the decision and here is a chance to help them find their way home. Originally published at Upon Hope on November 1, 2014.

The Digital ID will change the lives of every Australian – For The Worse

Harry Richardson
-
0
The Digital ID will change the lives of every Australian – For The Worse
This is from Malcolm Roberts who is probably Australia’s best politician. He works harder than a one armed man changing a nappy and actually cares more about the Australian people who vote for him, than the big money donors who fund the uniparty. He will be up for reelection at the next general election. Don’t forget him and all he does for us, especially if you live in Queensland. Harry Editor-in-Chief Richardson Post
As much as the Government attempts to downplay the importance of introducing a single central digital identifier for all Australians, the truth is that this legislation is the most significant I’ve encountered during my time in the Senate. It’s the glue that holds together the digital control agenda by which every Australian will be controlled, corralled, exploited and then gagged when they speak or act in opposition. The government knows Digital ID will be compulsory by the device of preventing access to government services, banking services, air travel and major purchases for any Australian who does not have a Digital ID.
The Digital ID will, in effect, create a live data file of your movements, purchases, accounts and associates containing reference to every piece of data being held in the private and government sector as a first step in a wider agenda. Tech giants have been building huge data files on every Australian for years. Those huge data files that contain every website you visited, every post you made on their social media, everything you have ever bought online. Keywords scanned from conversations overheard by Siri and Alexa in your home are now unmasked. Until now, that data was anonymised using a unique identifier rather than name and address, which has always been there as well. However, tech companies were not allowed to use it or share data with others that included the person’s name and address. Until Now. Look for the tech giants to ask for your Digital ID as a requirement of using their service. The point of that exercise is to ensure they put the right name on the right data treasure trove. This is why the Liberal Party have moved amendments to the Digital ID Bill to bring private corporations into this roll out earlier. All those treasure troves of data worth billions, trillions, that have been accumulated for years illegally, by retailers, tech and data companies – all that unrealised profit just sitting there has been too much of a temptation for the Liberal Nationals to resist and is now joined with Labor in pushing Digital ID. There will be no escape from the digital ID. Australians now have a digital version of “papers please” and Australians will never be the same.

Transcript

Life is about to change for every Australian. As much as Senator Gallagher seeks to downplay the significance of introducing one central digital identifier for each and every Australian, the reality is that this is the most significant legislation I’ve seen in my time in the Senate. It’s the glue that holds together the digital control agenda by which every Australian will be controlled, corralled, exploited and then gagged when they speak or act in opposition. The Digital ID Bill will be misused because this bill is written to be misused. The government knows that digital ID will be compulsory by the device of preventing access to government services, banking services, air travel and major purchases for any Australian who does not have a digital ID. The digital ID will, in effect, create a live data file of your movements, purchases, accounts and associates, containing reference to every piece of data being held in the private and government sector as the first step in a wider agenda. Google, Facebook and other tech giants have been building huge data files on every Australian for years. Those huge data files contain every website you’ve visited, every post you made on their social media and everything you have ever bought online, and the keyword scan from conversations overheard by Siri and Alexa in your home are now unmasked. Until now, that data was anonymised using a unique identifier, rather than name and address, which has always been there as well. However, tech companies were not allowed to use it or to share data with others that included a person’s name and address—until now. Look for the tech giants to ask for your digital ID as a requirement of using their service. The point of that exercise is to ensure they put the right name on the right data treasure trove. It’s not just the tech giants heading into the data gold rush. Those reward cards you scan at the checkout have included terms and conditions to allow Coles and Woolies to make a record of every purchase you have made for years. This is why the Liberal Party has moved amendments to the Digital ID Bill to bring private corporations into this rollout earlier. All those treasure troves of data worth billions or trillions have accumulated for years illegally, and all that unrealised profit just sitting there has been too much of a temptation for the Liberals and Nationals to resist, and they have now joined with Labor in pushing digital ID. Those listening at home may be wondering how an individual could avoid being drawn into this net of data trading and surveillance. The simple answer is: you can’t. This Labor government has already passed the Identity Verification Services Bill, which makes it legal for every Australian’s photo or video likeness to be used to verify that person against the database containing their biometric data. Biometric data simply means a digital representation of your face that allows for instantaneous electronic matching. Just days after that bill passed, the first thing the government did was to send an email to people with a myGov ID to update their myGov record by providing a facial scan on their phone. Yes, that really happened. This is what these people are doing to you. This is not voluntary. Ten million Australians have a myGov ID. Most of those were forced into it to access Centrelink benefits. It’s cruel. There are another two million Australians who were forced to get a myGov ID to register as a company director, despite the director identity enabling legislation not even mentioning myGov. The government did it anyway! The database the government is using for data surveillance is the national driver’s licence database which has 17 million records—everyone who has, or has had, a driver’s licence. This government doesn’t need an excuse to further digital control for everyday Australians. Socialists love control. Socialism needs control. For socialism to exist, there must be control. The government knows control will be used by government to identify people who say mean things on social media to speed up enforcement of our new laws against saying home truths to crazy or dishonest people. No hiding behind anonymous accounts or false addresses; you can expect a knock on your door at home, work or school, as we’re seeing happening in other countries with digital identity already in place. Only by being able to keep tabs on citizens 24/7 can the government possibly hope to introduce the wealth heist they have planned. Anyone viewing this topic for the first time can see the detail of what I’m talking about on my website. The committee report on the digital ID bill was a travesty. The committee made a recommendation to pass the bill which was simply not supported by the evidence they received during the inquiry. Witness after witness testified that this rancid evil bill failed to protect privacy, failed to establish that the ID would be voluntary, failed on human rights grounds and failed on technical grounds. One blackout, and the whole thing comes crashing down. Yet all these valid criticisms from leading organisations who, unlike the government, know what they’re talking about were simply ignored. This article was first published on Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Website and the Pickering Post. NB: If you haven’t signed the petition yet, the link is below. Please share far and wide. https://www.onenation.org.au/petition-request-for-immediate-action-against-the-digital-id-act-2023?utm_campaign=digital_id_petition_follow_up&utm_medium=email&utm_source=onenation

Not even Aboriginals want a Voice to Parliament

David Hiscox
-
0
Not even Aboriginals want a Voice to Parliament
Two weekends ago when South Australia held a vote for a state-based “voice to parliament” for aboriginals, almost nobody showed up: From Australians vs The Agenda:
UPDATE: After taking a week break since the election date for absolutely no reason, the South Australian Electoral Commission has finally decided to complete counting the MASSIVE amount of ballots casted at their inaugural ‘First Nations Voice to Parliament’ elections. Officials estimate that of the eligible 30,000 people, only 2583 formal votes were counted. With one candidate who was elected only receiving 6 votes, it’s hard to imagine anyone taking this serious.
Andrew Bolt has rightly slammed the farce:
Sky News host Andrew Bolt claims South Australia has now confirmed “race politics” is not wanted by Aboriginals after a low voter turnout for the state’s Voice to Parliament. Less than ten per cent of eligible Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders voted for candidates in the new state-based Voice. South Australia’s First Nation’s Voice passed parliament last year. “The vote for this in Parliament to set it up saw the white left line the streets in support but last week it was time for Aborigines themselves to vote for their representatives on this state voice – and boy that was a very different story,” Mr Bolt said. “Fewer than nine per cent of the state’s estimated 30,000 Aborigines of voting age bothered to vote.”
It’s moments like this you realise that when elites say they have engaged in “consultation” before forcing their latest elite-driven agenda down our throats, what they mean is that elites spoke with other elites and they all agreed on what they should force down our throats. It was already the height of arrogance to go ahead with a state “voice to parliament” vote after a national “voice” had been so comprehensively rejected in last year’s federal referendum, in which a whopping 64.17% of South Australians voted against it. However, globalist standard operating procedure is to push on regardless of the will of the people. Especially when the whole point of the “voice to parliament” was to transfer ownership and control of Australia over to globalist institutions such as the UN. The consequent spin the South Australian government is trying to put on this is hilarious:
Kyam Maher, SA Attorney General and  Minister for Aboriginal Affairs says while there are a “range of factors” impacting elements of the election, but says he’s very pleased with “strong nominations” and he believes it is a “good base to build on”.
“A good base to build on” translates to “we’ll just keep forcing you to vote until we get what we want.” Anglos don’t want this, nor do aboriginals. A democratic trouncing has been swiftly followed by a democratic farce, but here is the important point. Globalist elites constantly use the term “our democracy”. This means something entirely different to “democracy”. It is their democracy:
“The whole push after the 2016 election and after Brexit and after a couple of other social media run elections that went the wrong way from what the State Department wanted, like the 2016 Philippines election, was to completely invert everything that we described as being the underpinnings of a democratic society in order to deal with the threat of free speech on the internet. And what they essentially said is, we need to redefine democracy from being about the will of the voters to being about the sanctity of democratic institutions and who are the democratic institutions. “Oh, it’s the military, it’s NATO, it’s the IMF and the World Bank. It’s the mainstream media, it is the NGOs, and of course these NGOs are largely state department funded or IC funded… if you define democracy as being the strength of democratic institutions rather than a focus on the will of the voters, then what you’re left with is essentially democracy is just the consensus building architecture within the Democrat institutions themselves.”
“Our democracy” translates to “globalist consensus”. It has nothing to do with the will of the people, in fact the will of the people directly threatens “our democracy” because the will of the people and globalist consensus are diametrically opposed. The democracy rabbit hole does not end here though. Democracy did work for a time in ancient Athens, when the city was small, ethnically homogenous and when suffrage was strictly limited. Whenever these preconditions are breached it leads to tyranny, every single time. Those who pushed democracy as an alternative to a divinely appointed monarchy during the horrendously misnomered “Enlightenment” knew this and wanted this. They saw democracy as a means by which to subvert hereditary rule by the best of a people. Monarchy and Aristocracy by definition excludes foreigners from power (with the occasional exception) thus it had to go. When we wonder today why our “democratic” rulers do not make decisions in the interests of their people, this is why. They are not of the people.

Melbourne: Pro-Immigration Narrative Shattered In One Image

David Hiscox
-
1
Melbourne: Pro-Immigration Narrative Shattered In One Image
A diversity incident was captured on film today by a 9 News crew. It occurred in Victoria Street, Richmond, an inner-city suburb of Melbourne. An African with a hammer threatened two Asians as he tried to steal their jeep, while other miscellaneous foreigners tried to get away without being noticed.
From 9 News:
A man armed with a hammer allegedly threatened two people and attempted to steal their cars in Melbourne’s inner east this afternoon. A man has been arrested over the incident that occurred in broad daylight on Victoria Street, Richmond just after midday today. In shocking vision… the man can be seen swinging a hammer at two drivers in what was believed to be an attempt to steal their cars. The vision shows the man getting into one of the cars before he gets out again after it’s believed he was unable to start the vehicle. The man then appears to walk away casually while swinging the hammer before returning to smash the windows of one of the cars. The man was then seen walking away into the back streets of Richmond. Police caught up with the man about 20 minutes later down a laneway off Lennox Street. One of the drivers of the cars was treated by paramedics for minor injuries.
He was carrying a hammer… I think you see where I’m going with this one. Since the tent encampments full of White working class Aussies have hit the headlines, the legacy media has been doing everything it can to misdirect public debate regarding the housing crisis. The fact is, one graph is all it takes to demonstrate that mass replacement immigration is the key factor causing the housing crisis. The height of the elites’ wilful economic ignorance has been the argument that we need more migrants to build homes for all the migrants. Yes, we’re not making this up. Lucy Turnbull was rightly roasted. From The Noticer:
Lucy Turnbull, the businesswoman wife of former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, has been called out for saying that Australia should bring in more migrant workers to solve the housing crisis. The 65-year-old one-time Lord Mayor of Sydney weighed in on the housing debate on X on Monday, reposting an article from SBS advocating for “quick migration solutions” to help the Labor government meet its target of 1.2 million new homes by 2029. “100%. If Australians want more homes built, more migrant workers are needed,” Mrs Turnbull wrote. But critics were quick to point out holes in her argument, and some responded with memes making fun of mass immigration advocates. “You are either very poor with mathematics, or you have a conflict of interest. I’m not sure which one it is,” wrote property expert Louis Christopher. Others referred to Australia’s record-high immigration levels and accused her of “Ponzi scheme” reasoning, and some said “mass deportations” were needed instead. “So a million is not enough for your liking? How about encouraging existing Australians to take up apprenticeships, help builders to afford apprentices. The level of immigration is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme,” one wrote. “We have so many migrants that we are going to need even more migrants to build houses for all these migrants. This is beyond parody,” said another.
Hilariously, even 9 News made the same argument a couple of days earlier. So, he was carrying a hammer…. It’s your XYZ.

Infant Nation: How therapy culture creates slaves to the state

Dr. David Hilton
-
0
Infant Nation: How therapy culture creates slaves to the state
I remember the first time I was told that I would be teaching an autistic student in the upcoming academic year. “What, he’s into art?” You could get away with that 15 years ago. “No, he’s different. He doesn’t register facial expressions, has trouble regulating his feelings and will be inappropriate without meaning to be.” Oh so he’s retarded, I thought. Turned out, the boy in question was a fine young man with just a few eccentricities. He was no more or less odd than any of the rest of us, once you get to know us. Those few student autists back then were the fledgling snowflakes of what has now become a blizzard of dysfunction in Australian schools. An entirely new schooling sector beyond the traditional state, Catholic and Independent ones is growing up entirely driven by the need to cater to kids ‘on the spectrum’. Private schools now are opening up secondary campuses to cater to the ‘neurodivergent’, enabled and empowered by the billions and billions of taxpayer dollars being funnelled into providers’ pockets by schemes like the NDIS. These days, teachers are required to individually tailor their instruction for all these idiosyncratic snowflakes or else be accused of negligence. Mothers, in particular, can be shockingly militant when it comes to forcing teachers to accommodate their charges’ diagnosed disorders. By and large, the children of such mothers are disorderly and unruly due to overly permissive parenting. A book available for print pre-order, Bad Therapy, provides a thorough diagnosis of this social-mental illness we’re now seeing everywhere. In the postmodern Western classroom, children can no longer be ‘rude’. What a quaint and old-fashioned idea. They are ‘oppositional’ and become so when triggered by teachers making unreasonable demands, such as that you complete a worksheet or cease spitting out the window on children outside. This is not an exaggeration. The spread of what we can call therapy culture throughout the education system has undermined what little was left of teacher authority. It’s a tyranny of the damaged; and well-adjusted and well-brought-up children are forced to watch as the crybaby thugs run the asylum. When you talk to teachers about these developments, and I frequently do, they will usually agree that it’s become a farce. They dare not express such a view publicly or begin to conduct themselves as though they think such things if they wish to keep making their mortgage repayments, though. We can see therapy culture spreading throughout our society wherever those under the age of 40 are making decisions. It’s a millennial-on-down mentality, by and large. Didn’t do well enough on your Year 12 exams to get into university? No problem. Get mum to get a doctor to say you suffer from psoriasis, and with the extra credit that provides, you’ll be able to get into that ANU course you believed you were entitled to. Can’t make your assignment deadlines because you streamed too much garbage instead of studying? No dramas. Get a psychologist to say you suffer from anxiety, and you’ll get an extension and have the time you need to pass. Can’t follow directives at work and so keep getting unfairly dis-employed? No worries. Get a medical professional to say you’re disabled and you can get a pension and free allied health services. Life sorted. Like a spiritual darkness, this mentality is spreading everywhere—enabled by establishment platforms like the ABC. ABC Classic, for example, has started a new program called Mindful Music. It’s hosted by Greta Bradman (yes, that family, and I’m sure no nepotism was involved at all, of course). The show is basically an orchestral pity party for unstable Gen X females dealing with the psychological consequences of promiscuity and abortion guilt. The minions of Big Sister on ABC Classic call it a ‘musical hug’. We have reached another dead-end in this centuries-long project to replace Christianity with utopian humanism as a foundation for society. Last century, the world-improving intellectual types believed that a classless utopia would provide the basis for heaven on earth. Instead, it brought hell, and still does for many Christians imprisoned in communist nations like China and North Korea. Several hundred million died last century thanks to utopian ideologies, and if you’re paying attention you would agree that we may well be on the cusp of billions dying this century due to another iteration of the great ideological struggles of the modern period. This time it’s decadent Western globalism versus a revanched Eurasian multilaterism. We’ll be told that our children need to die for freedom again. We don’t teach kids about the horrors of communism and utopianism at school. Even the Christian schools don’t teach children about the millions of Christians experiencing persecution today under communism, because the only historical suffering that ever happened, according to teachers in schools, was indigenous people during colonisation and Jews during the Holocaust. That’s not an exaggeration. It’s a fact. Therapy culture is another attempt at a centralised society ruled by experts with the state replacing the family as the primary institution. This time, it’s happening in the West instead of in Eurasia. We’ve now got several generations who have been made incapable of living independently from Big Sister’s codependent embrace. The kids aren’t crazy. We are. We’ve put our faith in the relativity of human reason and abandoned the certainties of God. We’ve exchanged life under heaven for hell on earth. Pills and psychologists won’t fix our children. High standards and bruises will. If we don’t take back control of our children from the state then we will replicate the horrors of the twentieth century in our own nation in the twenty-first. Originally published at Education Reformation.

Why Aren’t We Having More Children?

Mark Moncrieff
-
0
Why Aren’t We Having More Children?
In the 1990’s the Left shared an African proverb, ‘it takes a village to raise a child’. They loved that this traditional phrase called upon a collective for child raising. What they failed to notice was that in an African village nearly everyone is likely to be a relative of that child. It is not about a collection of random people or of professionals raising a child, but the importance of the extended family in looking after itself. From Italy to South Korea there is hardly a country in the developed world that doesn’t have a baby shortage. This is even spreading to the third world. Here we are witnesses to a civilizational issue, not simply one restricted to one country or society. Which means that to understand the issue we must look more broadly. Men and women want children, but we are not simply creatures of instinct. We think, which means that what we think can be influenced by things other than our instincts. The environment in which we live and the ideas that exist around us also influence us. As does the reality of raising children. They take up time, money and resources. Even though people want children, children come at a cost. However in the past people seemed to be willing to pay that price and today more and more people seem to be unwilling or unable to. The standard answers as to why are always economic. People moved from the farm to the city and children went from being an asset that could provide labour to a burden that instead cost money. That as women become more educated they wanted less children. Each idea suggests that these things are rational and logical. Even that having a large family is indulgent and selfish. In 1700 no matter where someone lived they were nearly always surrounded by family. Everyone in the town, village or district is related in some way to the other people who also live in that place. Which means that there was a vast network of people who could help in the day to day raising of children. But when a family moved to the town or city they left behind that support and they disrupted two communities. We are familiar with the idea that the village is disrupted, but so too is the community that someone moves to. A stranger arrives and is now competing against the locals. Ties are broken and that includes those of the extended community. If no one can look after the children then it makes less sense to have more. It is not economics or logic that encourages less children. But instead the reality that it is much harder to look after them. There is an old saying, ‘many hands make light work’, meaning that if a job is done by many people each person’s share of the work is reduced. In the past motherhood used this principle, many people other than the mother took some of the burden. Mother, grandmother, aunt, sister, cousin, niece, daughter, all pitched in. When a women is in a new place amongst new people then all of that changes. Motherhood becomes a much bigger and harder part of her life. We see this in modern times, a couple have a child together and it is a very trying time for them. The husband feels as if he is doing everything that he can to support his brand new family, working, helping out, providing emotional support for her and often she is frustrated beyond belief, why is he doing so little to help she wonders? Which has a big impact on how many children this couple will have. It is an enormous test for their relationship. The answer is other women, specifically her mother, then her aunt, sister and any other women who are related or experienced with children. It is an unfortunate modern trend for the father to take the place of all the women in the village, it’s too much. Then in the middle of the 20th century we had a massive population boom, the rapid growth of population in the third world as it received the benefits of transport, new rapid growth crops and pharmaceuticals. In 1927 the world’s population was around 2 billion, in 2023 it has gone over 8 billion, but nearly everywhere the fertility rate has declined. In the West we had the babyboom between 1944-1964, but that created its own problems as new families left older communities and started new lives amongst new people. Those older family ties and formations broke down and today we are seeing that continue although with new challenges. One of those new challenges is how hard it is to get into an economically stable position and then to remain there. In the past a great deal of effort was made to get families to form and to make sure that jobs were available and that prices were kept under control. Today none of that is true. It is still required for a man to have a stable job and to pay, but permanent employment is harder to obtain. Competition from women, and mass immigration all make family formation harder. Marriage has been made unstable. I have mixed feelings about the fertility decline, in 1086 when Willian the Conqueror had the Domesday book compiled there were around 1,700,000 people in England, today there are more than 56,000,000. I can’t help feeling that that is insane. Sure about 20% of that is from immigration, but even 45,000,000 is a lot of people. That problem is now all over the Earth. Capitalism, the handmaiden of Liberalism says that a bigger population leads to a bigger economy and that’s what really matters. I’m a bit more agnostic on population, I’m not convinced that a smaller population is a bad thing. Having said that, if we want people to have more children then we need to make family formation easier, make family stability a priority and to make women more important to society than to the economy. Today we are burning the candle at both ends because in theory it increases the economy. But if increasing the economy leads to our extinction then that isn’t a good deal at all. Originally published at Upon Hope. You can find Mark’s Subscribestar here.

Australian Senate establishes Formal Inquiry into Excess Deaths

Guest
-
0
Australian Senate establishes Formal Inquiry into Excess Deaths
Rebekah Barnett The Australian Senate voted to establish a parliamentary inquiry into the nation’s excess deaths today, giving the green light to what is possibly the first inquiry of this nature in the world. One year and five motions is what it took for Senator Ralph Babet, of the United Australia Party, to finally get the go-ahead on the inquiry.
Senator Babet tabled two unsuccessful motions calling for an inquiry into Australia’s excess mortality last March, followed by another unsuccessful motion in February of this year. Several weeks later, his fourth motion calling for the Senate to acknowledge the need for an inquiry scraped through with a win, marking a shift in attitude within the Senate and paving the way for today’s vote to finally establish an inquiry. “Fifth time’s the charm!” said Senator Babet in a statement after his motion passed successfully. “This appears to be a world-first inquiry for what is a global issue. May this committee process give a voice to the family members of the deceased and deliver the answers that our nation so desperately needs.” The successful motion, co-sponsored by independent Senators Jacqui Lambie and David Pocock, calls for the Community Affairs References Committee to conduct an inquiry into factors contributing to excess mortality in 2021 – 2023 and to make recommendations on how to address them. The vote was won 31:30 with only the left-wing Labor Party and the Greens opposing the motion (see full breakdown here). The phenomenon of excess all-cause mortality is an issue for nations all around the world since the pandemic kicked off in 2020, yet governments have shown little interest or initiative in investigating why, or what to do about it.
Source: Our World in Data.
Australia saw record-high excess mortality throughout the pandemic, peaking at 11.7% above the expected baseline in 2022. This number was initially touted to be as high as 15%, but the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) revised its excess death numbers down with the adoption of new modelling in 2023. Though 2023 saw fewer excess deaths, the ABS reports that the excess was “sustained” and “statistically significant” into the first half of 2023.
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Figures released by the ABS just today show the majority of 2023 deaths sitting above the baseline range, although mortality did come within baseline range during weeks 31 – 43. Cancer remains the leading cause of death in Australia, accounting for around a third of all deaths year on year, followed by dementia, respiratory disease, and heart disease. In 2022, Covid was the sixth-leading cause of death, falling to eighth in 2023.
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Naturally, some of the excess deaths seen in Australia and around the world are attributable to Covid, but the virus cannot account for all of the excess mortality. In fact, the lax criteria for attribution of deaths to Covid means that the impact of the virus on excess mortality is probably overestimated. Initially, the ABS differentiated between deaths due to Covid alone, and deaths with other causal factors, revealing that just 8.6% of deaths with Covid were caused solely by the virus. Subsequently, this reporting method was done away with, and all deaths with a causal sequence of events (including with pre-existing chronic conditions) were swept into the ‘due to Covid’ category, taking the accounting of deaths due to Covid from 8% to approximately 80%.
COVID-19 Mortality in Australia, Deaths registered to 31 January 2022. Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Even so, an analysis of 2022 excess mortality by Australia’s peak actuarial body, the Actuaries Institute, pinned only half of Australia’s excess deaths on Covid. That leaves the rest of the excess mortality unexplained. The actuaries suggest that other factors driving Australia’s excess deaths may include: mortality displacement, undiagnosed Covid, mental health issues, and unhealthy pandemic-influenced lifestyle changes. Note that the latter two are documented knock-on effects of government pandemic policies. An independent excess death probe led by the Australian Medical Professionals’ Society (AMPS) highlighted the impact of the Covid vaccination program as another potential driver of excess mortality. One particularly interesting report featured in the AMPS inquiry was an Australian study of all-cause mortality trends conducted on the pre-Covid but post-vaccinated Queensland population. The analysis showed that deaths started trending upwards with the Covid vaccine rollout, not Covid.
Queensland mortality data shows a marked upturn in all-cause mortality among those aged 60 and older coinciding with the primary series vaccine rollout, and before Covid spread in the community. Analysis by one of the presenters at the AMPS inquiry, Dr. Andrew Madry.
While the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) officially acknowledges only 14 deaths related to the Covid vaccines, there were over 1,020 reported deaths and over 140,000 injuries recorded in the DAEN, Australia’s safety surveillance database, as at 12 March 2024.
Source: DAEN.
As underreporting is a well-known feature of such safety surveillance systems, the true extent of harm from the Covid vaccines is unknown. The TGA admitted as much when, in September last year, the regulator refused to say how many of the adverse events reported to the DAEN it had determined to be causally linked to the Covid vaccines, but let slip that the TGA assigns almost all reports a causality status of ‘possible,’ neither confirming nor denying causality. Other potential contributors to excess mortality may include harms arising from the pandemic response, including lockdowns, isolation, loss of employment, loss of autonomy and increased stress, all of which were raised in submissions to an inquiry into Terms of Reference for a Covid Royal Commission. Australia’s inquiry into excess deaths will likely consider all this and more. The Committee is expected to provide its report by 31 August 2024. This article was first published at Dystopian Down Under and Richardson Post.

The Red Pill is a World Without God

Adam Piggott
-
2
The Red Pill is a World Without God
I’ve heard it said that feminism ruins women, while the red pill/MGTOW/PUA movement ruins men. I think this is fairly accurate, but in the sense that the viruses in question ruin the respective sexes in different ways. The red pill has two distinctive ways of ruin for men. The first is the temptation to the vices of lust and hedonism and many sins against the 6th and 9th commandments. The more common ruin is the loss of hope and a withdrawal from the possibilities of having a  family. The absence of attainment of female companionship for men further leads to a loss of ambition, of the drive to create something worthwhile in the world that could attract a woman to be one’s wife. The really tricky aspect to the red pill is that in a logical manner, it is not wrong. The 16 Commandments of Poon that Roissy coined, as an example, are all well proven to have a strong basis of fact. The books by Rollo Tomassi also fall under this category. They are factually correct. They are how the world works as regards to women. But with a caveat: they are factually correct if you inhabit a world without God. The Red Pill, then, is the ugly reality of the relationship between the sexes without God. The Red Pill is thus a strategy to survive relationship pitfalls in a secular world. But it is critical to understand that this secular world includes the very vast majority of Christian churches, as the Church itself joined with the protestants and embraced modernism just over 60 years ago. The Red Pill is the reduction of romantic relationships to an entirely mercenary proposition, where every man can never relax as a more skillful practitioner of the foul red pill arts could be just around the corner ready to steal his concubine. The Red Pill is a reduction to life without loyalty, meaning or hope. It is grounded on a life based on fear. As a result, it entails no planning for the future. It is the work of the devil. It is a world of suffering, but not for God, rather for ourselves in cohesion with Satan. Catholics are not immune to suffering. On the contrary, we should welcome suffering, because the more that we suffer here on earth then the less we will have to suffer afterwards. The purification of our souls will happen whether we like it or not. Better to suffer here than in Purgatory. But the great difference between a traditional Catholic marriage and a Red Pill relationship is that the Catholic marriage is grounded in a journey; a journey towards God. It is the primary responsibility of the Catholic father to guide towards God the souls of his family, as much that is within his powers. A Red Pill relationship has no journey. It ends when it ends, and then either a new consort is found or death has knocked upon the door. Growing up in the modern secular hedonistic world, we have been blinded to this reality and thus we seek to believe that which we see with our own eyes and discover for ourselves. The Red Pill rose precisely when it did because the men of Gen X needed answers. And we found the answers that we sought, but what we didn’t understand was that it was the world itself that we had been sold that was the issue. The rupture of the relationship between the sexes was merely a symptom of the far greater and much more terrible malaise. A world without God. And that is a world without hope. As Christians we believe so as to to build our faith. We build our faith so as to conquer our fear. We conquer our fear so as to have hope. We have hope that we may arrive at grace. In the world of the Red Pill, none of these or any other of the virtues are present. It is a world of power and domination; a world of constant manipulation; a world of fear; a world of hate. But you can only reject the Red Pill if you embrace God, the traditional Catholic God. It is no coincidence that so many former Red Pill writers have chosen God. It was the natural progression for those who really seek truth. The real answer was there all along. We thought that we were discovering amazing and secret rules about women, but what we were really revealing was the truth behind the great lie. Originally published at Pushing Rubber Downhill.

Will France’s Tranny Granny start World War III?

David Hiscox
-
0
Will France’s Tranny Granny start World War III?
Every normal person who sees this knows it is fake and gay. Recently, Candace Owens potentially exposed just how fake and gay the marriage of French President Emmanuel Macron to “wife” “Brigitte” really is. Here are the dot points:
  • “Brigitte” was born Jean-Michel and “transitioned” at age 30 to “become” female.
  • Photos released attempting to “debunk” the “conspiracy theory” always turn out to be of other people.
  • No photos have been released of Brigitte from the first 30 years of her life.
  • Nobody can find any trace of her “brother” or former “husband”.
  • “Brigitte” is a dead ringer of said “brother”.
  • Mainstream French journalists have been sued by the “first lady” and fined, and threatened by police for investigating the story.
Intriguingly, Owens just lost her job. It could all be nonsense, and honestly, I don’t really care. Similarly you, dear reader may ask “Why does this matter?” This has blackmail written all over it. We know courtesy of extensive research by Whitney Webb that Jeffrey Epstein was a Mossad agent who blackmailed Western politicians on behalf of his home country. The Epstein spy ring was just the latest in a long line of blackmail operations, and as Owens has also exposed, blackmail dominates the music industry too. Blackmail is the decisive factor regarding who is chosen to rule in “democratic” countries. It is why politicians always promise to do things the electorate actually wants when they’re on the election trail, then they implement the policies of their masters once they get in. The sexually perverted are the easiest to blackmail, hence why political leaders behave like sexual perverts in public. This is where the Macrons fit in. Even if the tranny story is complete nonsense they are eminently blackmailable given Emmanuel’s age when they first met. The Rothschild banker has overseen Covid Tyranny and the continued multicultural dismantling of the French nation. If “Brigitte” is a man it brings the blackmail to a whole new level. Drama teacher “Brigitte” did not fall in love with a youthful Emmanuel Macron in a Mrs. Robinson-style affair. Instead, the pervert Jean-Michel groomed Emmanuel. Still, one may say “How does this matter? I just want to be left alone.” This matters because World War III will not leave you alone: Several days ago international media reported that France could send 20,000 troops to the Ukraine within a month. It is now being reported that French, German and Polish troops (regular army, not mercenaries) are already in the Ukrainian theatre. The Russian government is indicating it is preparing to escalate actions directly against NATO members in response, including conducting nuclear tests, enforcing a no-fly zone over the Black Sea, conducting air patrols close to NATO’s border, and actual strikes against NATO military bases and supply centres. It is worth heeding Dr. David Hilton’s warning regarding the potential of an EMP attack, and consider that a nuclear test would be the perfect pretext with which to carry out such an attack. It could mean direct war between Russia and NATO, or they may find a way to just keep stringing it along. It may not mean nukes yet. Basically though, it’s on. Expect this, but in Western Europe. Even the YouTube algorithm is now selling not just perversion to the normies, but war between France and Russia as an added bonus. This is why I have used the term “Tranny Granny” in the same headline as “World War III”. Look at the map of France and Russia: France going to war with Russia makes as much sense as the still youthful President of France being married to a woman in her 70’s. Unless they are both blokes, they’re both perverts, and Macron is being blackmailed to carry out a foreign policy which directly contradicts France’s national interest. Consider that twice in recent years, news emerged that leading elements within the French military were deeply dissatisfied with the demographic and security deterioration in France, with suggestions that a coup may be possible in order to avoid civil war. Now they’re supposed to be turning their guns on other White men several countries away? France’s enemy is internal, not over 1000 miles away. It is an enemy deliberately imported by its own government. Consider the bigger picture of why the Globohomo West is engaged in a direct strategic struggle against Russia and China, with a proxy war in Taiwan just as likely to erupt in coming years. It does not make sense, unless you understand that the people directing the foreign policy of White countries are not Whites, but dual citizen neocons who are deliberately replacing the people they rule over. They don’t care if they replace Whites over the course of several decades via mass immigration and enforced multiculturalism, or if they feed us piecemeal into the Ukrainian meat-grinder. Either way, we’re gone. That is the objective.

Moscow Terror: Clownworld punishes Russians for voting the wrong way

David Hiscox
-
2
Moscow Terror: Clownworld punishes Russians for voting the wrong way
In last weekend’s Presidential election, Russians voted for Vladimir Putin in record numbers. He won nearly 88% of the vote with about voter turnout of about 75%. Naturally then, Islamic State decided to do a Bataclan in Moscow last night. WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO Latest reports indicate 60 murdered and hundreds wounded, although this toll will undoubtedly rise. It doesn’t make any sense, unless you understand that ISIS is to the US what Hezbollah and the Houthis are to Iran. In modern day geopolitics, states use their proxies to conduct operations which could cause escalation if committed by regular forces. In this instance the US government basically telegraphed its intentions several days beforehand. The entire strategy of Clownworld’s proxy war against Russia in the Ukraine hinged upon triggering a “Colour Revolution” against Putin. With the Ukrainian army on the brink of collapse, this crushing victory for Putin crushed Globohomo’s last hopes of regime change in Russia. If the election had occurred in the West, the globalists could have just forced the people to vote again or outright rigged the election to get their desired result. Instead, Putin is unassailable via conventional warfare, via coup and now at the ballot box. It is here that we come to understand just how evil the rulers of Clownworld really are. They force-feed groomer propaganda onto children in order to make them take chemicals to alter their hormones and undergo surgery to mutilate their genitals, and will jail any parent who attempts to protect their child from such sadism. They also forced billions to take a poisonous “vaccine” which is now killing millions. These people think nothing of sending their proxies to enter a Russian concert hall and shoot ordinary people at point blank range. Because they’re evil. The intent is pure terror. The message to Russians is “We want revenge and we can get you anywhere.” The message to Whites in the West is “There is no escape.” We should not be under any illusion that Vladimir Putin is coming to save the White man. The world is essentially locked in an Orwellian geopolitical struggle between Oceana (Globohomo), Eurasia (Russia) and Eastasia (China). The Russian government rightly jails groomer activists and takes White South African farmers as refugees, but it persecutes nationalists just as Globohomo does. However for long suffering Anglos, to all intents and purposes Russia appears to be a Whiteopia. We see images of clean streets, beautiful train stations and a distinct lack of diversity. Given Clownworld’s entire state ideology is based on the idea of “progress”, that what we have now is better than anywhere else on the planet and at any time in the past, contradictory evidence must be destroyed. This is why Democrats force diversity upon White suburbs in America. It’s why black journalists do hit-pieces on Orania. It’s why they tell horror stories about the 1950’s. And it’s why gunmen slaughtered ordinary Russians listening to classical music. The only way we survive this is if we win. Follow XYZ on X and Gab.

Pauline Hanson calls for Immigration Halt

David Hiscox
-
1
Pauline Hanson calls for Immigration Halt
It would have been nice of her to back Fraser Anning’s plebiscite motions in 2018 and 2019, but it is good nevertheless to see this being tabled in parliament. From news.com:
Pauline Hanson has called back to her now-infamous claims Australia is being “swamped” by Asian immigrants as she renewed calls to halt migration.
Why “infamous”? We have indeed been swamped, Australia is unrecognisable from the one in which Pauline made her maiden speech.
On the day new figures revealed Australia’s migration intake had surged to a record high of 548,800 arrivals in the year to September, threatening the government’s own efforts to ease levels, the senator said the warning she first made almost 30 years ago was proving true. In an address to the Senate shortly after 9am, the One Nation leader called for a plebiscite to ascertain what Australians believe is an appropriate level of immigration, saying the “majority” did not want a “Big Australia”.
Personally, I have no problem with a Big Australia if the country is full of Australians. Every Anglo family should be having ten kids.
She was supported by her One Nation colleague Malcolm Roberts and United Australian Party senator Ralph Babet but was ultimately defeated in her efforts. In her speech, she cast minds back to the first speech she made as the Oxley MP in 1996, where she said: “I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians”. “I was called a racist, of course, by the major parties and big media who are in lockstep of a big Australia,” she said on Thursday. “But today, seven out of the top 10 source countries for immigration to Australia are in Asia – including four out of the top five – and the numbers are out of control. “Was I right? You’d never admit it. But yes, I am.”
Since the end of lockdowns mass replacement immigration has gotten totally out of control but the government just doesn’t care. It claims we need to make up for the replacement level migration we missed out on during the Covid hoax:
The government has accounted for the migration surge by contending the increase is a one-off event, as a rebalancing in population growth occurs after pandemic-era border closures stalled international arrivals. Releasing a migration strategy in December last year, Ms O’Neil vowed to put the brakes on the surge in international arrivals. According to the government’s own forecasts, it anticipates that Australia’s net overseas migration intake will be slashed by 50 per cent in 2025. Should it be realised, a fall of this size would represent the largest decline in migration in Australia’s history outside of pandemics and world wars.
The hubris of this is breathtaking. Pre-2020, the level of immigration was already insane. The lockdowns actually gave us a chance to breathe. What they’re saying is that next year they will cut things back and pretend that a whopping 300,000 or so net annual migration intake is reasonable. As Caldron Pool points out, this is immoral. The Noticer reports that Hanson slammed the cowardice of the politicians who refused to support the bill:
Ms Hanson said that those who refused to support her bill were afraid of giving Australians a voice, because they know that a majority of the country does not support mass immigration like they do themselves… Ms Hanson said the political class were not just ignoring poll after poll showing that the more than 60% of Australians want migration lowered, but that they were ignoring the housing and cost of living crises caused by the record-high influx of immigrants. “They’re ignoring the huge numbers of people lining up to inspect a single property, desperate to secure a rental. They’re ignoring the growing congestion in our cities,” she said. “They’re ignoring the families struggling to find the money to pay skyrocketing rents amid our cost of living crisis. They’re ignoring the growing cities of tents, swags and cars as more Australians fall into homelessness and despair. “One Nation has always championed lower immigration in solidarity with the majority of Australians. On their behalf I am demanding a halt on immigration, and for the government to put the Australian people first.”
MacroBusiness has consistently warned of the housing catastrophe now hitting ordinary Aussies. It can be summarised in one graph. The Noticer has also reported on the tent cities now springing up in Australia’s major cities. Ordinary working class and middle class Aussies working full time jobs are going homeless because rents have skyrocketed. A paradigm shift is occurring on the right of politics in Australia, with One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts recently floating the topic of remigration on social media. Even the legacy media has been forced to admit the obvious, with a slew of articles attempting to manage public perception. Incredibly, they have even been forced to concede points which nationalists have been making for years, such as the fact that immigration does not benefit an economy:
“I just wonder why this is the only economic model we’ve got – to force feed population growth, to run the highest imaginable immigration intake, and to condemn our big cities to a relentless chase to keep up in terms of infrastructure,” he said. “We don’t have to do it to guarantee Australia’s prosperity.” He said it was a “lazy” way of running an economy.
There is no way they will be able to keep a lid on this. Australians have been very comfortable for a very long time, and very docile as a result. That comfort is ending. The lockdowns all conveniently lifted in late 2021 as the country was on the brink of revolution, but they can’t wind this one back. Uncomfortable Aussies are getting really, really angry.

Open letter to Councils between Rockingham and Margaret River

Stephen Wells
-
1
Open letter to Councils between Rockingham and Margaret River
Dear Elected Councillor, I am writing to you and to every single one of your colleagues in every Council up and down the Coast of WA whose constituents are directly impacted by the Federal Government’s proposal to approve nearly 7,700km2 of Ocean for development of Wind Turbines between Mandurah and past Cape Naturalist. This is an open letter and will be submitted to mainstream media outlets for publication and will also be published via alternative media on the internet. I write to you to urge you to formally oppose the Wind Farm proposal as a Council and individually as a Councillor. It is important to add the official opposition of local elected representatives to the individual opposition, as protests of large groups of individuals are often ignored by Government, but it is much harder for one tier of Government to push ahead with its plans if it is officially opposed by another tier of Government. Please put a motion to your fellow Councillors to officially oppose the Wind Farm proposal as a Council, vote on the motion and if you get a majority, instruct your CEO to make your formal opposition to the Federal Government’s plans known. Should you fail to get a majority in the vote, then I urge you to still put an official opposition to the Federal Government using your official position as an elected representative of your community. The Federal Government’s proposal, if approved, will see more than 1,300 wind turbines dumped into the Ocean that will soar 268 meters above sea level. This is 20 meters taller than the highest building in Perth CBD and almost 4 times the height of the Rendevous Hotel in Scarborough, which is currently the tallest building on the WA Coast, at just 70 meters in height. They will be visible from as far north as Rockingham and as far South as Prevelly by Margaret River. The ocean floor will be up to 100 meters under the water and so the total height of the turbines will be up to 378 meters from ocean floor to their tops. To put this in perspective the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France is just 300 meters tall. Would you sanction even one Eiffel Tower to be dumped in the ocean, much less 1,300 of them? None of these Turbines will add a single extra watt of on demand power to the grid. Instead it will double the infrastructure to provide the same amount of power as the coal or gas powered generation that must be constantly online ready to back up the wind. Wind energy that can drop to zero for days on end and wind that can also blow way too strongly to be safe to allow the turbines to operate. For those of you who think storage will solve this issue, I must refute such thinking. Batteries (which are much more toxic than anything coming from coal mining or coal burning and must be frequently replaced) cannot provide more than an hour or two of back up power for the whole system. The 20GW wind farm proposal for the Southwest will need 480 Gigawatt hours (GWh) of storage capacity just to back up the wind turbines for a single day. As you may have noticed it is possible to have an entire week with barely any wind. The world’s biggest battery is set to be built in NSW and will only provide 2.4GWh of storage at a cost of $2.4 Billion. So if you wanted to provide just 1 hour of back up for 20GW of wind turbines, then you would need more than eight of them at a cost of nearly $20 Billion. Back up for a day at $48 Billion and back up for a week at $3.36 Trillion! Don’t forget, if the wind is recharging the battery, that energy is not providing power to the grid. You need energy to do both. The fact is, mega batteries are not used for back up power at all. They are instead used for frequency stabilisation as the erratic nature of wind can cause surges and dips in power which can blow up transformers and cause power cuts. But the more wind power that is put into the grid the harder it becomes to keep that power stable. Not only will coal and gas be used to back up the wind when it doesn’t blow or when it blows too strongly to be safe, it must be on constant stand-by dumping energy in the form of steam into the atmosphere. It must also SUPPLY electricity to the turbines a lot of the time to help them to turn. The wind turbines are made of concrete, steel, balsa wood and toxic resin. The balsa wood is made by clearing rain forests. This is then covered in toxic resin to make the turbine blades, and these blades must be frequently replaced and cannot be recycled. Instead they are either dumped into the ocean or into landfill where the resin slowly leaches into the ocean or ground water and soil. The Southwest coast of WA is full of endangered marine life, including coral, dolphins and migrating whales. Birds are a frequent victim of these giant blenders. The proposal states that every 2GW of Wind Turbine development will require 6,000 workers to build and 3,000 workers to maintain. So we can extrapolate from this that 60,000 workers will be required to build 20GW and will require 30,000 people to maintain. People who are clueless on economics will scream “we’re providing jobs!”, but we want fewer people providing our power not more. If it takes 1 person to provide electricity to 100 people and everyone earns the same, then we will only require 1% of our income to power our homes and businesses. But if it requires 10 people per 100 then electricity costs will rise to 10% of our income. 60,000 workers will require homes to live in. They will likely have to be imported from overseas. Housing in the Southwest is already under strain. Who will build all the extra homes required? Who will build all the extra roads required? The Bussell Highway upgrade is still not finished after 4 years. Must we endure roadworks forever? All of this because of a so called “Net zero carbon” goal, to fight man made climate change. There is no such thing as “Net zero carbon”. It is an arbitrary selective wish list that only exists on paper. Every human activity puts carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, wind turbines not least. Concrete and steel production both emit huge amounts of it into the atmosphere. As for “climate change” any official who still believes we are in any danger from our carbon dioxide emissions is guilty of criminal negligence. There is no excuse anymore. It’s been a generation since Tim Flannery told us Perth would be the world’s first climate change ghost city within a generation and it’s been 36 years since original climate shyster James Hansen told the US Congress we had 10 years to save the planet, or within 20 years New York would be under 10 feet of water. Instead of arresting these fraudsters they are allowed to keep pushing the date of doomsday further and further into the future. I could tell you how the whole science behind it is a fraud as well, but I had to write a whole book to cover that properly (I will happily give you a free copy if you ask! Or you can look me and my books up on Amazon if you prefer.) If the above has not convinced you that this project should be opposed with every fibre of your being and every ounce of authority from your elected office, then it will have to be assumed that you are not fit for office. That either stupidity, brainwashing or corruption has made you ineligible. If you are waiting for “public support” before acting, then you are also unfit for office. There is nothing more reprehensible than a coward. We do not live under a system of direct democracy, but of representative democracy. This means most people elect someone they think they can trust to make decisions without them, so that they can get on with living their busy lives. They have no time to research the truth, THAT’S WHAT THEY ELECT AND PAY YOU FOR!! It’s only when you betray that trust by lining your own pockets or turning a blind eye to things you should know are bad, that the general public take an interest in your decisions. So take heed. Voting you out might not be enough for the asleep mob, who is at the moment content to go to work Monday to Friday and watch the footy on the idiot box every weekend. History is full of examples of people in power coming undone because they assumed that the docile population would always remain so and could be abused and exploited at will. At the very least, you risk loosing your seat at the next election and facing some choice words from angry residents if you fail to officially oppose these wind turbines. Yours sincerely, Stephen Wells (concerned citizen) P.S. I could search out a bunch of links to back up all of my claims, but you shouldn’t need any. If you don’t have enough common sense to grasp that you can’t provide power on demand with erratic intermittent wind and that sticking even a single skyscraper into the ocean is bloody insanity, then no amount of links will change your mind. You can find Stephen Wells at Telegram and purchase his books here.

Does Dutton Want Nukes?

David Hiscox
-
1
Does Dutton Want Nukes?
If we get nuclear power, I’m going back to 1985 and staying there.
From news.com:
Peter Dutton has doubled down on the Coalition’s decision to push ahead with a nuclear power policy, saying it’s the only ‘credible pathway’ to net zero. The Opposition Leader has unveiled a draft of his energy policy to take to the next election that proposes to replace existing coal-fired power generators with a mix of small and large scale nuclear reactors to use for net-zero power sources. He also indicated where the nuclear reactors could be located. “If there’s a retiring coal fired generator that’s already got an existing distribution network, the wires and poles are already there to distribute the energy across the network into homes and businesses, that’s really what we’re interested in,” Mr Dutton said. Mr Dutton said nuclear reactors would provide a more reliable and cheaper source of clean energy.
This is a very sensible decision. Nuclear power is safe, clean and the cornerstone of electricity generation in practically every modern industrialised nation. Australia has the largest reserves of uranium in the world, and some of the best land for storing nuclear waste. It’s a no-brainer and it should have been done decades ago. Labor’s moratorium on nuclear power, in conjunction with the current environmental extremism pushing “renewable” energy and destroying coal and gas fired electricity generation, has cost Australia hundreds of billions of dollars due to high energy costs. It’s intriguing that the Liberal Party is using the pretext of “net zero” to propose this sensible economic reform. I suspect most Liberal Party decision makers know that “climate change” is a hoax and that “net zero” is insanity but are too cowardly to say it. However, kudos for having the cunning to appropriate the language of climate extremists to derail their goal of de-industrialising Australia. (Or maybe they’re just true believers.) I suspect the cunning goes further, as nuclear power generation provides multiple military benefits. Initially, lower energy costs would provide an enormous boost to Australia’s industrial and agricultural sectors, the cornerstone of any economy in a prolonged war. Then there is the little matter of nuclear weapons. With nuclear reactors, Australia could rightly build its own nuclear arsenal. Defence thinkers are openly dubious about whether the United States could or would aid Australia should conflict break out with major powers. Given that the US government is currently playing chicken with both Russia and China, our submarine fleet is years away from modernisation and the Australian armed forces are struggling to recruit from a population it openly despises, a nuclear deterrent would be the ultimate insurance policy. Again, it’s a no brainer and it should have been done decades ago. As an added bonus, we could use the nuclear tests to blow up all the stupid wind farms. Here’s the catch – who will have the finger on the trigger? Australian politics has gone full globohomo. Our foreign and domestic policy is basically:
  • normalise anal rape and genital mutilation for children
  • use mass replacement immigration to destroy White people
This is horrifying enough but it gets worse. Clownworld is unsustainable because “multiculturalism” is a pipe dream and mass replacement immigration impoverishes a population.
Australia sees record number of long-term arrivals in January – as tent cities spring up due to housing crisis
Both Labor and the Coalition are withering because besides their anti-human policies, they represent the old ideological and class divide that existed when Australia was a homogenous, Anglo nation. As Australia becomes multi-ethnic due to mass replacement immigration, the population will vote more and more along ethnic lines. Thus the mass replacement immigration policy adopted by both parties to avoid electoral suicide via recession will ultimately destroy them both. In the coming decades new political parties will emerge to replace Labor and the Coalition to instead represent respectively the interests of Chinese, Indian, and Arab/Muslim residents, and a coalescence of native Anglos/Whites. Once the Australian political system reflects its multi-ethnic reality, the outcome of every Australian election will have major geopolitical consequences across the whole of Asia. Domestic elections will give the ruling ethnic party the power to favour its own people regarding resource distribution, and would make Australia a vassal to either India or China should Whites fail to win. The resultant domestic ethnic turmoil and the temptation for foreign powers to meddle would all but ensure conflict. Moreover if Australia has nukes, whichever ethnic group wins an election gets the nukes. With or without nuclear weapons, mass replacement immigration constitutes a clear and present danger to Australia’s national security. Follow XYZ on X and Gab.

Voice to Parliament: South Australia Defies Democracy

David Hiscox
-
1
Voice to Parliament: South Australia Defies Democracy
Not only did nobody ask for a “voice to parliament”, the entire concept was comprehensively rejected by the Australian people. Despite this, in South Australia, “elections” are taking place this weekend for a state “voice to parliament”: Their ABC tells us that:
South Australia’s First Nation’s Voice passed Parliament last year, and means the SA Voice now exists in state laws, not the Constitution as proposed by last year’s failed referendum.
Given the current political climate, it is highly unlikely that any state government will ever have the political will to abolish a so-called aboriginal “Voice to Parliament” once it has been legislated. Left wing extremists in state and local governments understand this, so they are pushing ahead with their undemocratic pet project while pretending it is democracy. Obviously then, they’re doing it in Melbourne too:
Despite Australia overwhelmingly rejecting an Indigenous Voice to Parliament, an inner city council has unanimously voted to establish a similar body. The City of Melbourne’s 11 councillors voted on Tuesday night to establish a First Nations advisory committee that will ‘participate in the governance of the council’. According to its draft terms of reference, the committee will ensure ‘First Nations voices and aspirations must be embedded in our core business and decision-making at every level as we strive for reconciliation, recognition, respect and truth-telling’.
When they say “reconciliation, recognition, respect and truth-telling” they mean reparations, separatism and escalating political suppression of Whites. In South Australia the candidates aren’t even bothering to compete against each other because they know that whoever gets in, they will be able to pressure governments for more free stuff. Moreover once established, a “voice to parliament” will gradually accrue more and more power:
Naturally, they’re not attempting to make logical arguments:
When the No vote won in last year’s referendum, Dawn Likouresis says it was like someone had hit her. “When they said No I was so emotional. I cried and I thought ‘this is wrong’,” she said. “It just stopped us in place.” But Ms Likouresis is still putting her hand up, nominating as a candidate in South Australia’s Voice to Parliament.
Feelings matter more than democracy. In ClownWorld, “democracy” does not mean what you think it means. It has been redefined to mean institutions like parliaments, courts, committees, NGO’s and the media, so the will of the people no longer matters. If we vote the wrong way, our rulers have several tricks up their sleeve: – Force us to keep voting until we vote the way they want – Sabotage election or referendum outcomes through deliberate incompetence so badly that the public doesn’t get what it wants – Rig the election – Attempt full spectrum dominance of media and social media so they don’t even have to rig elections – Imprison populist candidates to keep them out of power When they claim that opposition to aboriginal identity politics, the climate change hoax, Covid hysteria, or mass immigration is “a threat to our democracy” they’re not lying. It’s a threat to their democracy, not ours.

Privatised totalitarianism

Dr. David Hilton
-
0
Privatised totalitarianism
The principal of elite Sydney private school Cranbrook was forced to resign last week for failing to stand down a teacher who had sent vulgar emails to a former student while the teacher was being investigated. Nicholas Sampson’s career ended in ignominy, as he will be forever associated with sexual misconduct despite having never been accused. The teacher who was investigated was also cleared of any criminal or professional misconduct in multiple investigations. This scandal-by-association was aired by the woke media as part of a sudden attack on Mr Sampson’s leadership at the school. Via the Guardian:
The latest incident comes at the end of a difficult week for Cranbrook which was the focus of an ABC Four Corners investigation on Monday. The program included interviews with former staff and students who claimed the school had a toxic culture, including bullying, sexual harassment and sexual abuse. After the episode aired on Monday night, Cranbrook school council issued a statement saying: “The council has considered in detail the matters raised by the ABC and remains fully supportive of the headmaster and the school’s leadership.”
And there we have it. A perfect case study of how Western cultural Marxists take power over institutions in their steady march toward total social control: a media beat-up, a scandalous revelation then wall-to-wall media coverage to take down the target. Mr Sampson has done nothing to merit being disgraced, but that doesn’t matter. He was just in the way, no doubt. Perhaps Cranbrook had some senior staff who were not entirely bought into the identity communist agenda. The school has been in the crosshairs of the wokelings for being an all-boys school, and perhaps there was too much sensible thinking going on still among the school leadership. The identity Marxist playbook is always the same. They create the appearance of a scandal to catalyse a crisis, force the target of their attack to resign, and then swoop into the power vacuum to assume control over the organisation they’ve targeted. The Western communists did this in our universities in the 60s and 70s and have done it in just about every institution and organisation in our society since. It’s also an ongoing process as the ideology becomes more extreme and puritanical. Like the Gnostic ouroboros, the revolution always eats its parents. Once the communists are in power, sane and honest individuals get blocked from promotion and the organisation becomes a power base for further communist expansion. I have no inside information on who masterminded this coup d’etat against Mr Sampson’s regime at Cranbrook; however, one of the potential replacements for his $800,000 per annum position turns out to be the senior staff member in charge of the transition toward the school becoming co-ed—Malcolm Turnbull’s daughter Daisy. Perhaps her ‘narcissistic psychopath’ dad gave her a few pointers on subversion and betrayal? There is no lever of power in Australia now outside the control of this network of identity communists. The elite of Australia has now been entirely captured by devotees of this virtue-signalling, Anglo-hating, God-loathing, perversion-pushing, hypocritical identity cult. If you want to get ahead or stay on top in Australia, you have to kiss the ring of this Frankfurt School-forged mind creature and be seen to push woke ideology. If you don’t, you’ll end up like Mr Sampson. Or worse. The power base of this neo-Marxist cult is the education system. That’s where this cancer began before metastasising across society. The means of its spread, however, is culture. It has been through control over movies, music, TV and the media that identity communists have spread their ideology throughout Australian society. When you see the local shopping centre posting on social media that rainbow minorities are welcome at their shops, it’s because the people in charge of that account got those views from the culture. Hammering home cultural Marxist tropes constantly over the decades through entertainment and news has created a society that thinks wokery is just ‘being a good person’. They’ve thoroughly internalised a fake moral law from the infernal pit which pretends to be about niceness and decency but actually brings division, resentment and social disorder. Communism spread its bloodthirsty tentacles across Eurasia last century via political power. Political revolutions would be catalysed using class resentment, and once those Marxist tactics had brought the communists to power the bloodletting would begin. We still haven’t come to grips with the devastating toll this has taken on humanity. The political safeguards and the economic prosperity of Western nations made those tactics unsuccessful. The communists didn’t give up seeking power, of course. They instead chose to focus on culture rather than politics and on control of institutions and the private sector rather than political parties and the public sector. Thanks to theorists like Gramsci, they figured out that politics is downstream from culture. The checks and balances on political excesses put in place by our forefathers only delayed the communist advance, and the communists are now strong enough to exercise the total power that is the true face of communist thought. They won’t do it through the state directly, however. They’ll do it via the banks, Big Tech, your social credit score, and your digital ID-connected electric bike, which you need to earn your carbon credits through your gig economy delivery job. Communism has nothing to do with equality or tolerance or saving the planet. It’s a cult of power, every single time. Particularly concerning is seeing cultural Marxist thinking spread into the church. Signs at Christian schools about ‘Acknowledgement of Country’ or Christian thought leaders more offended by plain speech than sin are now commonplace. Too many Christian leaders, especially young ones, spend too much time watching secular movies and TV shows and so take their morality from Satan rather than from Scripture. We attend a strong Biblical church, yet even there the cancer is evident. One of the pastors warned the faithful last week that our church has ‘toxic masculinity’ and it needs to be stamped out. That sounds like a crisis! That pastor should know better. The term ‘toxic masculinity’ is utterly incompatible with Christianity. It’s a phrase that came out of Jungian philosophy back in the 80s and was contrasted against ‘healthy masculinity’ – which was practiced by weirdos buffalo dancing around a bonfire with their shirts off crying about their dads.
I just wanted to ride my skateboard, Dad.
It’s now a phrase most commonly associated with gender theory and Third Wave Feminism in universities. You cannot redeem a phrase like that, and introducing it at church is a form of spiritual mixing that leads to disunity. Our mental categories must come from the Word, not the world. This is how cultural Marxism works, even inside the church. Christians spend so much time soaked in secular culture they can’t discern anymore what are the things of the world and what are the things of God. Before you can say, ‘Love is love’, the church has been subverted. This mixing of concepts from the culture into the church is a spiritualised form of what Israel was commanded not to do by marrying women from surrounding nations and taking on their gods. It introduces impurity. The gates of hell cannot prevail against the gospel, and therefore Satan’s only weapon is deception. In our formerly Christian society, the primary means for that deception is the culture. Even if you’re not a believer, you need to come out of this mad, decaying culture. Homeschool your children, avoid popular entertainment and keep your children away from the world as much as possible while they grow. The madness we see now can get a lot madder, and as the cultural communists are forced by reality to face the inevitable failure of their ideology to create utopia, you can be guaranteed one thing. They’re going to start killing people. They always do. Originally published at Education Reformation.

If India can exclude Muslims, why can’t we?

David Hiscox
-
0
If India can exclude Muslims, why can’t we?
Obviously, nobody cares what happens in India. However, the example is instructive. Based:
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government today announced rules to implement a 2019 citizenship law that excludes Muslims, weeks before the Hindu nationalist leader seeks a third term in office. The Citizenship Amendment Act provides a fast track to naturalisation for Hindus, Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Christians who fled to Hindu-majority India from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan before December 31, 2014. The law excludes Muslims, who are a majority in all three nations. The law was approved by Indian Parliament in 2019, but Modi’s government had held off with its implementation after deadly protests broke out in capital New Delhi and elsewhere. Scores were killed during days of clashes. The nationwide protests in 2019 drew people of all faiths who said the law undermines India’s foundation as a secular nation. Muslims were particularly worried that the government could use the law, combined with a proposed national register of citizens, to marginalise them.
Because it is racist to take religious minorities from muslim countries fleeing muslim violence but not let the violent muslims in as well. Is that the logic?
The National Register of Citizens is part of Modi government’s effort to identify and weed out people it claims came to India illegally.
Nice policy you’ve got there… it would be a shame if, say…. Western countries applied the same standard to you…
The register has only been implemented in the northeastern state of Assam, and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party has promised to roll out a similar citizenship verification program nationwide. Modi’s government has defended the 2019 citizenship law as a humanitarian gesture. It argues that the law is meant only to extend citizenship to religious minorities fleeing persecution and would not be used against Indian citizens. “These rules will now enable minorities persecuted on religious grounds in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan to acquire citizenship in our nation,” Home Minister Amit Shah wrote on X, formerly Twitter. India’s main opposition Congress party questioned the announcement, saying “the timing right before the elections is evidently designed to polarise the elections.”
LOL, he’s doing a John Howard and pretending to be racist to get elected.
Human rights watchdog Amnesty India in a statement called the law “discriminatory” and said it “goes against the constitutional values of equality and international human rights law.” It said the law “legitimises discrimination based on religion” and is “exclusionary in its structure and intent.”
Bear in mind, this is a report by the Globalist media, so of course they’re offended. Globalists want to mix all the races in every country together so that everybody is brown and boring and obedient. Meanwhile, every normal Anglo reading this is thinking, why can’t we do what India did? The word India literally derives from the word hindu. India is defined by the fact that it is a hindu majority nation, and it exists precisely because it is distinct from the muslim majority nations Bangladesh and Pakistan from which it was partitioned. Thus India’s government rightly prioritises the interests of its hindus. This follows a trend among Asian countries to define themselves as civilisation states, with the understanding that what makes a nation is its people, and their people are defined by blood and religion, not a piece of paper.
Similarly, Australia was founded as a homeland for the White British settlers who built Australia from nothing. The Australian nation was understood to be an integral part of the Anglosphere, we were defined by the very fact that we are a White, Anglo, Christian nation. The Australian government should prioritise Aussie interests over all others, but in the Current Year we, its people, are put last. Not a single elected politician in the land will explicitly advocate for native Anglos, instead favouring foreigners in their insane commitment to diversity. There are multiple ironies here:
  • Many foreigners trafficked here by our government insist (when it suits them) that they are Australians, but have a very “exclusionary” definition of what it means to be a member of their own race.
  • While our government insists that the culture of foreigners “enriches” us, it ignores this inconvenient aspect of foreign cultures.
  • While Modi defends the interests of his fellow hindus at home, he aggressively encourages the Indian colonisation of Australia, with the Australian government as his willing accomplice.
Put simply, Australians don’t want any of them – Indians, muslims or our government.

Ghostly Whispers

Steve B
-
0
Ghostly Whispers

Sometimes as I grow much older,

A distant memory Taps me on the shoulder. But when I turn to see, to delight in its fare, I look at emptiness, The ghost of nothing there...   It could have been Bon just having a lark, Out as a whisper, Then back to his grave, dark. Maybe it was the Fonz, bringing back Happy Days? But I can’t see them, No matter how far I gaze.   Maybe I heard Kermit’s kroak whispering in my ear, “Don’t  forget about me, The Rainbow Connection is just over here.” But when I turn my head to stare All is thin space, I look at nothing, just empty air.   Maybe it was the Two Ronnies and perhaps Benny Hill Who once made me roar, Till my funny bone had its fill, Walking as phantoms forgotten by time Oblivious to the fact That their humour is now a crime.   I want to go back, I want to re-see The vision of decades When society was free To Monaro, GTHO and Peppermint Twist– With colours so divine. Please add bellbottoms to the list:   And come back again, just one more time…  
1...567...341Page 6 of 341