What Happened to White Australia?

Thomas Jackson, American Renaissance, March 1, 2013

ForTheAustralian
Another case of suicide.

Alan James, New Britannia: The Rise and Decline of Anglo-Australia, Renewal Publications, 2013, 217 pp., $20.00 (soft cover)

Australia, like the United States, was founded by the British. Both countries were built by white settlers and populated by white immigrants. Both had immigration policies strongly favoring white immigration that continued until just a few decades ago. But Australia had even more racially explicit origins than the United States. It came into being as a nation dedicated not merely to racial purity but to preserving a specific ethnic heritage. The “White Australia Policy” was really a “British Australia Policy,” established by a people who, as Prime Minister Robert Menzies said, felt “British to the bootstraps.” What happened to this proud, fiercely explicit identity?

In New Britannia, independent scholar Alan James traces what he calls “the rise and decline of Anglo-Australia.” It is a story of betrayal that almost perfectly parallels that of the United States. Beginning as early as the 1930s, intellectuals, bureaucrats, and politicians deliberately flouted the desires of the vast majority of Australians and opened the country to immigrants utterly unlike the founding stock.

NewBritannia

The penal colony

Until the American Revolution, the North American colonies were a handy dumping ground for British convicts. The newly independent United States refused to accept prisoners, however, so that is why, beginning in 1787, Britain shipped convicts to Australia. The plan was also for them to be the founding population of a British colony to counter France in the South Pacific. The first governor, Arthur Phillip, accordingly set the pattern: Once an exile had served his term he was to be treated as if his record had been wiped clean.

Britain continued to send convicts to Australia until 1868, by which time a total of 132,000 men and 25,000 women had been transported. Today’s Australians like to point out that the convicts were not degenerates–most were petty thieves; more serious criminals got the death penalty. The average age on arrival was 27, and convicts were chosen in part because they were healthy and would make good settlers. Even from the earliest days, there was a handful of volunteer settlers, and by the 1820s, one fifth of all arrivals were free immigrants.

Britain encouraged free emigration, and in 1832 started helping pay passage to Australia. Because most of the convicts and many of the emigrants had been men, there was great demand for women, and more women than men took subsidized passage. The sex ratio evened out only in 1880.

That century-long imbalance gave rise to what Australians call “mateship,” or male camaraderie. Men did not have women and had to depend on other men. At the time of a constitutional referendum in 1999, then-Prime Minister John Howard even tried to put a reference to “mateship” into the preamble to the constitution.

RisingGeneration

Mr. James notes that Australian colonists considered themselves loyal Britons. He writes that the only exceptions were Irish Catholic political dissenters who were sent down after the failed revolt of 1798. They nursed their hostilities and staged the only insurrection in Australian history. In 1804, about 300 escaped convicts stole weapons and demanded a ship to sail to Ireland. About 15 were killed in what is called the Battle of Vinegar Hill, and nine ringleaders were executed. Mr. James writes that this soured English-Irish relations in Australia for some time, but that for the most part, Scots and Irish assimilated to British patriotism.

White Australia

The first rejection of non-white immigration goes back to the 1830s. By then, landowners had large holdings and wanted cheap labor. They petitioned to bring in Chinese coolies, but both the colonial and British governments refused to consider admitting people of “an inferior and servile description.”

It was the gold rushes, starting in 1851, that brought the first non-whites. Chinese began coming in 1854, and by 1858 there were 40,000 in the gold fields of Victoria. White miners disliked their alien habits and complained that when Chinese were successful they sent their earnings back to China. The colonial governments of the time tried to curb Chinese immigration by taxing new arrivals and limiting the number who could arrive on a single ship, but gold was too strong a lure.

Tensions peaked in 1857, when 700 white miners attacked a camp of 2,000 Chinese. In what is known as the riot of Buckland River, they looted the camp, burned down a temple, and killed a handful of Chinese. Other Chinese drowned in the river trying to escape. It took the police three days to get out to the campsite and restore order. Thirteen white rioters were arrested, but juries refused to convict nine of them, and the remaining four got only nine months of prison.

In 1860, whites in the colony of New South Wales killed two more Chinese miners, and insisted on complete exclusion. They also set new words to the popular patriotic song, “Rule Britannia:”

Rule Britannia:

Britannia rules the waves.

No more Chinamen allowed

In New South Wales.

The colonial government found itself spending so much money protecting Chinese miners that it finally gave in and restricted Chinese immigration in 1861. In 1888 it passed a bill completely excluding Chinese.

Mongolian

In 1901, what had been separate British colonies united to form the Commonwealth of Australia, and its citizens wanted the commonwealth to stay white. As the first prime minister Edmund Barton explained, “We are guarding the last part of the world in which the higher races can live and increase freely for the higher civilization.” The second prime minister, Alfred Deakin, was even more explicit: “Unity of race is absolutely essential to the unity of Australia. It is more, actually more in the last resort, than any other unity . . . .”

Mr. James points out that this was the overwhelming view. In its very first year, the commonwealth passed a law to exclude all non-whites. Britain maintained veto power over some legislation, however, and could have overruled explicitly racial legislation. Australia therefore adopted the method pioneered by the South African colony of Natal and known as “the Natal formula.” This required prospective immigrants to take a dictation test in a European language. It could be any European language, so an English-speaking Indian could be given a dictation test in Italian, which he would certainly fail.

Labour was the only party that opposed this law; it insisted on an undisguised racial ban. As was the case in the United States at the period, spokesmen for working people were open advocates for whites. When a commonwealth-wide Labour Party was established in 1900, the number-two plank in its platform was “Total exclusion of coloured and other undesirable races.” For Australians, non-white immigration was unthinkable.

In 1907, Teddy Roosevelt sent “The Great White Fleet” on a round-the-world voyage to show the American flag. Australia welcomed the ships in the spirit of racial and even British solidarity. As Sydney author Joe Slater put it:

When they reach our sunny land we’ll extend a friendly hand,

And we’ll treat them all as brothers taut and true,

For when all is said and done, as a race we all are one,

All descended from the old Red, White, and Blue.

The USS Connecticut leads the Great White Fleet out of Hampton Roads, Virginia in 1907.

The USS Connecticut leads the Great White Fleet out of Hampton Roads, Virginia, in 1907.

“Australia, the White Man’s Land,” was a piece of music published and first performed in 1910. It included such words as:

Sunny south of Old Britannia’s sons,

Australia the white man’s land,

defended by the white man’s guns.

God bless and help us to protect our glorious land Australia.

WhiteAustralia

In 1919, Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes attended the Paris Peace Conference. During the negotiations to draft the covenant of the League of Nations, Japanese proposed a declaration of racial equality. Hughes successfully led the opposition to what he saw as an assault on the White Australian Policy.

Ordinary Australians continued to take race for granted, but a few “intellectuals” were beginning to low-rate their own country. Mr. James quotes a 1939 poem by Alec Derwent Hope (1907–2000):

Without songs, architecture, history . . .

And her five cities, like five teeming sores

Each drains her: a vast parasite robber-state

Where second-hand Europeans pullulate

Timidly on the edge of alien shores.

This was a considerable change from poetry of an earlier time. Mr. James also quotes Mary Gilmore’s (1865-1962) Old Botany Bay, which celebrates the convict pioneers:

I am he

Who paved the way,

That you might walk

At your ease today;

I split the rock;

I felled the tree,

The nation was—

Because of me!

Mr. James writes that the first official breaches in the White Australia Policy occurred after the Second World War. There had been a number of non-white refugees from Japanese aggression who had been allowed temporary residence during the war, and most went home—as they had promised—when peace came. Some insisted on staying, however, and there was a raucous debate over whether they should be forcibly deported. In the end, some 800 were allowed to stay—a clear and ominous deviation from long-standing policy.

During the allied occupation of Japan, a number of Australian soldiers married Japanese women. The wives were let in—another deviation from policy, but one justified on the grounds that there were very few war brides. Prime Minister Robert Menzies assured the public that these exceptions did not mean a change in policy.

By the 1950s, however, for the first time, there were organized groups calling for non-white immigration. Mr. James notes that members were Communists and church leaders—with a high proportion of Irish Catholics. In 1959, something called the Immigration Reform Group, set up mostly by academics, called for an end to the White Australia Policy.

In 1961 came what Mr. James considers a very significant event: A man named Peter Heydon became head of the Department of Immigration. Mr. James does not explain what led to this appointment, but Heydon’s view was opposed to that of the government of the time, and he set about filling the department with people who wanted non-white immigration. Heydon was followed by Billy Snedden, who also favored non-white immigration. There had been no official change in policy, and no cabinet member would have called for such a change. This appears to have been a purely bureaucratic, almost undercover takeover of a crucial department.

Sir Billy Snedden went on to become Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Sir Billy Snedden went on to become Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Changes were working their way through Australian society. Ominously, in 1965, the Labor Party (it switched from “Labour” in 1912) dropped any reference to “white Australia” from its platform. This was open betrayal of the principle labor had stood for ever since the mid-19th century. Perhaps coincidentally, 1965 was the same year the United States abolished its national-origins immigration quotas.

In 1971, then-Prime Minister John Gorton explained his reasons for the switch in policy:

I think if we build up gradually inside Australia a proportion of people without white skins, then as that is gradually done, there will be a complete lack of consciousness of differences between the races. And if this can be done as I think it can, then that may provide the world with the first truly multi-racial society with no tension of any kind possible between any of the races within it. At any rate, this is our ideal.

Australia obviously had no obligation to undertake an experiment of this kind, and Gorton himself acknowledged that success was not guaranteed. This wooly thinking prevailed everywhere in the West.

By 1972, the White Australia Policy was officially dead, and by the 1980s Asian immigration was in full swing. Labor governments especially promoted it, and the unions—always closely aligned with Labor—said nothing. This was a typical stab in the back. A party that was firmly on the left in terms of supporting labor’s demands on capital was captured by leftist silliness on race—and probably many other things—that had nothing to do with working-class interests. The media fell into line without a hiccough.

Vietnamese boat people arrive in Darwin Harbour in 1977.

Vietnamese boat people arrive in northern Australia’s Darwin Harbour in 1977.

Mr. James notes that by the time of the “Blainey Affair” in 1984, there was a hard consensus against the traditional policy. Geoffrey Blainey, one of Australia’s most eminent historians, wrote cautiously about the ethnic tensions that can arise in mixed-race societies and suggested that levels of Asian immigration were too high. He was mercilessly hounded, called all the usual names, and was visibly shattered by the attacks. As Mr. James points out, this kind of public flogging has a chilling effect on anyone else who is tempted to step out of line.

By 1991, when a report appeared on the actual costs of accommodating foreigners and non-English-speakers, it was common to say that costs do not matter at all, that civilization itself requires the repudiation of “racist” policies.

Mr. James notes that all the pillars of Australian society—media, churches, politicians, academics—conspired to flout the will of the majority. He quotes tellingly from an admission by former prime minister Robert Hawke:

[T]the major parties had reached an implicit pact to keep immigration off the political agenda. . . . [T]here are no other issues to which the major parties have been prepared to act in this way . . . to advance the national interest ahead of where they believed the electorate to be.

Journalist Gwynne Dyer approved of deception in the name of “ethnic diversification.” He said the government was right to “do good by stealth:” “Let the magic do its work, but don’t talk about it in front of the children. They’ll just get cross and spoil it all.”

This is typical of the contempt in which elites hold the people. Displacing the founding stock with aliens is wonderful, but somehow its wonders are not easily grasped by the people being displaced. Therefore, let the policy be carried out in secret.

The assault on Anglo-Australia

Mr. James is proud of his British heritage, just like the Australian majority. He sees “ethnic diversification” as an open assault not just on white Australia but British Australia.

Unlike the United States, Australia did not have to fight for independence and for generations maintained ties to Britain that verged on veneration. When the British general, Charles “Chinese” Gordon was killed in Khartoum in 1885, a British expeditionary force was formed to avenge him. No fewer than 770 volunteers sailed from Sydney to join it, and two-thirds of the city’s population is said to have seen them off. Sixteen thousand Australian volunteers fought for the British in the Boer War and other wars in Southern Africa. Australian volunteers wanted to help put down the Boxer Rebellion but arrived too late to take part. An astonishing 60,000 men—all volunteers—died for Britain in the First World War. Mr. James sees these sacrifices as entirely natural for men who believed they were fighting for their kinfolk and for the empire.

Australian recruitment poster from World War I.

Australian recruitment poster from World War I.

Robert Menzies—“British to the bootstraps”—visited Britain for the first time in 1935. He wrote touchingly of what “move[s] the soul of those who go ‘home’ to a land they have never seen . . . .”

The 1930s saw a lull in immigration by Britons, who were outnumbered by continental Europeans. Europeans were white, but they were not British, and in 1936 Australia resumed subsidized passage from Britain. A few barriers were also set up to non-British European immigration. Mr. James notes that in 1939, Europeans were required to submit photographs with their visa applications. One purpose was to weed people who looked Jewish, on the assumption that anti-Semitism would never take root in Australia if there were no Jews.

The Second World War was an important turning point in relations with Britain. Australia was shocked by the British surrender of Singapore, which put 16,000 Australian prisoners into the hands of the Japanese. Churchill also insisted on sending Australian troops to Europe rather than let them stay to fight Japan. Instead of serving under British command as they always had, Australians fought under American officers. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which had always played “The British Grenadiers” before new broadcasts, switched to “Advance, Australia Fair” in 1942.

Old ties were not easily broken, however, and free and assisted passage from Britain continued after the war. From 1947 to 1973, more than one million new British settlers arrived to the slogan of “Bring out a Brit.” The British stopped subsidizing fares in 1972, but the Australians kept paying until 1981. When Australian citizenship was introduced in 1948, British immigrants could apply after only one year of residence, as opposed to longer periods for others. British immigrants also had preferential admission into the military.

Mr. James looks back with nostalgia on Anglo-Australia. He notes that until the 1970s, school children in the state of Victoria saluted the Australian flag every day, and listened to “God Save the Queen.” Until the 1960s, cinema played “God Save the Queen” before the movie—and everyone rose. The queen’s portrait was in government buildings, scouting halls, schools, and council chambers, but these began to disappear in the 1970s.

Some shifts were voluntary. A 1977, referendum changed the national anthem to “Advance, Australia Fair.” However, despite near-monolithic media support for a republic, voters—most recently in 1999—choose to remain subjects of the Queen.

"The Founding of Australia. By Capt. Arthur Phillip R.N. Sydney Cove, Jan. 26th 1788" painted by Algernon Talmage in 1937.

“The Founding of Australia. By Capt. Arthur Phillip R.N. Sydney Cove, Jan. 26th 1788″ painted by Algernon Talmage in 1937.

Still, Mr. James notes that on the Left, the switch to a multi-culti Australia has been accompanied by rituals of contempt for Britain. The uncomplimentary Australian word for the Brits is “poms,” as in “whingeing [whining] poms” and “pommy bastards.” Despite the typically lefty prohibition against “negative stereotypes,” the British, and white Australians by extension, are the only people one may savage with impunity. Mr. James cites a headline to a story about litter left on a tourist beach: “Filthy Poms.” He notes that there are plenty of other tourists on the beach, but would a newspaper dare write about “Filthy Japs”?

Insulting the British is a way to spit on the White Australia Policy. If anyone shows nostalgia for pre-multi-culti Australia, it is fashionable to retort that in those “meat and three veg” days Australians didn’t even know how to eat, and that turning their backs on Britain was the best thing Australia ever did.

Why did it happen?

Mr. James has given us an eminently readable account of a once-sturdy people running itself onto the rocks. What it lacks, though, is what most such accounts lack: a convincing explanation for why Anglo-Australia conceived a hatred for itself and decided to ring its own death knell.

This is not entirely Mr. James’s fault. The multi-culturalists have often acted in secret, and conniving media never demand an explanation that goes beyond slogans about diversity and silly jabber about ethnic food. Every nation of the British diaspora has the same miserable record: Canada, the United States, and New Zealand all forsook their roots. None consulted its people or explained why the founding stock was suddenly not good enough.

It is sad to read such convincing confirmation that our own disease so badly infects our Australian cousins, but it is gratifying to know that a few are still healthy, and are determined to save their country.

[An earlier version of this article had a reference to Malcolm Fraser as a Labor prime minister. He was the leader of the Liberal party.]

Topics: , , , , ,

Share This

Thomas Jackson
Thomas Jackson lives in Virginia and has been writing for American Renaissance for more than 15 years.
We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • joesolargenius

    It is corruption which is the biggest enemy of politics and which goes unnoticed when the media is controlled by those whom are doing the corrupting.Every country needs a stable and patriotic media outlet .

  • sbuffalonative

    I am he

    Who paved the way,

    That you might walk

    At your ease today;

    I split the rock;

    I felled the tree,

    The nation was—

    Because of me!”

    Just like in the US where blacks claim they built America, I can see the Chinese claim they built Australia.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Blacks built America? They couldn’t build a sand castle on the beach.

    • rightrightright

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJF15kNazlw

      This is one of the most anti-White people in British politics today. Diane Abbott. You will need a strong stomach to watch this. She spews her bile here after the news that London is now officially less than 50% White. This is her version of her bro Obama’s “you didn’t build that” lie.

      • Bantu_Education

        When I visit the UK I have often seen her in a political discussion threesome program with Michael Portillo (former high-ranking Tory) hosted by Andrew Neill (former editor of the Times). For some strange reason Portillo and Abbott (opposite ends of the political spectrum) were made to share an uncomfortably small 2-seater couch on which Abbott sprawled like a grotesque slug, the way blacks tend to “sit”. I always felt very uncomfortable for Portillo, a debonair gent, having to sit so close to someone he must have hated.

        • David Brims

          Diane Abbott is a race hustler, just like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

        • David Ashton

          Portillo used to be a “right-wing” Thatcherite, but has drifted in left in recent years. However, his analysis on this program is usually very acute. I don’t think he found his companion hateful as he regularly looked sideways in apparent admiration at her utterances. The problem with TV in Britain is its overwhelming and ubiquitous “political correctness”.

          • Bantu_Education

            I noticed that too, but I think he was just playing to the camera – at least I hope so. I wasn’t in Britain often when he was a leading Tory so don’t know much about his politics, but I like his railway programmes. :)

      • Achaean

        Right, I could not even watch more than 10 seconds of this retard’s assessment of immigration; yes, there were migratory movements within Europe through the centuries but never the unprecedented mass immigration from non-White areas, which have destroyed the city of London.Watch this video clip of beautifu White London/England in the 1960s before the aliean Asians, Africans, and Moslems came. It is a disgrace what they did to this historic grand nation!

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3HpaC7mKEA

        • Bantu_Education

          Crowds of white people walking across a bridge – not a single black – and virtually none of them fat – what country could that possibly be? I want to go there..!

        • David Brims

          Any country with darkies in it goes down the toilet.

          It’s inevitable, just as night follows day.

      • sbuffalonative

        And what can you say about the people who applauded in agreement? Ugh.

      • Michael Mason

        She should be thrown out of a plane flying over Africa.

      • David Brims

        I didn’t realize Sir Christopher Wren was a West Indian.

      • Pat

        You need a strong stomach to watch Question Time – the BBC at its PC best! I particularly liked the bit where ‘immigrants support the monarchy’ – how come I missed them in the crowds during the Queen’s Jubilee celebrations?

        • David Brims

          The Queens Jubilee celebration = all white crowds.

          The Cultural Marxist Olympic Opening Ceremony directed by Irish republican marxist Danny Boyle = All black or mixed race people.

      • TeutonicKnight67

        This sow should be slaughtered and fed to her fellow swine.

  • JohnEngelman

    This is typical of the contempt in which elites hold the people.

    - Thomas Jackson, American Renaissance, March 1, 2013

    This suggests that t he policy of opening Australia to Asian immigration was unpopular with the Australian electorate. Nevertheless, Thomas Jackson did not post any opinion surveys to document this suggestion.

    Nor did he mention any tangible disadvantages to Asian immigration. Australia has a murder rate of 1.0 per year per 100,000 inhabitants. The United States has a rate of 4.8.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

    The unemployment rate in Australia in 2012 was 4.4 percent.

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/au.html

    By all accounts Australia had done comparatively well during the Great Recession.

    Thomas Jackson does not have much to say in criticism of Asian immigration to Australia than, “I don’t like it.” It does not seem that most white Australians agree with him. It does not seem that they have any tangible reason to.

    In “Paved with Good Intentions,” Jared Taylor wrote, “Asians have faced fierce discrimination in America, but this has not stopped them from working hard and getting ahead. In fact, they have been so successful in “racist” America that whites have even begun to complain about Asian achievement. Whether one looks at Japanese and Chinese, who have been in America for generations, or Koreans and Vietnamese, who have
    arrived more recently, Asians have been remarkably successful.”
    http://lesenfantsdelazonegrise.hautetfort.com/media/00/02/1497255978.pdf

    Thomas Jackson’s book review leaves me with the suspicion that Asians are equally successful in Australia.

    • David Ashton

      The success of foreign “unarmed invaders” economically is not the only point.

      Look at the almost insane “reason” given by John Gorton, the earlier initiatives from the Communists and the “undercover bureaucracy” aspect; exactly comparable to what happened in Britain, and with an eventual outcome as described by Douglas Murray elsewhere. Australia and New Zealand belong primarily to the Anglo-Saxon cultural sphere, along with Canada, the USA and Britain, and secondarily to western Europe as a whole. They should not become colonial Lebensraum appendages to China and Japan, nor a battleground for “race, gender, class” revolutionaries.

      You might just as well say that the relatively benign occupation of our Channel Islands by Germans was opposed just because the islanders didn’t “like” them. Nationhood is a quite different matter than eating foreign foods or having students in your laboratories, especially if in the Chinese case there are strategic threats from the Middle Kingdom.

    • Benton Harbor

      Asians belong in Asia. You have been here a long time. Have you not learned that yet? Diversity is a failed experiment. It doesn’t work anywhere on the planet. It violates physical reality.

    • NYB

      What’s with the defense of Asians?

      “By all accounts Australia has done comparatively well during the Great Recession”

      It’s well known that this is exclusively because it profitably sells resources to China. This requires no Asian immigration. The Arabs, for example, have sold their oil resources for decades without allowing mass population displacement.

      During a boom time, the majority are so drunk on comfortably-obtained wealth that they are susceptible to deception. The deceivers are the elite economic stakeholders who are lining their pockets selling and giving away Australian heritage. They are the bankers, the landlords, the property speculators and the commodities traders.

      As Australian luminary Gregory Copeland put it, “urban real estate, …is a primary driver of capital investment”. And real estate speculation is one of the primary drivers of immigration.

      • Neil

        During the 1850′s gold rush the New Zealand Government passed a poll tax to discourage Chinese immigration.The Chinese who did come were segregated and could only pan for gold in areas abandoned by European prospectors. In contrast to that, this week in Auckland two run down bungalows in the gentrifying suburb of Sandringham were sold at auction for over one million dollars.In other parts of the city a similar house would sell for three hundred thousand dollars. Both buyers were Chinese.I’m predicting these neighbouring houses will be demolished and the large sections combined in a Chinese style mansion compound.

        • Neil

          Newsflash!The demolitions have begun.An entire street of former ‘state houses’ have been sold to a Chinese consortium who are planning to build apartments and luxurious townhouses.

    • Luca

      There are towns here in So Cal that are now virtually 60 or 70% Asian. While if forced to, I would prefer Asians over Sub-Saharans, mestizos or Muslims there is no mistaking that what becomes disturbing are the sheer numbers.

      In the Asian dominate towns what has happened is overcrowding, and loss of culture. Some of these Asians live 12 to an apartment and sleep in shifts, they start up businesses and hang signs in their own hieroglyphs with no English translation, some of their hygiene habits can be offensive, I have looked through the back doors of some Chinese restaurants and the food handling standards leave much to be desired. While shopping I have noticed Asians can a bit more uncivil, loud, pushy and arrogant. They buy a small plot of land and build a mini-McMansion taking up virtually every inch of land the law allows. They attend civic meetings and demand interpreters and pamphlets in their peculiar language. etc. etc.

      Granted, this is far better than the rape. murder, and crime we have endured with other minorities, but once again John, when it comes to jews and Asians you pretend there is not another side to the coin. There is more to life than a high score on a IQ test.

      • Stan D Mute

        Yes there is! WHITE men must also possess a thing called INTEGRITY which “JohnEngleman” utterly lacks. He is a common THIEF and nothing more. Compounding his criminality is his fundamental lack of BROTHERHOOD and complete DISRESPECT for publishing a link to a stolen PDF of Mr Taylor’s great book on Mr Taylor’s own website.

        He is SCUM and unworthy of your time to read his insipid comments let alone to comment in reply.

        • Sean

          Would he be described as having “an inferior and servile description” do you think?

        • Defoe

          So please ignore him. Please.

    • Stan D Mute

      YOU are a contemptible FAILURE as a man and especially as a white man (if indeed that is what you are).

      Who goes onto an author’s website and publishes a link to a STOLEN copy of that author’s work? Mr Taylor, if he wanted to give away “Paved with Good Intentions” free, could certainly do so himself here. That he does not should indicate to all but a REPREHENSIBLE THIEF that he rightfully expects to be PAID for his great work.

      I, for one, would pay handsomely to see a worthless TRAITOR and THIEF such as “JohnEngleman” jailed for his thievery and violently buggered by his criminal philosophical (if not actual) kin.

      For those WHITE MEN interested in Mr Taylor’s work, you may buy it from New Century Foundation at: http://www.nc-f.org/store/paved_with_good.html

    • Whites Only

      Asians aren’t White people and will never procreate White children. The US and Australia were never built by asians, and they have their own countries to take care of. It is amazing how on one hand you can brag about how successful asian countries are while advocating asian immigration to western countries. This doesn’t make any sense unless you are an American born asian, and you’re not fooling anyone trying to pretend you’re White.

      Asian countries are for asians, and White countries are for White people. You fail.

    • Bantu_Education

      They do not seem to integrate with white Australians. I visit Sydney for a few weeks every year and whenever I see groups of Asian youth I notice there is never a white face amongst them.

  • Jefferson

    Australia is still by far the Whitest country in the New World. At 94 percent White, no other New World nation surpasses Australia in Whiteness.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Australian

    If Australia was a U.S state, it would be as White as West Virginia.

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/GenXinOz GenX ANZAC

      I wish you were right but I remember it being well publicized in 2001 that we’d ‘proudly’ hit one million Asian born citizens or 6% of the total population.
      http://tinyurl.com/afmp8zp
      In 2011 it was estimated that people of Asian ancestry are 12% of the total population.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Australian
      Our total population was 10.6 million people in 1960, and now 53 years later it’s about to hit 23 million people.
      The march of ‘progress’ is getting faster and the place has become unrecognizable for it.

      • newscomments70

        I feel your pain, but we suffer those increases every few months due to illegal immigration. We have about 20 million in metro Los Angeles alone…almost all non-white. At least yours are spread over a continent…and there is something you can still do about it.

        • Paleoconn

          Not really spread out. Most are in the big cities. I understand Australia has many Greeks and other eastern Europeans. Those are groups that traditionally integrate well and contribute to the success of the adopted nation.

        • http://www.youtube.com/user/GenXinOz GenX ANZAC

          We’ve had a 10% increase in our population in the last seven years alone.
          From 21 million in 2006 to 23 million in 2013.
          How many people is enough for our elites I wonder?
          I was watching the news last night and our politicians were talking about setting up trade and technology exchanges, and selling places in our coveted education system to the emerging economies of Brazil and Columbia, while they were rubbing their hands together and licking their lips.
          On the same note they’re doing nothing to stop foreign investment in our housing property market which is making home ownership impossible for locals (we get to pay our rent to an off shore owner most likely in China).
          So thanks to all of this growth, locals (aka Whites as non Whites still have placements and scholarships saved) are getting priced out of education and housing, not to mention unskilled work, food and fuel prices are bad enough thanks increased demand and limited supply (or locally produced foods fetching better prices on the ‘global market’, so locals don’t even get to sample local foods unless it’s the third grade or the dollar is too strong for exporters).
          When these politicians talk there’s always envious talk of these other countries big populations and their desire to have the lifestyles that we currently have (um or had).
          That 1% is selling the rest of us out over greed and for more riches, it’s sickening and is the ultimate betrayal to the average Joe.
          I remember my dad taking us to LA in the early 80′s and I remember seeing nothing but White people.
          These traitors in power need to pay for what they’ve done to our once fine countries. Multiculturalism is apparently a proponent for all cultures barring White culture.

      • Greg Deane

        But I think that 12% includes a lot of students who return whence they came, workers on temporary visas, and long-term visitors who return after a tear. Some are also refugees who are actually repatriated. So the figure might not be quite as bad as it looks-though it is growing at an alarming rate.

        • http://www.youtube.com/user/GenXinOz GenX ANZAC

          Recently I’ve seen a few media bits and pieces stating that London is less than 50% White Briton, over on Praag (http://praag.org/?p=3287) Dr Roodt says that in 1950 South Africa demographers from Stellenbosch University made a ‘nightmare scenario’ prediction that there’d be 20 million blacks in S.A by the year 2000 (in reality it was actually 40 million) and then in Australia (as I stated above) we’ve added 10% to our population in the last seven years alone, note the 2011 Australian census states that for the first time in our ‘modern history’ that we’ve received more immigrants from Asia than from Europe.
          The current demographic rate of change in Western countries is mind boggling and with no avenues to speak out against it, just out of pure frustration, I sometimes wish for something drastic to happen just to stop the flow.

          • Greg Deane

            They were even celebrating the browning of London on the TV show The Bill, a semi-official propaganda vehicle for the politically correct social engineers, over 10 years ago. I have been following TFR changes in Europe and other white countries as closely as I can, given the restrictions on such information the so-called elites impose; I have also noted the ABS figures for shifts in migration trends, which ‘right-thinking’ people are meant to find uplifting. But I wonder how much of this quantitative evidence involves double counting as part of a device for overwhelming dissenters so that they accept the dreaded demographic outcomes as inevitable.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/GenXinOz GenX ANZAC

            We just need one White country to make a stand, big or small (big preferably) to hopefully start some sort of domino effect, as we surely can’t go out like this, drowning with barely a whimper.
            Unfortunately all our countries are so closely connected and we’re all competing in the same left wing peeing competition.

          • Greg Deane

            Yes, there has been a concerted policy by western governments for over two generations to de-westernise the West. But maybe now they are becoming to cocky as they approach the tipping point they had hoped to achieve. Hopefully there will be a domino effect, most likely set off in Holland under the auspices of Geert Wilders.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/GenXinOz GenX ANZAC

            ”God made the ocean, but the Dutch made Holland. (Dutch proverb)”

          • Greg Deane

            Just as the Anglo-Celts and other Europeans took Australia out of the Stone Age and turned it into a honeypot for the Third World.

          • watling

            You’re right about London. It’s less than 45% white British. Leicester (also 45%), Luton (also 45%) and Slough (35%) are also less than 50% white British. Like any big city London is patchy. The cheaper the housing the higher the proportion of non-white British, or, more truthfully, the higher the proportion of non-white British the cheaper the housing. East London is particularly “enriched”. With a few exceptions – e.g. Russian oligarchs and successful Asian businessmen – it’s only high property prices that keep the non-indigenous out of certain areas. As white flight increases, such areas should remain expensive and even increase in value.

            See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9792392/White-Britons-a-minority-in-Leicester-Luton-and-Slough.html

    • Bantu_Education

      94%..! How hideously white..! But the usual suspects have noted that and are beavering away to change it – they’re importing Africans, even into Tasmania..!

    • gemjunior

      I wonder if we can go there. My mother is a Brit by birth, and my dad Irish. I know that in Ireland, for example, they allow citizenship to anyone who can show evidence of a grandparent who is Irish. I wonder if the Australians have anything like that for British citizens’ relatives? If the country is 94% white it must be paradise and we have a better chance of saving that continent for ourselves than the US, sad and unpatriotic though that might sound. I just cannot stand being around blacks and it seems like the bantus aren’t such a large immigrant group there.

    • SirMe

      lol 94% white, back in 2006, its more like 80% now….most white Australians are around 44 years old and aging..

  • Barrack Osama

    1965 truly was one of the worst years in human history.

    • newscomments70

      it marks the end of civilization.

      • Luca

        ,if we allow it.

      • Bantu_Education

        Interesting that this was also when pop music suddenly changed too..! And the start of the “permissive society”. What on earth were we smoking then? (no pun intended).

      • Charlie Brown

        It marks the worst existential crisis of European Civilization. It isn’t yet known whether Europe will prevail and rise again. It isn’t looking good, that’s for sure. But it isn’t known. Not yet.

    • whiteuncleruckus

      Correction. It was on the worst years in White human history. It was a great year for non-White humans.

    • Anders

      There was a famous quote from a ‘labor’ politician from back in the ‘White Australia’ days:
      He actually said in parliament: “Two wongs don’t make a White”, not joking.
      These days, every ‘labor’ politician is just crazy about gays and Africans.

    • Charlie Brown

      Looking back into history, it is in America that the anti-White forces first truly conquered a country and became powerful enough to then spread the ‘model’ to the rest of the West.
      One reason is most likely the nature of the American revolution itself. The break with Britain amounted to a break with Aristocracy…..the social class that was carrying the hidden knowledge about anti-White forces, and which forces it consciously kept itself protected, both in terms of breeding and culture.
      In turn aristocracy ensured it dominated culture, religion and government, and through that society.
      It worked. Just about. The anti-white forces were powerful in themselves.
      And what or who are the anti-white forces? Brother, if you still need to ask, then it’s possible you ain’t never goin’ t’know.

    • John

      I completely agree, my friend. The truth is that Whites do not wake up one fine morning and think, “Gee, it sure would be nice to have Blacks, Browns, Reds, and Yellows living all around me and bedding and wedding my daughters.” There is a great evil in the world that is strongly pushing this wicked and very evil agenda of multiculturalism and diversity.
      It goes far beyond the ability of international travel and open borders to facilitate miscegenation and amalgamation. The U.S. government is actively scooping up millions of Black Africans and dumping them off in small little towns all across the United States. Look up Bangor, Maine; Duluth, Minnesota; Lincoln, Nebraska; and Shelbyville Tennessee just to get an idea of the scope of the problem.
      The great evil ones in the world are pushing their wicked agenda of multiculturalism and diversity to strengthen and solidify the binds of their fiat currencies and totalitarian control mechanisms.
      Our problems extend far beyond the immediate threats posed by the undesirable presence of non-Whites among us. We’re basically living in an enslaved world. If you think you’re not a slave, refuse to pay your taxes and you will quickly find out who your masters are. Our only recourse is to live on islands, or in the woods, or in caves. The evil ones literally own civilization, including your home, clothes, and family. For you to live in civilization, you’d better have a permit just to walk down the street or you could end up in prison.

  • Benton Harbor

    Diversity, multiculturalism, race mixing, enrichment, tolerance, et al, has been tried and has failed over and over again. Has never worked. Will never work. It violates reality and produces strife and discontent. Enough already! Diversity is for fools!

  • pcmustgo

    By the 1950s, however, for the first time, there were organized groups calling for non-white immigration. Mr. James notes that members were Communists and church leaders—with a high proportion of Irish Catholics.

    Wow, for the first time , someone besides Jews are blamed for this.

    • Stan D Mute

      EXACTLY!!!

      It is traitors among us who bear full responsibility. They led and the sheeple followed.

      There are men who will sell their mother for a nickel (“JohnEngleman” above a prime example – stealing our brother Mr Taylor’s book) and for whom destroying posterity for a new Cadillac is reflex. THESE are our true enemies.

    • GeneticsareDestiny

      This makes me ashamed to be descended primarily from Irish Catholics. Why does it seem like they’re always disproportionately represented in anything treasonous to whites everywhere?

      • Anders

        Yep. My extended family here in Australia is like one big ‘Father Ted’ episode (if you know the show) wall-to-wall Micks. There was a fair bit of ‘inherited resentment’ towards the Brits from my old Dad and my uncles that they got from their parents that came from Ireland, but there was no way in hell that any of those men were in favour of diversifying Australia. I could provide a few quotes, but I’d better not. Julia Gillard might send the boys around.

      • David Brims

        Irish catholics were a persecuted minority, so they will identify and empathize with other persecuted minorities, the blacks, jews, muslims.

        • TeutonicKnight67

          Sad but true.

      • Ramyleth

        The British have expanded most places. They (we) have a long history of treating the Irish like garbage and worse. The Irish take on that was probably “one ill turn deserves another”, which is 100% understandable but of course has had a disastrous effect on the White race.

        A good example of the above in modern times is the Irish party Sinn Fein, which began bombing and killing people in the 80s and 90s who wanted a closer political union with GB (read: England), but couldn’t care less when Africans and Arabs turn Ireland into an open air sewer.

        Plus the Irish were mostly Catholic and the British Protestant, and it is a sad fact of history that Christian brotherhood seems to have died out before Christianity even existed.

        • TeutonicKnight67

          Sinn Fein and the modern IRA are arms of the Bolshevik Culture Destroyer and act accordingly. Faithful Catholics would be wise to reflect on this.

      • TeutonicKnight67

        I feel the same way. When the Irish are libtarded they are as venomous and destructive as any Red Sea Pedestrian. It’s truly disgusting and shameful.

    • Gweilo

      The Irish Catholics were anti-British, but the Jews were anti-white, and had the usual involvement in destroying white civilisation:

      http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/08/the-war-on-white-australia-a-case-study-in-the-culture-of-critique-part-3-of-5/

    • Bantu_Education

      He did indirectly mention them – Communists.

    • Nancy Thomas

      Jewish groups lobbied from the early 1900′s to change U.S. immigration policies. There were virtually no other groups advocating for these changes, and in fact, the American people made it known that they wanted the USA to remain a white country, and favored the white ethno-state quota system in the 1924 law. Congressional records do not lie.

    • lanceman

      Communist is another name for jew.

    • David Ashton

      Communists from India had a surprisingly major role in cranking the starting-handle.

      Pressure for “anti-racist” legislation came from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, though partly because some more vociferous anti-immigrant groups, led by Colin Jordan and John Tyndall, were also vocally anti-Jewish.

      Opinion among Jews about immigration, especially of Muslims, in Britain is divided. Contrast Melanie Phillips with Tony Kushner among writers on this theme.

    • saxonsun

      And Irish Catholics are at fault for a lot of this third world immigration. Their stance against England is to blame.

      • TeutonicKnight67

        Their chickens are coming home to roost…even on The Auld Sod.

    • TeutonicKnight67

      I am still baffled by the tendency of the Irish to be so wretchedly libtarded. The generational hatred of the English is so ingrained that they reflexively support ANYTHING that might hint of the IRA.Here in the US it’s pretty bad but enough generations have passed that not all Irish Americans are so leftist. Many felt betrayed by the odious Ted Kennedy and forced bussing and were dragged by circumstance to a more racially realistic outlook.

  • pcmustgo

    Attention , Engelman… Asians have their grievances too… ! I’ve heard many an asian-american bring up “the Chinese Exclusion Act” and Chinese building the railroads… there’s always a reason to hate/resent/get back at all “whites”.

    Tensions peaked in 1857, when 700 white miners attacked a camp of 2,000 Chinese. In what is known as the riot of Buckland River, they looted the camp, burned down a temple, and killed a handful of Chinese. Other Chinese drowned in the river trying to escape. It took the police three days to get out to the campsite and restore order. Thirteen white rioters were arrested, but juries refused to convict nine of them, and the remaining four got only nine months of prison.

    • jay11

      Asian immigrants just off the boat or plane to this very day are indoctrinated about the travails of those earlier chinese laborers. Even though today’s asians have zero connection to those asians, who were not slaves, but paid laborers, asians today are made to feel as if those laborers of 150 years ago were their very own grandfathers, and that they have legitimate greivances against whites.
      -
      Same holds true of latinos. Little Jose from the yucutan penninsula climbs over the border fence, and ‘latino activists’ tell him that this land is his land, and that his very own ancestors were oppressed by those evil americanos.

  • steve7789

    You’re forgetting the main reasoning behind the severing of close ties between we British and Australia and that is the tragedy of Gallipoli which many Aussies blame us for. It was indeed a senseless slaughter but the majority of the casualties came from within our ranks not the Dominions. The ANZACs weren’t considered expendable because of their nationality, they were considered expendable because that’s how all troops were viewed by our bloodstained Generals.

    • Paleoconn

      I read that Churchill sent them to their slaughter at Gallipoli.

      • Defoe

        Churchill loved war; he was the quintessential warmonger having never fought himself. Nevertheless, he considered himself a consummate strategist having played with his toy soldiers during his entire childhood. May he burn in hell.

        • Paleoconn

          I agree, a blowhard warmonger who goaded Hitler into war and brought the States in too on dishonest information, although FDR was already champing at the bit to destroy the Japanese. Churchill is one of those people who are revered as legends, but whose memory should instead be spat on rather than glorified.

          • Bantu_Education

            Rather like Mandela. Except Churchill could at least write and paint well.

          • Paleoconn

            Agreed, but I never mention black leaders because their deification is a given.

          • eunometic

            Looking at the betrayal of White Australia it is worth noting that it was performed by so called “Conservatives” (known deceptively as the “Liberal Party”). The Labor party was still representing the interests of the working class who rejected non White immigration. An influx of politically correct university educated ideologues and certain immigrants latter transformed the Labor party into the hideous, ethnically gerrymandered monster it is today.

            Both political parties are very alike and it comes across as controlling both sides of the debate. Moreover they have become a segregated political elite often forming closed branches not open to new membership.

          • Paleoconn

            Like the Repulsicans and Democraps in the USA, two sides of the same coin.

        • Bantu_Education

          Too true, he was also responsible for the insane “Dieppe raid” in 1942, where thousands of Canadians were slaughtered on the beach 2 full years before D-Day which, even with the vast numerical and material advantage the Americans had brought to play by then, itself was a close-run thing. How he thought he could invade France in mid-1942 when the Germans were still so strong, is beyond me.

          • Paleoconn

            Exactly. But with no skin in the game, nothing to lose for Churchill right?

        • Michael Mason

          Churchill was an ugly drunk and an arrogant slimy politician who was deemed a hero simply because he was the leader of the only European country that was spared from invasion. At one point in the war he said he cared more about defeating ethnic Germans as a people than defeating national socialism. He also said he’d use whatever tactics of deception he possibly could to get the U.S. involved.

          • Pat

            Churchill had an American mother and no way did he hate the US. He did what he thought he had to do at the time and we can all be clever with hindsight. Life under a Hitler regime would not have been as rosy as some people here seem to think.

          • Michael Mason

            He didn’t hate the U.S, but he was willing to do whatever was necessary to get them involved. Churchill was the first leader during the war to order the bombing of civilian targets (Berlin). My point is that history chooses him to be a hero because it is the most convenient. He even said at one point, “History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.”

          • David Ashton

            Churchill, like Hitler for that matter, was a combination of “good” and “evil”, “talent” and “folly”. Pat Buchanan’s book on them both, and on the war, is worth reading, as also the first volume of David Irving’s book on Churchill’s war. The declaration of war over Danzig and the Corridor was more than a mistake, but once Britain was on the receiving end of Nazi retaliation and the possibility of occupation, Churchill became the best leader of our people for the duration. There is a lot one can say for and against the battling boozer, but the tragedy of the Bruderkrieg was summed up in his statement in 1948 that “after all the exertions and sacrifices of hundreds of millions of people…we lie in the grip of EVEN WORSE PERILS than those we have surmounted” (e.g. Soviet communism).
            The Australian sacrifice of lives for Crown and Empire in both wars was both unnecessary and – courageous. After the last war, especially the struggle against Japan, there was a strong fellow feeling between some Australians and British, as indicated by Russell Braddon and Nevil Shute; and more should have been done to develop such unity among the white Anzacs.
            The spread of communism, and the early signs of non-white migration into the white countries which communists actively encouraged, became a concern of Churchill in his later years, but to little avail.

          • David Brims

            But then Britain stabbed Australia and New Zealand in the back when it joined the EUSSR.

          • David Brims

            I meant the British government, not the British people.

          • Paul

            ‘Churchill became the best leader of our people for the duration’??

            Get real, Britain was not even under attack. He goaded Hitler into bombing London civilians even though the Luftwaffe was never set up or serious about bombing civilians. If not for Churchill you would never have seen a German Bomber in British skies.

          • David Ashton

            I referred to the situation after “retaliation” had been provoked.

          • Pat

            My grandmother lived in Plymouth during the war. The city was heavily bombarded from 1940 – 1942. The centre was completely wiped out. My grandmother one morning found an incendiary bomb on the mat at the top of her stairs, it had come through a damaged fan light window. A block a few hundred yards from her had 13 people in it when hit with high explosive – none survived. Next door to gran was a pub and a butchers, it was just a large hole for years – I used to play in it. A local lady was a child during the second world war, one day when she and a friend where walking to the library, a returning German aircraft swooped down low and machine gunned them. If you are referring to the later bombing of Dresden, etc. had I been around at the time I would have wanted to know why it had not been done sooner. War is war, no time for touchy feely when it is on-going. The very first aerial bombardment ever I believe (could be corrected) was carried out by the Germans in the Spanish civil war. As for bombing civilians – Hiroshima? Nagasaki? I have yet to hear any serious condemnation of that from the US, it was considered necessary. As to getting the US involved I think the ‘glory’ for that can go to the Japanese. No disrespect to Pearl Harbor – a hideous event.

            Last year in Plymouth two large bombs were dug up under an old building being demolished. My brother working in Leipzig at the time was stopped in the street one day by a policeman and told to go no further as they had found an unexploded allied bomb. My brother asked him if this was common – he replied that he came from Dresden originally and there were so many that it was nothing to him. Life goes on.

            I am willing to bet that whatever Churchill wrote about the history of this country it has already/will be re-written.

          • Michael Mason

            The war happened over 70 years ago. I don’t like Churchill, because the Zionists love him, and I don’t think he was a hero. I can’t think of any successful military action taken by the British that was actually of his devising. I don’t like Hitler, because he was chauvinistic at the beginning and then foolish when Germany’s situation got more desperate But I’d just like to say that regardless of who was the worst villain, it’s important to acknowledge that the war was bad for everybody, accept a particular tribe of people, and it’s negative effects are multiplying to this day, rather than being diminished. Yes, Europe has been rebuilt from the ruins, but the herds of third world immigrants are going to bring it right back down to primitive status unless we whites wake up and do something about it. And the reason we face this catastrophe is because of left wing ideologies that were allowed to prevail after the world was changed by the war.

          • Pat

            I tend to have a better view of Churchill than you do as he was the only one with any guts to step forward. The alternative was the likes of Chamberlain the appeaser. We have a load of them today. You are right about the left ideologies but I do not think Churchill can be blamed for what has happened since. He and Enoch Powell both thought along the same lines when it came to nationhood. Churchill thought the European Union was a good idea for Europe but he never thought we would be in it.

            I agree about our need to ‘wake up’ but who is there to lead. They all sing from the same hymn sheet. Up on Plymouth Hoe there is a large war memorial with the names of naval men who died in two wars, when looking at it you wonder what they would make of their sacrifice today. Further along the coast in a field overlooking the sea is the mass grave of over 800 Americans who died when they were attacked by an E Boat while practising for the D Day landings. They are largely forgotten as it was hushed up for security reasons, this is what makes me so annoyed when I see Americans today saying Hitler was a better option. They all died for a free and open democracy and we should not forget that. We must all wake up indeed.

          • paul

            ‘Further along the coast in a field overlooking the sea is the mass grave of over 800 Americans who died when they were attacked by an E Boat while practising for the D Day landings’

            The American navy openly attacked German ships for three years while German ships simply ran away from the exchange. This was illegal. You can’t blame Germany for defending itself against attacks from the USA which had absolutely no business going to war against them.

          • Pat

            Japan attacked Pearl Harbor to increase its power in the Pacific. America attacked them back. They were close allies with Germany, should America have said ‘we will fight the Japanese, but not the Germans?’ The Germans invaded Poland in 1939, bombing as they went and this brought Britain and France into the conflict. The Germans bombed British cities from 1940 onwards as it was seen as a psychological weapon on civilians. We did the same to them – it did not work as planned in either case. My own mother told me it was amazing how you could get used to it.

            ‘The American navy openly attacked German ships for three years….I thought Roosevelt maintain your neutrality until Pearl Harbor, or are you referring to the years after this. If so they had every right to attack an enemy’s ally.

            I know we are all in a mess now with not much hope in sight but, sorry, Nazi Germany would not be my first choice.

          • eunometic

            Roosevelt’s oxymoronic “neutrality patrols” used the US navy to escort British convoys about 3/4 of the way across the Atlantic about 9 months before formal hostilities. During this time USN ships were ordered to attack u-boats approaching the convoys In addition “lend lease” Essentially financed the entire British war effort in return for tokenistic access to British overseas ports in the Caribbean etc. When Hitler declared war on the US it in a way merely formalised a situation. He might have restrained himself and sucked it up in the hopes the US would focus on the Japanese but I’m sure that was considered.

          • eunometic

            “I know we are all in a mess now with not much hope in sight but, sorry, Nazi Germany would not be my first choice.”

            Hitler was a unique product of the outrage of the treaty of Versailles which dismembered Germans in an immoral way, blamed them exclusively for French, Russian and British idiocy and intrigues.

            The problem for us is that the National Socialists and Hitler came up with a compelling ideology which said that the exclusive purpose of the state is to preserve and advance a race of kindred peoples. To do this they wanted to harmonise capital and labour via government to avoid the conflicts Marxists both claim and espouse. Importing masses of non White labour to suite business or minorities would have been impossible to imagine. Any wealthy business man advocating that kind of racial treason and nonsense would have found that business cutoff, possibly nationalised and the owner retired and told to shut up. It’s a natural ideology that would have been popular and sustainable once the hegemony of international left/liberal and globalist business was nipped in the bud.

            Hitler, the Nazis and Germans in General said many positive and respectful things of other races and cultures. Hitler was highly complimentary and respectful of other races such as Hungarian Mygars, he said admiring things about the Chinese. I have seen such statements in regards to Bulgarians.

            The problem is that many vulgar things was said about fellow Whites that Germany and Germans were in conflict with and under threat of existence namely Slavic poles and Russians. This is a problem for us as nationalists because it is used against us.

            Had the Nazis have secured a quick victory I think the future of Whites would have been secured. In the absence of war harsh plans would have become sensible and softened. Hitler would have passed away and a things would have returned to a kind of democratic normalcy minus the anti White ideologies in the media and politics. They simply wouldn’t be needed or wanted by the population and would simply die out.

            Consider the high crime rates and welfare inflicted by minorities on Whites by the dominance of Anglo US racial ideology, also the suppression of data on crime and ethnic related data, anti White affirmative action, hate crime laws that limit even polite discussion and ultimately normalisation of lifestyles that cause the collapse of family and sustainable birth rate.

          • eunometic

            Chamberlain was a good, honourable White man of Great compassion and hnour. He let the almost entirely German speaking Suddetenland portion of the artificial state of Czecoslovakia go back to Germany where they wanted to be. Czechoslovakia was a artificial creation of France to breakdown and destroy Germany. Woodrow Wilson latter complained he had been lied to re ethnic distributions. Czechoslovakia was 5.5 million Czechs, 3 million Germans and 2.5 million Slovaks. The latter two (slovaks seperated recently) didn’t really want to be there though the would have accepted contonic swiss or US style federated goverment. Czech police killed dozens of unarmed Germans during council elections in 1919 in several towns, About 50,000 Germans were sacked from the railways for linguistic reasons and Eduard Bennes threatened to ethnically cleanse ethnic Germans in the event of Germany and Austria united politically and economically. Forced land redistributions and subsidisation created further upsets.

            Sending British forces to spill blood to Force Suddetens to remain there made no sense and it wouldn’t have been accepted by the British because it was immoral.

            I should point out that Eduard Bennes created a fake iGerman invasion threat that was exposed when German officers escorted large numbers British officers on the Czech German border. Hitler was both Humiliated and Outraged by this stunt. It is only at this point he developed a resolve for a military solution (rescue from his point of view).

            Hitler had offered an anti Soviet Pack allieing Poland and Germany against the USSR in return for a railway line across Poland to Danzig. Britain’s clumsy guarantee to Poland was to her independence not her Borders so that negotiations could continue. However the Polish dictator Beck stopped negotiating. It was only at this point that Hitler came up with his “whitches brew” of a soviet German pact. It was Camberlain not Churchill that declared war over the guarantee. The Germans restrained themselves in the hope of avoiding war for a long time.

            See R.H.S Stolfis “hitler beyond good and evil” for a non PC look at events.

          • David Ashton

            My late father was born and bred in Plymouth, a devoted Devonian and English patriot, and I was aware all my life of the damage that lovely city suffered. The aerial devastation of Germany and Britain was appalling, and lessons must be drawn from it, including the fact that Europeans should not go to war again but stand together against common external dangers.

            I knew a German who as a youngster in the HJ was expected to work AA guns later in WW2 and who described how US planes also dived low and shot up anything that moved.

            I would be interested to know how the proven death-toll in Guernica compares with Republican bombardments of Nationalist-controlled territory, Soviet secret-police bombings within the USSR and during the conflict with China over the contested railway, and the Soviet bombing of Finland.

          • Paul

            ‘one day when she and a friend where walking to the library, a returning German aircraft swooped down low and machine gunned them’??

            ha ha

            Please supply a reference for this hilarious story.

          • Pat

            You are of course free to believe or not.

          • eunometic

            Almost all of these strafing stories when looked into are urban myths while some are propaganda. They abound in Germany, Britain, France and Spain. One German academic who looked into hundreds of cases of supposed deliberate strafing was unable to confirm one single case. Of.

          • newscomments70

            “As for bombing civilians – Hiroshima? Nagasaki? I have yet to hear any serious condemnation of that from the US, it was considered necessary.” The Japanese government was given the choice to stop these horrible bombings, but they refused. They are the ones responsible for the senseless killing of their own civilians…not a nation who was only defending itself. What are you even doing on AMREN? I hope the muslims in your country kill you.

          • Pat

            Sorry about that – as I am not American the First Amendment (free speech bit) obviously does not apply. Although I did think that is what AMREN was wanting to protect for us beleaguered whites.

            O would some power the gift to give us
            To see ourselves as others see us…..

          • newscomments70

            Unlike the UK, we do have freedom of speech, for now. You are not however allowed to slander or libel. Whenever I hear such a statement, it is from a European liberal…that attacking Japan was entirely the fault of the US. Such a simplistic and untrue accusation always angers me. Japan attacked the United States and started a horrific war. The atomic bomb ended the war. The only other option was invasion of the island, which would have resulted in many more casuaulties. It would have also resulted in shared Soviet occupation of Japan. The Japanese government was given the option to stop the bombing, but they refused, even after the first bomb. It was solely their fault that this happened. It wasn’t the “evil, imperalist Americans”. You may write any anti-american screed you wish, but don’t expect to make too many friends here.

          • Pat

            What are you talking about! I was not passing a negative comment merely pointing out a fact. You had every right to attack Japan, just as I had every right to attack the Germans. I quite understand the reason for the use of such a weapon, another positive from it is that it has never been used since. A previous post seemed to imply that we British should have just rolled over and allowed Hitler to get on with it. ‘Slander or libel’ I take as a personal insult.
            There is nothing liberal about me really. I am fighting a rear guard action for my four grand children, who if things don’t change pretty soon are going to be blaming my generation for the current mess – and who could blame them.

            I wouldn’t say we no longer exist – we are just waking up. Regards Pat

        • Pat

          Churchill commanded a battalion of Scots Fusiliers on the western front in the First World War.

        • TeutonicKnight67

          Churchill did fight in a war…The Boer War. He was a POW and escaped. His exploits were publicized and he was considered a hero. He certainly loved fighting fellow whites.

  • Luca

    Large groups of indoctrinated or ignorant people are easily manipulated and they are essential to have in a democratic society to gain power. When the elites could not get enough whites to be swayed to the left and lulled into ignorance they started importing new voters.

    Liberals embolden the ignorant masses to rise up against their “oppressors”. They did it in 1917 and they’ll do it again.

    • Stan D Mute

      Except that here in the USSA, the communists already took power and did so not by killing the government, but by co-opting it and allowing their minions unrestricted and long term open warfare against the founding population.

      • TeutonicKnight67

        Ssssshhhhh! Be careful Comrade! Glorious Leader is watching us!

  • rick

    “the major parties had reached an implicit pact to keep immigration off the political agenda. . . . [T]here are no other issues to which the major parties have been prepared to act in this way . . . to advance the national interest ahead of where they believed the electorate to be.”
    The above quote could just as easily be used to describe the situation here in the United States.

  • Jaego

    Occidental Observer has a long five part report that gives the whole story. As in South Africa and the United States, Jews were the driving and Unifying force in the ideological change and subsequent opening of the borders.

    • rightrightright

      Jews want a multiculti West so that they can be lost in the crowd and not again be persecuted on grounds of race and religion. They are not interested in what is destroyed to achieve such safe anonymity. Yet without Western, White civilisation they (and all of us) will slide down into lives that are nasty, brutish and short. Without a White West, Israel will be annihilated in a bloodbath of islamic butchery. I just cannot understand why Jews living in the diaspora cannot grasp this. For goodness sake, Jews aren’t thick so why have they closed their brains? Is it a desire for revenge on Europe and the Anglosphere, a desire so intense it negates reason?

  • Dr. X

    Hmmm. Seems to be a self-induced cancer metastasizing throughout the White Anglosphere the past several decades. In Britain, you had the Fabians and other intellectuals like the Bloomsbury writers trashing British culture in the interwar period, and the critique went mainstream after the first Labour government in 1945. By the 1960s, White intellectuals throught the English-speaking world had embraced decolonization, integration, Negro music, and self-loathing. Almost simultaneously you had the White world abandon support for Ian Smith, the U.S. civil rights movement, the Leftist government of Trudeau in Canada, the darkening of Australia, and by the1980s White pressure for the aparthied government of South Africa to dissolve itself.

    My thesis is that the World Wars undermined the White intellectuals’ belief in the superiority of their own cultures. This happened first in Britain (and France also) after the inane slaughter of World War I, and in the U.S., Australia and elsewhere after World War II and Vietnam. Much of the literature of the Left in the 1960s essentially equates the U.S. with Nazi Germany, and the atomic bomb as the equivalent of the Holocaust. The upshot is that White intellectuals began to believe that Whites were no better than the colored jungle savages that their Victorian and Edwardian predecessors had derided as inferiors.

    Although their argument was clearly an oversimplification, they nonetheless did have a point that the slaughter of the World Wars undermined the notion of White moral and civilizational superiority. Today, however, the self-loathing of White intellectuals and “diversity-worship” has become a cult-like fetish unmoored from any serious arguments about the actual mistakes or failures of White society, and has become reflexively unappreciative of all the good, noble, and salutary achievements of the White race.

    • David Ashton

      This is a pretty good general account.
      Some early Fabians, however, were not racial traitors.

  • Sean

    ‘They petitioned to bring in Chinese coolies, but both the colonial and
    British governments refused to consider admitting people of “an inferior
    and servile description.”’

    People were more honest back then.

  • JohnEngelman

    (AFP) – May 21, 2012

    SYDNEY — Some 50 percent of Australians want an end to the nation’s immigration programme because they believe the country has too many people, a poll showed on Tuesday.

    The survey of 2,000 people, conducted for the tabloid Sydney Daily Telegraph newspaper, found 51 percent thought “our population is too high (and) we should stop immigration”…

    But in the poll only 32 percent of respondents felt Australia should welcome more immigrants and almost two thirds, some 65 percent, said “migrants should adopt the Australian way of life”.
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gpjOdI-5uVIY2u0JAuUVPoN3tgPg?docId=CNG.ad6df8e98bc95ad0546d67dc14e22cc6.551

  • Jason

    In Australia any discussion about preserving our cultural identity is usually met with the smirks from leftists who say “oh you want to go back to the racist white Australia policy do you?”

    They see a country full of White people as sickening and evil and racist. A second homeland for the Anglos and Celts is their idea of a nightmare. Just imagine it, all those filthy little white children running around like a plague. Disgusting! Abhorrent!
    How dare the people who built this country, who fought in wars for it, how dare they have a say on who comes to this country.

    • Will MacFarlane

      Oh please, spare me the tripe. Both Australia and N. America have for the most part of recorded human history traditionally been non-white. The REAL natives of Australia like with N. America were the Aborginals who did have their own language, customs AND a sense of land ownership. We all know what happened in the 1600-1700s – the atrocities committed by Europeans in both these places. Fast forward to today and we see the tables have turned. Well well well, Karma is a bitch! No sympathy for the devil here, mate. I’m happy with these changing trends even if it means the extermination of my kind.

      -Aussie Liberal.

      • BannerRWB

        You may be happy with this situation, but many Whites are not. The question is how will the policies of mass-immigration play out in the long run. We saw what such policies did when White’s were expanding, but it sounds as though you actually support such movement of people. Would you be happy if current policy results in mass-bloodshed leading to the next world war, bringing death to millions and destruction across continents? You say you would be happy with the change even if it means the extermination of Whites, but say you were a liberal native of Australia or the Americas in the year 1700, would you have been glad to see Whites take over your homelands? Otherwise, I believe your comments are disingenuous at best, as it appears you seem to have no sense of any group being allowed to stay “native”; I don’t see Aussie aboriginals retaking Australia, nor do I see “native Americans” retaking the United States. What’s occurring is a reinvasion by non-native populations of other lands due to liberal policy, which may well result in yet the next large-scale human conflict. As you state, you can be happy with your own extermination, and in fact, I doubt I’ll miss you once you are gone. Your comments make it sound as if you are the kind of anomalous offshoot that the White world can do without anyway, so I don’t see any great loss. And remember, should a racial separation occur, those like you will not belong to either side. – My above comments would be to any such White liberal. As for Mr. MacFarlane, I understand he may be a troll of some sort and just be posing here as a White person, but I still wanted to make the post.

        • Will MacFarlane

          So any white person here who disagrees with your idiocy is a troll? C’mon, surely you can do better than that, mate!
          Also, talk about natives being taken over by outsiders – how truly ironic that it is the illegal interlopers (whites) of yesterday who cruelly ransacked and dispossessed the natives of these very lands ( Americas & Australia) are getting their butts handed to them by others more devious than them! Guess, nothing works best than experiencing a taste of your own medicine, eh mate?

          • Ted

            Dear Mr. MacFarlan,
            I don’t care whether you are a troll or not, but now you will need to put your money where your mouth is given your views. Here’s a list so you can get started.
            1. Transfer possession of all your material items (house, car, pension, etc) to anyone of “native” ancestry.
            2. Make a public apology to non-whites for the supposed crimes of your ancestors. (that is if you’re white, which I doubt).
            3. Euthanize yourself, because afterall, the extinction of whites is inevitable, right? You and your family’s presence is nothing but a waste of perfectly good resources that could go to non-whites. Why not start the process early.
            4. Stop posting on AR. (See #3 above)
            Wishing you all the best, Mate!

          • BannerRWB

            Exactly. Although MacFarlane’s comments were deleted, his position is the archetype of the liberal hypocrite. They live in, and enjoy the benefits of the White world, all while complaining about the evil White man. Such people will never match the spirit of their mindset or commentary by personally taking the commensurate actions of which they speak. They complain and gripe about the White world, yet as soon as they destroy it by implementing their policies, they will depart the forsaken areas for the “better schools”, etc., of the ever shrinking White areas.

          • Bantu_Education

            @ Moderator – why did you delete McFarlane’s comments and my response? I don’t understand.

          • Ted

            They truly are mentally ill individuals.

          • David Ashton

            Those whom the gods destroy, they first make mad.

          • Bantu_Education

            Aborigines never owned Australia – they didn’t even know the place existed. They were squatters and useless ones at that. Now, if they had developed something worthwhile in the 60,000 years or whatever they claim then I could possibly take your side and agree they were unfairly dispossessed. They did not deserve Australia – they did not deserve anywhere. If the Chinese, or Malays, had occupied Australia hundreds of years ago the Abos would be extinct and forgotten, as they deserve to be. The whites, against their best interests, have allowed them not only to live but to increase their numbers and claim all manner of undeserved benefits. You are a typical self-hating liberal who cannot bear the thought that the races are indeed very unequally endowed with civilising qualities. You and your type don’t deserve to be born as white. You should be extinct as is your wish.

      • ilovemyrace

        Dear Will MacFarlane,
        I’d like to make your dream come true. Please post your address so concerned readers can come help speed the “extermination” of your kind, as you so passionatly desire.

  • Mortimer123

    In Australia the most successful Chinese immigrant was Victor Chang, a world class heart surgeon. Unfortunately for him he was murdered in a failed kidnapping and ransom and the culprits were not white Australians but other Asians! Also the public of Australia has to “thank” a Vietnamese immigrant for that country’s first political assassination. John Newman was murdered in 1994 for campaigning against Asian crime gangs. Multiculturalism does not work and should be abandoned immediately!

    • paul

      ‘In Australia the most successful Chinese immigrant was Victor Chang’??

      Are you on crack? The only reason you’ve even heard his name is because he was murdered in Chinese shake down by other chinese.

      If it happened to a white man it would have made the news for only one night.

  • One Eyed Aussie

    “Malcolm Fraser, who was Labor prime minister from 1975 to 1983, let in Vietnamese boat people and illegal immigrants, assuming they would vote Labor.”

    That quote is a piece of spectacularly bad journalism in an otherwise excellent article. Malcolm Fraser was a Liberal (conservative) prime minister of Australia (NOT Labor!). It makes the subsequent sentence illogical at best. I can’t countenance how anyone who has seriously considered the topic could make such a blatant mistake (even if you think the author accidentally swapped the names of the two parties, no liberal (conservative) prime minister would have been stupid enough assume they were going to get the votes of Vietnamese refugees and assorted other illegal immigrants.).

    If you were talking about a Labor prime minister, then that sentence would have made a lot of sense.

    The simpler truth is Malcolm Fraser was a typical deracinated modern politician who thought he was doing the “right thing” in the aftermath of the Vietnam war. He is persona non grata in the modern Liberal (conservative) party and his period of government is considered by most conservatives to be a wasted opportunity.

    As I say this was a really good article which makes blatant errors such as that jar even more.

    • One Eyed Aussie

      NB It has since been edited out, making my comment moot.

      • Alan James

        Although the reviewer’s error has been corrected, your point is still interesting.

        I used to know Malcolm Fraser reasonably well, when he was just my local member of parliament and not yet the Prime Minister. He was a complicated man. Half Jewish, he liked to think of himself as part of the rural aristocracy (the “squattocracy”) of western Victoria. In those days he was very anti-communist in an Ayn Randish way. When he let in the 1970s Vietnamese boat people he thought he was introducing and stitching up a new anti-Left block vote. He was right to some extent, since the new arrivals (with or without their alleged gold bars) tended to set up small businesses and act like good little micro-capitalists.

  • Bantu_Education

    “Malcolm Fraser, who was Labor prime minister from 1975 to 1983, let in Vietnamese boat people and illegal immigrants, assuming they would vote Labor.”

    Wrong..!!! Fraser, despite his strident anti-apartheid stance and incomprehensible hatred for white-ruled South Africa, was from the same “Liberal” (i.e., conservative wing) as “British to the bootstraps” Sir Robert Menzies. I am not sure whether it was the author who said this, or a mistake by the reviewer. Perhaps he meant Gough Whitlam (the Labor PM who preceded Fraser) as it was he who finally scrapped the White Australia policy?

  • Bantu_Education

    Why is it that every single white country (well, certainly all the wealthier ones) is having this totally bizarre social experiment called multiculturalism inflicted upon them? Normally, when experiments are being performed, there are ALWAYS control groups. Where are the white “control group” countries which are being allowed to stay (hideously) white until the experiment is completed and the results are in? Russia, Ukraine, for example, cannot be suitable controls because those countries are so different from the “advanced” ones being used by the mad marxist social engineers as objects of their experimentation.

    • Defoe

      It is not an experiment. No control group exists. The goal is the extermination of White culture and the White race. They hate us.

      • whiteuncleruckus

        Unfortunately I think you are correct Defoe. I don’t think anything can be done to stop the enemies of White people. There are simply too many of them, which includes traitors, and not enough of us. For them it’s fashionable and even morally rightous to hate White people. Our once great and proud race will die a slow and painful death. Future generations of White people will suffer even more than we do today.

  • Mariner33

    And all this, my dear friends, is why Asia and Asians will rein supreme in the World for a long time. They have a natural immunity to self denigration and delusion. Unlike the White races, they have no problem with extreme patriotism, they primacy of their nation’s interest, and no desire for dilution with other races or grafting alien cultures onto theirs.

    The elites in all Western countries have underhandedly promulgating these policies of extinguishing cultural and racial existing identities. It’s a pattern that is repeated over and over. They are stealthy, extremely well funded, ruthless, and relentless. The opposition, and the people extant.have not a chance against this onslaught and tsunami of destruction. They mimic the microscopic world of deadly, almost undetectable Central Nervous System and vital organ parasites.

    Oh yes, and they buy and sell politicians like stock market day traders.

    • ms_anthro

      More defeatist babble! It’s true that traitorous anti-whites among our kind are our own worst enemies, but when white people decide to take their countries back en masse, the “Asians” (Which Asians? Hmong? Vietnamese? Han Chinese? Japanese? Asia is not some unified mass.) will not be a serious threat. For one thing, they’re heavily dependent on Western consumerism to keep their own economies afloat. Why spend blood and treasure on a suicidal attempt to conquer us when they can just keep trading with us and benefiting from our inventions and cultural advances? The more advanced Asian peoples are nothing if not extremely practical.

      • Mariner33

        I did not say, as you imply, that the Asians would or desire to conquer and occupy the West. That is against their nature and cultural tradition. Domination can take many forms. When your economy is stronger, your military forces stronger, your people more patriotic and united, and other countries look to you first for protection and trade, you dominate.

        My opinion on the global dominance of the Chinese and Asians is supported by many strategists and even military brains. The evidence is in front of you. As a life long operating and maintenance marine engineer, one looks at the present state of operation of systems, and the TREND. Those who lack the acumen or courage to study and understand the latter, are inevitably “surprised” when a casualty or failure ensues.

        Finally, my friend, the Chinese produce a bumper crop of CHINESE, home grown, while we cannot produce enough Whites to replace our thinning ranks.

        I cannot forget the immortal phrase of an ethnic Chinese hotel executive in Singapore, during an interesting and wide ranging discussion. He said, “Chinese people very practical”. That speaks volumes.

        • ms_anthro

          The same military brain trust that has embroiled us in endless wars to line the elites’ pockets and protect a corrupt theocracy that openly spies on us while conniving to hijack our own governments, the same strategists that recommended the wanton slaughter of the best young white Southern men this country had to offer…the chickenhawk warmongers who have our military spread so thinly around the world while our borders remain undefended…

          The astute reader should look to history and actual likelihoods instead of defeatist, anti-white neocon scaremongering. I’ll believe it when I see it.

        • David Ashton

          Trends in history can sometimes go in different directions.
          People make events, and we should not give up.

  • Bossman

    The writer of this article makes no mention of the aboriginal first Australians. It is as if they never existed. The first European immigrants were mainly bachelors. Did they interbreed with the native women? Australia is one of those white countries that will have a hard time remaining white for the simple reason that they are surrounded by countless Asiatic hordes who are just waiting patiently to swallow them up. We in north America are more lucky. To begin with, the native women of the Americas were and are far more sexier than East Asian women. Most so-called Hispanics are already half white and Asia with its countless hordes are still very far away..

    • Bantu_Education

      When America can no longer afford or loses the will to defend Australia and NZ, or they are defeated in war (possibly attempting the defend Taiwan), China will invade and occupy both Australia and NZ. China will justify it the way Hitler justified the annexation of the Sudentenland – “our compatriots begged us to protect them from the racist white Australians”. Expect this to happen in 20 to 30 years time.

      • IstvanIN

        With all the fifth columnists in Australia, China won’t have much trouble invading.

        Australia isn’t really environmentally suited to harboring a huge population without large energy inputs, since it is a largely arid country. That being said Australia could go back to a white Australia policy by stopping non-white immigration, perhaps limiting immigration to British immigrants only (with the death of the UK imminent, the British people and Crown will need a new home), and developing nuclear weapons. Remember, a country doesn’t need enough nuclear weapons to win a war but just enough to make invading too costly. Of course, Australia won’t do this, they are suicidal.

    • JoePatriot12345

      Spanish women are attractive.

      Indigenous mexicans are not.

      • Bossman

        Indigenous Mexicans belong to the same race as all the natives of the Americas.
        You should watch the Miss Universe Contest. Women from Latin America are completely dominating that contest. What all these women have in common is that they are mixtures of Europeans and native. No sooner had Columbus landed in the Americas, his crew were out in the bush humping native women. After 500 years the process still continues.

  • Mike Lane

    Found this:

    “A ‘racially integrated community’ is a chronological term timed from the entrance of the first black family to the exit of the last white family.” – Saul Alinsky

    I was surprised to see of what ethnic group he was from. (*cough* sarcasm)

  • Achaean

    The lie that immigration and multiculturalism have enriched Western nations is becoming ever more evident to the general public, as we can see in this article a few days ago, which cites Huntington spot on: “Multiculturalism is in its essence anti-European civilisation . . . It is basically an anti-Western ideology.”
    http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/4868/full

    Fortunately, the facts hidden by the MSM are increasingly available to the general public:
    Moslem rapes in Sweden:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KBdmdCW_-A4#!
    http://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/sweden-shocking-muslim-rape-wave-epidemic/
    Moslem rapes in England:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an-DgorV8HM
    http://www.examiner.com/article/muslim-rapes-of-children-covered-up-by-u-k-politicians
    From Gates of Vienna:
    http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.ca/2012/11/muslim-gang-rape-whitewashed-in-britain.html

    Rape Jihad against British girls:
    http://muslimrapewave.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/more-muslim-rapes-in-england-and-sweden-and-norway-and/

    Documentation of immigrant rape cases of British girls
    http://vladtepesblog.com/?cat=594

    • David Ashton

      We must all try to keep this sort of information going.

  • Nancy Thomas

    Uh…the author at the end throws up his hands in wonder regarding what happened….he might want to pick up a copy of “The Culture of Critique.”

    • JoePatriot12345

      As much as I like Amren, it really is kind of sad how this subject is tiptoed around and avoided.

      “There is not a truth existing which I fear…”

  • Bantu_Education

    “If races and cultures really were as equal as multiculturalists sanctimoniously claim, then there would be no need to change the White Australian society and culture by introducing other races and cultures. That they routinely degrade White Australia and its traditional culture utterly belies their argument that all races and cultures are equal. Of course, the reality is that it is the very European-derived people (so loathed by the Jewish-dominated intellectual elite) which made Australia and other Western nations so successful in the first place. And it is precisely these people and their culture that the promoters of multiculturalism seek to destroy.”

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/08/the-war-on-white-australia-a-case-study-in-the-culture-of-critique-part-3-of-5/

  • roscommonman

    I live in Ireland, we are bringing in tens of thousands of Africans every year, putting them on welfare, free cars free houses, some of them even in government jobs while our own people are forced to emigrate and have their services cut by the IMF. Add to this we give $832,000,000 a year “aid” to Africa, the vast majority of it going into Swiss bank accounts. Yet no one is saying a word for fear of being called a racist, it is like living in a dystopian, Orwellian nightmare, what can I do?

    • Achaean

      For an answer as to why this is happening to Ireland, see this newly released article:

      http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/03/the-misplaced-minister-ireland-and-israels-alan-shatter/

      • David Brims

        The ”tribal members ” have always been very troublesome and radical, that’s why the Romans got rid of them in AD 70.

    • David Brims

      In Ireland the political class is incestuous, corrupt and self serving. Political dynasties rule, fathers gift constituencies to their sons, brothers to brothers, aunts to nephews, parish pump politics at their worst and a electorate which seems inert and bovine.

      When Brian Cowan, the fleshy faced moron and politicians son, signed the country’s guarantee of all bank debt he effectively imposed a crippling austerity regime on Irish taxpayers for decades to come. He then retired on an enormous pension.

      The new government has accepted the austerity regime without much change.

      Quite why the Irish electorate hasn’t stormed the Irish Parliament and frog -marched these corrupt traitors to the nearest lampost to howls of execration is beyond me.

    • IstvanIN

      The only group of whites I have no sympathy for are the Irish (well, if you consider Jews white, then them, too). Their on-going hatred for the English and Protestants, their desire to destroy anything British, or in the case of American Irish, WASP, makes me sick. The British built the greatest societies in the world, the UK, America, Canada and Australia, not perfect societies, no one is perfect, but the best the world has seen. They were destroyed by a combination of the Anglo obsession with fair-play and certain non-Anglos desire for revenge. Sad.

      • KevinPhillipsBong

        They exchanged the Black-and-Tans for blacks and tans.

        • roscommonman

          The blacks with prams.

          • David Brims

            I’ve noticed that too, the only thing they do well is have babies, lots of them.

      • saxonsun

        You are right–I hold the Irish responsible for so much of this.

        • IstvanIN

          What is really sad, in addition to whites fighting whites over old grievances, the Irish against the English, the Czech against their own German minority, are the whites who bring their ancient grievances to America. The Italians like to nurse grievances against the people who allowed them to migrate here as well, although, except for the Cuomo family, not as hatefully as the Irish. The Irish came here voluntarily yet they hate Anglo-Americans and despise Protestant society. I appreciate the fact that America allowed my family, both before WW1 and after WW2, to come to America. We assimilated and are Americans though and through. I have no arguments with any white American who leaves the old world behind.

          • TeutonicKnight67

            I have never bought into the IRA nonsense that oozes so readily from the Irish pubs I frequent. As a Catholic I must disagree however on one issue. You can’t deny the oppression of Irish Catholics as a point of fact. The English considered them subhuman at one point in time. In fact, white Irish Catholics were often treated WORSE than Negro slaves. I don’t know what the answer is, and I certainly don’t have any residual Anti-Brit chip on my shoulder because of history but I just wish for God’s sake we could get past this and raise the next generation to be united in whiteness.

          • America First

            Don’t know why you believe “Italians like to nurse grudges against the people who allowed them to migrate here.” I’ve known hundreds, grew up with and am related to Italian-Americans. My friends of Italian ancestry are, by far, the most patriotic of all my acquaintances; I have NEVER heard a complaint against this country by any of them, and I am in my seventh decade. My Sicilian-born grandfather came here as a teenager, joined the American Army in World War I, was thereafter routinely and openly discriminated against when he applied to work (he was a trained cabinet maker), but it never embittered him. After he and my grandmother retired, they would spend months each year traveling cross-country because they loved the U.S. They could have afforded to go (back) to Italy, but had no desire to, even for a short visit. Anyway, your comment is belied by my own experience. (Most of the Irish-Americans I know are quite patriotic as well, but many are surprisingly liberal, and certainly far to the left of me.)

          • IstvanIN

            I absolutely agree people of Italian ancestry are very patriotic but there are still those who complain about discrimination, as if any group on the face of the earth has never been discriminated against. There is a NJ radio host who likes to periodically bemoan how “Italians” were or are treated. I have heard Mario Cuomo wail about the poor treatment “Italians” have received. I believe it is his justification for being anti-white. And since I am being a grouch I hate when Americans of Italian decent refer to themselves as “Italian”, when 99% of them have never been to Italy and are in fact American. Of course I hate when the Irish refer to their “nationality” as Irish. Time for white people to be American.

      • JoePatriot12345

        Um, the English starved the Irish on purpose – for a profit. Millions died.

        Any Irishman that kisses English arse has his head up his own.

      • SirMe

        Look and the Commonwealth of Nations and its objectives that was created by the Anglo-Saxons, and you will see why immigration happened to countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand..You can stop blaming the Irish while your at it.

  • William Allingham

    i think that its our responsibility to protect black and brown people from racism and the best way to do this is not letting them enter to the countries where wicked-white-man lives (the same way you wouldn’t let children play near a swamp full of crocodiles).

    brown people are so open minded, so predisposed and emphatic that we don’t need the helpless white man to create our perfect multicultural societies. let them stay isolated in their incomplete white countries and we better try our diversity experiment in mexico, zambia or
    sudan.

    these pale, bigoted, farmer-minded people will never learn african or mexican values and high “filosofia” so for your own good leave them alone!

  • Thora

    The West rejected Christianity a half-century ago, thereafter flouting the nationalistic warnings in the Old Testament. For example:

    “Here
    then, is the land thou art to invade an conquer. To make room for thee
    in this land, the Lord thy God means to dispossess a multitude of
    nations at thy onslaught.

    “Thy part is to
    exterminate them, never parleying with them, never pitying them. There
    must be no bonds of marriage between you; as thou wouldst deny thy
    daughter to any son of theirs.
    “This, rather, you must do;
    overthrow their altars, break their idols, cut down their sacred groves,
    set fire to their carved figures, to shew that yours is a people set
    apart for its own God, chosen by its own God, out of all the nations on
    earth, as his own people.

    “Little by little, now here, now
    there, he will dispossess these nations; thou couldst not destroy them
    all at once without letting the wild beasts breed, to thy hurt. But
    deliver them over he will at thy coming, beating them down till he makes
    and end of them, leaving all their kings at thy mercy, till at last the
    very names of them are forgotten on earth; none shall be able to resist
    thy victorious onset.”

    From the Law of Judaism, Deuteronomy 7

    • KingKenton

      Exactly. Many White Nationalists like to blame Christianity for the rise in multiculturalism and anti-racism. I would argue it is because the West has rejected Christianity that we find ourselves in our current predicament. What is especially interesting, and I believe reinforces this argument, is the easily observable fact that the more post-Christian a Western society / nation has become the more multicultural and anti-racist it has become. Likewise we see the inverse where Christianity still has its strongest hold. In places like Russia and Eastern Europe which are much more traditional in there Christian beliefs we see the most racial solidarity. The Russian Orthodox Church is almost open in it’s disdain for Western multiculturalism. Also interesting is those that oppose the Orthodox Church (i.e. front groups for Western style “democracy”), are the ones pushing hardest for Russia and Eastern Europe to embrace multiculturalism.

      • TeutonicKnight67

        And Traditional (Latin) Catholicism is slowly clawing its way back for the same reasons you cite.

        • http://twitter.com/dchrist81 david christoph

          Catholicism throughout its entire history, from the Roman Empire to this very day and likely until the end of the age, has been the single greatest threat to authentic Christianity. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25833/25833-pdf.pdf

  • dj2

    You have to remember that the desire for Empire, for rule over others, is a particularly Anglo disease. Because Anglos, with the possible exception of America though even this is waning, no longer have the manpower or desire to send their best young men overseas to the brown and black parts, they invite them over to recreate Empire at home. This happens in the U.K., North America, and Australia.

    For the Anglos to ever recover, they will have to simultaneously reject Empire and multiculturalism. They must begin to say clearly with a loud voice: we reject the desire for rule over others; we will trade with you, but otherwise don’t want to have much to do with you.

    But as a consequence our lands are our lands…they are for whites only, and forever will remain that way.

    To be truthful, I don’t know if the Anglos have it within them to do it.

    • David Ashton

      I think the Anglos have long rejected Empire; the problem is with liberal interventionism beyond our military capacities. There is an unfortunate streak of dependence on cheap coolie labor rather than indigenous hard work.

      • JoePatriot12345

        It isn’t liberalism.

        If you dig deeper, ‘liberalism’ is just watered down communism.

        And then if you apply a minute amount of intelligence, you will figure out that communism is jewish ideological warfare.

    • Bantu_Education

      I don’t believe there was ever a desire to “rule over others”, per se. “Empire” was born out of a desire to build new and better Englands in sparsely-populated places with greater resources than England. For example, N.America, Australia, NZ, the original Cape Colony, also perhaps Rhodesia and the “white highlands” of Kenya. These, barring a few minor islands, were the only true “colonies”. With barely a handful of exceptions Britain and France never had any “colonies” in Africa or Asia.

      On the other hand, through exploration and trade links, etc, there grew a humanitarian desire to educate and “civilise” backward cultures, particularly Africans, in the hope that in due course through osmosis (and, more optimistically, common sense) they would adopt “English” culture and morals and create their own tropical “Englands”. But when they failed abysmally to create decent living standards in their own lands, hand-wringing white liberals said “this is all our fault and therefore we must compensate them by allowing them to come here and enjoy the benefits we failed to give them over there. Britains post-war Marxist-lite govt, eagerly over-reacting to the “profound evil” of Nazism and racism, found fertile ground for spreading their false doctrine of innate racial equality. This irrational dogma has “dogged” us ever since.

  • Alexandra

    When I was reading the part about “only a few war brides” I was thinking, oops, there’s the foot in the door.
    BTW this American is happy about her English and Scottish ancestry. :)

  • american_cavalier

    The tea leaves are easy to read. The origin stems from anti-British Protestant racism. Who promotes it. Judeo-Catholics throughout the Empire and the US. Irish Catholics were behind the policy to end the white Australia policy. American Judeo-Catholics were behind the policy to sever British Australian relations. Bankers and plutocrats within Britain itself, again a plurality of Jews, Catholics and Tory Brits wanted cheap labor. The Labour Party, the chief WASP working class organ in Australia was hijacked by Catholic Communists and became a front for pushing anti-Britannic policy. Other Australian conservative parties, the chief organs of WASP middle and upper classes where also hijacked by Jewish and Tory interests bent on suppressing overt Britannian values as the price of maximizing capitalism. The enemy in all of these affairs are aliens of Jewish, Catholic, and Tory origin. Whether it be dark actors in London, New York City, or Sidney the enemy is always the same. Their chief vice they use to ensare the patriotic leaders is always greed. So, keep your faith pure, give your ancestors due reverence, and smash the damned villains into the ground. Mates rise up!!!!

    • TeutonicKnight67

      Guys like you are exactly the reason why so many Irish are reflexively Anti-British. Many American Catholics (I’d venture MOST of them) are racially aware and very realistic about Bantus and swarthy Southrons. But instead of embracing them or encouraging their white fellowship you remind them of their ancestral oppression and drive them away. Judeo-Catholic? Interesting turn of phrase sir. Once again, in my experience, Catholics are not exactly keen on the Sons of Abraham so I don’t know where you come up with this tripe. If you are referring to the libtarded Vatican II left-wing clergy then you may have a valid criticism but they do NOT speak for true Catholics, In fact, the glorious well of Protestantism you seem to extol is far more infected by the influence of The Culture Destroyer with its rank liberalism, priestesses and gay liturgies. Not exactly conducive to producing strong, proud white men eh? Mates WAKE up! Catholics are not the Enemy. By the way, I’m also part German and have Protestant relatives. Does this make me a little less suspect? Or am I still your enemy?

      • JoePatriot12345

        Because of all the indoctrination and propaganda, very few people are comfortable directly bringing up the subject of jewish power and influence.

        Much easier to lump it all in with Irish/Catholics/Chinese etc….

    • David Ashton

      I would qualify the adjective “Tory” which in England can refer to those who oppose(d) Whig finance-capitalism, and supported national identity against alien immigration and international republicanism. Enoch Powell, Roger Scruton and Merrie Cave are modern examples.
      Many Catholics in Australia supported the “White Australia” policy; e.g. Father Leslie Rumble of “Radio Replies”.

  • Paul

    occidental observer ran a scholarly three part essay on how the Jews were behind this lock, stock and barrel. It’s a amazing that they’re not even mentioned here.

    • JoePatriot12345

      Its like spending hours discussing the symptoms of a disease, without any mention of the cause.

      And if you do bring up the cause, someone is sure to either call you names or delete your posts.

  • http://www.dailykenn.com/ Daily Kenn

    Virtually every technological advancement this side of grass huts, grass skirts, and voodoo medicine is the direct result of white innovation. Cultural Marxism doesn’t merely minimize that reality, it wholly ignores it, supposing trains, planes and automobiles popped out of nowhere along with computer technology, micro biology, health care advancements, etc.

    Western culture dominated the civilized world with vibrant, intelligent leaders whose inherent knack for innovation enjoined the rule of law with a free market economy thereby accelerating the planet’s population into a stratospheric realm of technological advancement.

    What will happen when we are gone? when the white infrastructure is disabled, then destroyed? Who will know how to turn the lights on?

    • JoePatriot12345

      It isn’t ironic, it is policy. Those who are behind it don’t view themselves as ‘white’.

    • SirMe

      Not really, people say the age of Imperialism is over, but it hasn’t, the Muslim world, China, India etc all are building their Empires, this is colonization, just in a different way.

  • Dr. Jim Saleam

    I must comment upon your review of Alan James’s New Britannia: :The Rise and Decline of Anglo-Australia.

    It is my intention to write a full review of it in due course, but I am currently preoccupied with writing a criticism of some articles authored by the otherwise eminent Frank K. Salter published recently in Australia’s Quadrant magazine (reviewed recently on another US website)..

    Bluntly, there appears to me to be a certain attack upon the concept of Australian Nationality in favour of some sort of Anglo-deconstructionism. We see Australian identity deconstructed from something ‘European generally by culture and ethnicity but native to the soil,’ in favour of a sneaking claim that only persons British (sic) by blood and with an Anglo consciousness – are Australian.

    I find it so false as to wonder why it is being put forward.

    The James’ text – from your review and without me having yet read it – alludes to many myths often put up by Anglophiles: (I must use this hackneyed term): that the White Australia Policy was really a British Australia Policy, that imperial loyalty defined nationality and that opposition to the Empire was some sort of Irish thing and of no weight.

    Even if I say that the Empire wanted no truck with White Australia, that loyalties in Australia were necessarily split because, as in America, a new Nationality was grown and that the Irish component in a native nationalism is often overstated by the Anglophiles for their purposes – this is still just scratching the surface of the latest effort.

    Interesting that most of the Anglophiles in action now forget our ‘Celtic’ Irish and seem to have abandoned use of the phrase that “Australia is Anglo-Celtic” which they used to employ just a decade or two ago. That idea would possibly create just another problem for them given that there was English / Irish politics in Australia once – so they’ve gone the whole road and just asserted their “Anglo identity”. Bad luck for the Celts and other Europeans, I suppose.

    I am afraid that if the arguments of the Anglophiles were part of any attempt at ‘political formation’, we would see only disaster if it indeed remains their intention to try at least to preserve this Continent from the Third World. The Anglo idea does not mobilize the consciousness required for such an effort. If an American would doubt that – apply it to yourselves and impose that logic backwards and you may get my point. We prefer to defend our identity. I regret to say that ‘White Australia’ is white Australia and proud we are to have a British legacy too, but our ‘whiteness’ (sic) extends beyond the Anglos (sic) and I think the Anglophiles need to assimilate this fact.

    It is true that some Anglophile groups exist in Australia. To speak crudely and directly for your readers: the Australian nationalists intend to offer them no peaceful path.

    • David Ashton

      Isn’t it possible for all white Australians to unite as an English-speaking people and include among them those who have British ancestry? Better to offer Asian immigrants and white supporters of a Non-white Australia policy no peaceful path?
      I speak without personal animosity despite the fact that in my temporary Sydney school in 1951 I was the only white immigrant boy in my class attacked in the playground because I happened to be a “bloody pom”,

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bardon-Kaldian/100003542251801 Bardon Kaldian

      “British” strategy is a wrong strategy. It should be a pan-European English-speaking one.

      • David Ashton

        I can accept this, so long as within the greater unity the components such as England and Croatia retain their own heritage.

    • Alan James

      It is typical of the onslaught against the white race that someone who has not even read the book under review should resort to making overt threats against people who are proud of their Anglo origins. That is what Dr Jim Saleam has done.

      Anglophobia runs so deep in modern Australia that non-Anglos like Dr Jim Saleam get hot under the collar when Anglo-Australian history is merely chronicled. Just the idea of such a book is enough to cause offense. Dr Jim admits he hasn’t even read it, yet even so he intends to review it “in due course”.

      Meanwhile, there’s that last sentence of his above – “To speak crudely and directly for your readers: the Australian nationalists intend to offer them [Anglos] no peaceful path”. His rhetoric here sounds like the sort of law-breaking threat that some of us have experienced from communists: “They shall not pass!” His statement is really aggressive – but it can’t be stressed enough that this anger is directed against people who are proud of being Anglos! It is anti-White anger.

      Dr Jim Saleam can make whatever threats he likes against the Anglo community of Australia, and he can mouth them as “crudely” and “directly” – and violently, since he admits he’s not “peaceful” – as he wishes. Presumably his threat “to offer [us Anglos] no peaceful path” is a threat to use violence against us. What else could it mean?

      Yet we Anglos are the founding ethnic group in Australia, and we insist on our right to survive DownUnder. Dr Jim’s violent threats will not deter the largest ethnic group in Australia.

      But we are very tolerant, perhaps even too tolerant for our own good. If Dr Jim were to make the same threats against Australian Jews, Muslims or even Aborigines, he might find that they are less forgiving. We don’t respond to his violent threats with violence, but let him try it against other groups and we’ll see how brave he is.

  • kjh64

    Why is any “White” country having a “Whites only” policy bad? Look at all the non-White counties. Non-White countries tolerate NO illegal immigration, racially profile possible illegal migrants, many have racial immigration policies, and allow little or no legal immigration to their countries yet they and White liberals scream racism if Whites want to do the same. Mexico has racially based immigration policies, racially profiles possible illegal immigrants from Central America, allows very little legal immigration stating that “immigration can NEVER threaten Mexican ethnicity”. Want to immigrate to India? Forget it unless you are ethnically and racially Indian( ie. have Indian parents/grandparents.) Japan? Unless BOTH parents are racially full-blooded Japanese and even then, it is very difficult. Thailand, not allowed for non-Thais, same for Korea etc. Most Asian countries allow no immigration unless you are of their ethnicity Forget about any non-Muslim being allowed to immigrate to Muslim countries. These non-Whites say it is to perserve THEIR culture and people and too much immigration would change that. Ok, that’s fine but why is it wrong for Whites to not want to do the same?

    • SirMe

      Because they have balls, they will never open their borders. India has a very strict immigration policy, even if you marry an Indian your not warranted a citizenship, even the White Australian policy didn’t go that far.

    • Lankford

      And yet the word “racist” is used ONLY when referring to whites and white nations.

  • Alan James

    I thank Mr Jackson for his clear-eyed review.

    Mr Jackson perceptively picks out the strange business of the appointment of Sir Peter Heydon to the head of the Immigration Department. Heydon had previously been attached to the Australian High Commission in New Delhi, where it seems he just couldn’t cope with the pressure of defending the “White Australia Policy” against Indian journalists. The Immigration Department at that stage seems already to have been partly sabotaged, so securing the shell-shocked Heydon was no doubt a great coup for those people inside the Department who were opposed to the government’s immigration policy.

    I revert to Sir Peter Heydon for a particular reason. Given his huge and lamentable impact on Australia’s gene-pool, very little of significance is known about the man, despite his impeccably “establishment” credentials. Interestingly, his son Dyson Heydon, until recently a judge of the Australian High Court, was born (in Canada) while Sir Peter was serving as a diplomat in the Soviet Union.

    This is one of the mixed frustrations and joys of trying to discern just how, when, and by whom our Anglo-Celtic nations were undermined. So much of the important history has yet to come out. Many of these slimy functionaries, like Sir Peter Heydon, maintained an urbane public face while secretly betraying us.

    There are no doubt people very like Sir Peter in the histories of Canada, the U.S., South Africa, New Zealand and the U.K. I hope that some future scholars will turn over the logs under which these men’s reprehensible deeds have hidden.

    • David Ashton

      Hard work, this research, but well worth the effort from some enterprising maverick scholar.

  • JoePatriot12345

    What is missing from this discussion is the subject of jewish power and influence.

    After WWII they were fearful of any white country, and took major steps towards weakening and dividing white countries around the world – which continues to this day.

    These efforts were backed by the Rothschild family (jewish of course), which owns the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve Bank, and is in essence the true power in the world having completely corrupted the US government for example as well as the EU. (Estimates put their wealth in the tens of trillions)

    Strong white countries are also free and democratic countries. But strong independent nations are an impediment to the creation of a global government ruled by a tiny elite. This is their goal. And this explains why it is official policy now in all wealthy white countries to self destruct, self divide, encourage failure and incompetence. It is a policy designed to ultimately favor an official global power structure.

    Not discussing the CAUSE of white decline, is to miss the real discussion.

    • Lankford

      How do the rise and wealth of China, S. Korea, and Japan fit into this theory?

      • Realist

        There are no Jews in those countries. The only jewish people in Chinese history were Rewi Alley, Otto Braun, etc. and all had devastating effects on Chinese people through their encouragements to the Chinese Communists.

        Also note, that if I remember it was the Jew Jacob Schiff who loaned Japan the money to fight the Russo-Japanese War (and Jewish bankers were supposedly arch-enemies of the czars).

        After the war, the internationalists have kept Asia as a market re:open door policy, however now that China’s star is rising, they are becoming less tolerant towards those of a yellower color.

    • Carney3

      We have serious problems without being distracted by obviously false crackpottery like asserting that the “Rothschilds have tens of trillions of dollars and own the Federal Reserve”.

  • Guest

    I hardly saw a White Australians when I was a Melbourne like a year ago, same with Sydney, I thought the Majority-Minority had already flipped places over there.

  • SirMe

    Just read the Commonwealth of Nations objectives and you will see why the White Australian Policy was scrapped. The British and their obsession with the Commonwealth started this for the other Anglo-Celtic countries.

    • David Ashton

      The British people were only interested in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and those areas of south and east-central Africa where they had and still have relatives. The British Empire became the British Commonwealth which became the Commonwealth; a transition from English “rule” to Afro-Asian “dominance”, with the Queen being used as a co-operative “head” even of republican additions like Mozambique.

  • cadmium

    ” None consulted its people or explained why the founding stock was suddenly not good enough.”

    That’s an excellent, potent way of putting it. I might ruin some polite conversation with it if you don’t mind.

  • Bobby

    Interesting article. The “open betrayal of labor” that occured in Australia, has been happening, and is continuing to happen in the United States. It used to be a consevative project, to betray labor, but now the left that created the union movement, has abandoned labor also and with a vengeance, as Democrats continue to “elect a new people” with their support of oepn borders and massive legal and illegal immigration.

  • Epiminondas

    My parents were tempted to emigrate to Australia because of the civil rights legislature of the 60s. But they didn’t for one reason or another. They little realized at the time that the disease had been spread “down under” and that it would have been like jumping out of the pan into the fire. Sad stuff.

  • AsianLibertarian

    Australia was originally an Aboriginal country and not White; it was Whites that were the original invaders–the ‘foreigners’ to the country.

    • AsianLibertarian

      …Same with the United States. It was the Native Americans who were the original settlers to the country. Now, if you’re talking about Europe, then I agree, since it’s always been a White dominated continent and the birth place of White civilization. I don’t have a problem with Europeans stopping all non-White immigration to the region, but the U.S. and Australia were never ‘White’ countries to begin with, and were taken as a result of conquest and imperialism. Whites are the ‘invaders’ in those countries…

    • Carney3

      WRONG. Before whites, Australia was not a country. It was a mere landmass, sparsely inhabited by the most primitive and unintelligent people on Earth, for whom the phrase Stone Age is generous. Almost uniquely among humanity, they did not grasp the connection between sexual intercourse and pregnancy. The Tasmanians even forgot how to make fire.