Nationalism And The Moslem Question: Thoughts On Foreign Policy, Immigration And Defence.
W. van Blitterswyk. September 2002
The following text is edited from a comprehensive letter forwarded by its author to a fellow nationalist.
Events are unfolding rapidly right at this moment.
How things politically develop within this nation will be heavily influenced by strategic events. We are not helpless puppets in this process but certainly can influence the course of events. Also, politically we have the capacity to exploit public sentiment as the strategic events unfold. To this we must have the right outlook/policy/philosophy in place. Now is the time to work it out.
The great danger I see at the moment, is a runaway war on behalf of International Capitalism against the Muslims. Christianity will be exploited to make it a religious war, which will have the effect of restraining the mass immigration program of large numbers of other races. This will only be a short-term effect, for as soon as Capitalism has regained control, the whole economic-political-demographic Asianization process - will be back on again.
That is of course if Capitalism wins and we are left with the integrity of the Australian continent intact. Despite the bluff of the West, a full-on war against Islam may well be lost to America (if not Capitalism as a whole). The U.S. would survive in such that it could easily retract to its continent and still be a very powerful nation. It would still possess considerable influence throughout the world, particular in Sth America. For Australia, the U.S. being forcing into such a position, could well leave us with an Invasion, the north of the nation occupied and Australia having to fend totally for ourselves.
From the U.S. perspective Australia is particularly important for its chances of overall success. To be able to project power into Asia (Taiwan or through Pakistan) the U.S. will heavily depend upon our bases in the north. Not necessarily for launching attacks but for providing the massive logistics associated with waging a sustained action well away from U.S. soil. With any conflict in the Middle East or Pacific (China) significant gains exist for Islamic forces drawing in Indonesia. Indonesia running over the bases in Australia’s north and denying U.S. access would be particularly beneficial for the Islamic strategic position. Not only would the U.S. lose a critical supply link but it would also have to reduce its overall striking capacity to support Australia (thus taking heat of the Islamic in the Middle East). Considering that Indonesia is 85-90% Islamic and extremely unstable (in danger of collapsing) a Jihad could be very attractive to the Javanese. Therefore, with current developments this is a very realistic expansion- possibility.
Simply, clinging to the American trouser leg and stirring trouble with the Islamics in the Middle East, is the worst possible action Australia could be taking for its own security. Apart from the obvious the risk of drawing upon ourselves terrorist attacks akin to those against the U.S. there is also the risk of bringing an invasion upon Australia.
In this vein Kim Beazley’s calling for the shaping of our defence forces against terrorism is the worst direction possible the nation’s defences could take. This approach plus the continued pro-Jakarta outlook of the Liberal and Labor governments is totally ignoring the real threat to continental Australia. Such is stirring the trouble afar and totally ignoring the direct threat of invasion to the north. At a time when our defence forces must be shaped for the defence of the Australian continent they will instead be trained for internal security. [This internal security, of course, will quickly be turned against Aussies opposing the direction pushed by the current system.]
Basically, the ANZUS approach is akin to relying on Fortress Singapore prior to the Second World War. ANZUS is rushing us into a conflict on behalf of Capitalism, a war that will be placing the nation at grave risk. We face an invasion from the north when totally unprepared for such. [We should have learned the massive suffering associated with this from the Second World War.] Along with this we will have an exaggerated threat of horrific terrorists attack for our role in supporting the U.S.. Then, we have to consider why. We will in fact be fighting a war for International Capitalism. That is, we will be fighting for Ansett collapses, privatization, longer working hours, lower wages, less job security, and politicians with multi-million dollar superannuation funds.
Moving from the strategic to the political, it is with this realization of Australia’s strategic position that we must form Nationalist policies for the next era.
So what answer does Australian Nationalism have to produce?
First, we are faced with the consequences of the multicultural mess. This sees us with a large Islamic faction at a time of conflict with Islamic nations. All other factors aside, supporting the U.S. in aggression against Islamic nations, exacerbates anger amongst Muslims against the West. Thus, even though radicalism may not exist within the current Australian Islamic community, with worsening events such radicalism will no doubt ferment and spread.
This will be compounded by the radical anti-Islamic sentiment that the Capitalist system will sponsor and support (Judaism will not hesitate to invoke racism when such is to their best interests). The development of a religious conflict, with a Christian versus Muslim attitude will greatly increase the internal threat to Australia. As matters become worse in the Middle East and as the Islamic community within Australia attracts antipathy, they will be more marginalized and hostile to Australian society. Therefore, they will become a greater pool of support for the radical, warring, Islamic elements.
The more radical Nationalist sentiment is to call for the expulsion of all Islamics. Considering the numbers within Australia, this would be a particularly troublesome approach. It would be guaranteed to generate unprecedented radicalism against Australian society. We would be fighting a nasty internal conflict, requiring extremely heavy-handed treatment for success. This would worsen the Islamic attitude throughout the world against Australia and could give impetus to widespread support of aggression against Australia. That is, such an approach compounds the threat of an Indonesian invasion of Australia. Greater weight is added to the Islamic purpose for such action along with the already significant strategic reasons (as previously described). Simply, the heavy-handed treatment of Islamics within Australia could stir up widespread support amongst the world’s Islamic nations for an Indonesian attack.
Considering our lack of military preparation, and the massive deficit in numbers that Australia already faces, this is an unwise approach. We will not be able to fight a nasty internal war, and one in the Middle East, and then one on Aussie soil.
We need to produce policy that stands to swing the odds in Australia’s favour. This means we have to try and clean up the multicultural mess without destabilizing Australian society.
To these ends I believe the best policy for Nationalism to push is a more moderate approach to the Islamic world. That is we do not support or enter into screaming anti-ragheadism (so-to-speak). There will be a natural swelling of anti-Islamic sentiment and nothing much can be done to stop it. In fact, Nationalism can benefit from this process – to a degree. However, if we allow Islam to become the foremost enemy of the Australian people, the Zionists will have shifted anger off onto another entity (back to the Christian – Muslim war scenario). In turn any action the people are moved to take, will be directed to the wrong ends. Consequently we will have once again failed to resolve the problem, once and for all.
The process of demonizing the Islamic world can already be seen in the propaganda response to the attacks on the U.S.. Our goal must be to keep the intent of radical Nationalism focused firmly on the real enemy. That means it is imperative we keep International Capitalism clearly identified as the main enemy of the Australian people – not Islam (that is we refuse to be dragged into a religious war against Islamics – that Christianity issue again).
The way to do such is to launch a strong propaganda campaign against Capitalism – centring on the banks. We do this by highlighting all those aspects of the current economic rationalist system that are immensely unpopular – privatization, deregulation, the G.S.T, investment rip-offs, corporate collapses and loss of workers entitlements, etc. Then we firmly identify the U.S. as the driving force behind International Capitalism.
In doing this we are starting to develop the concept of Islam and Australian Nationalism having a common enemy. This is tricky because we have to deal with the comparative friendship that exists between Australians and Americans. However, there is still a strong aversion to American culture amongst the Aussie people. A recent poll on the Internet highlight about 50% against close ties with the U.S. and 50% who supported such. I consider 50% on side to begin with as a pretty good start. It is my opinion that as the disadvantages of closer ties with the U.S. become clearer, the numbers will swing markedly our way. To these ends we must also direct a portion of Nationalist propaganda towards highlighting the down side to the ANZUS alliance. Also, we need to put to the forefront the other side to the happenings of the Middle East. That is, we do need material which highlights the dark side of the U.S. in world affairs.
One barrier in this whole process is the confusion that exists with some people between Free Enterprise and Capitalism. The Capitalist propaganda machine has done a good job. Another specific portion of Nationalist economic policy/propaganda must be directed towards developing an understanding amongst Australians of the difference between Capitalism and Free Enterprise. Aussies need to recognize that there are no half ways with Capitalism. In a Capitalist system there is no room for concepts of a more equitable distribution of wealth, or fair return for effort. Capitalism is about the demise of small business, the obliteration of working standards, the destruction of social services and community structures. It is about the sacrifice of capable defence forces, lowering of education standards, obliteration of the environment (etc.) -- all for the benefit of increasingly larger and more dominant (monopolistic) multinational corporations. We need to drive home the message that is contained within an Australian New Nation poster: "Capitalism: Aussies Not In The Club".
The most radical Nationalist elements may well call for the ultimate expulsion of all Islamics. However, as previously outlined, this is a short-sighted approach which will particularly damaging. Yet, the point that they are focusing on is itself very right. That is the mess that multiculturalism has created by having produced large communities of disparate peoples (Islamic in this case) within Australian society. This is a mess which must still be rectified, no matter the stance taken on the broader issue of Islam v Capitalism as a threat.
First, obviously, the Nationalist stance must be to put an end to the multicultural nonsense once and for all. This means taking a particularly strong stance on the issue of "boaties". In watching a Four Corners program on the Taliban, one thing really caught my attention was the amount of support for the Taliban amongst Afghan refos in Pakistan. There can be no doubt the same situation will exist with the boatloads coming here. [ASIO has in fact already substantiated there are Taliban supporters within the refo camps.]
The way to stop the flood of illegals is to put in place legislation which prohibits application for refugee status on Australian soil. No matter who or by what means they arrive, once they lob, they are sent back from where they came. Such legislation is perfectly legal; the only opposition within the existing system is that a move of this nature will contravene international treaties. However, no international treaty can override Aussie law. If we decide that a move is in the best interests of the nation, we can make that move regardless of international covenants and like.
Along with such legislation must go a large boost in defence spending which includes doubling the patrol boat fleet and increasing other surveillance capabilities. These defence improvements would fit well with the overall process of improving the continental defence of the nation (to address the previously highlighted risks of invasion).
In fact, looking after ourselves becomes a premium if we are going to defy international treaties and prohibit refugee applications on Australian territory. Such a move will no doubt draw censure from the "International Community". It then follows that United Nations’ support in an Australian time of need would be unlikely. Consequently the concept of looking after ourselves essentially includes developing defence self-reliance. Nationalism must push a defence policy emphasizing the importance of Australia being able to deploy and support military forces independently. A requirement of this is a strong national defence industry.
Not only does this guarantee our best chances against any foe assaulting Australia but it also creates a wider range of diplomatic options. Suddenly, with independence we are not shackled to U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Australia creates the opportunity to take a different diplomatic approach. The question can then be asked of whether we should listen to Osama Bin Laden and not be involved in the Middle East. That way we simply eliminate the threat. Instead of worrying about causing the terrorist war spread to Aussie soil, we can concentrate on the problems that are simmering to our north. Clearly this is what Australia’s best national interests dictate. We should be sponsoring internal unity (cleaning up the multicultural mess) and defending Australia’s borders. Australia’s government must also pursue this nation’s best interest regardless of what the U.S. or any other nation (the International Community) has to say such.
Australian Nationalism must come out strongly aligned with the Will of Australian People.
After having put a stop the flood of refos the next step is to return to a restrictive immigration policy. So, the continued development of multi-cultural insanity has ended. Then, we have to make moves to sort out the communities that are here.
To these ends we still only have to look to our past – the history of Australian Nationalism. That is, we turn to the tried and tested tool of: Assimilate or Leave.
Some Nationalists (more-or-less rightly) balk at the concept of Muslim, Asians, etc. assimilating. But there is a misunderstanding of how the concept works. Anyone coming to Australia will be expected to live by same standards as all other Australians. Religious freedom is guaranteed in the Australian Constitution – and is a foremost element of Australian Nationalism. Thus, that people are Islamic does not automatically weigh against them. However, they must accept that certain aspects of Australian society are held higher than any religion. If, they find this intolerable, that is their belief is to create Australia is an Islamic state (for example), then such people do not belong here. They must leave – and the power exists within the Constitution (Section 51 (26) to create such laws that are necessary to make them do so.
This means a Nationalist government will not tolerate Islamic gangs (or any other ethnic gangs) effecting violence against the Australian people. People found to be involved in activities of this type will simply be made leave. The same applies to drug smuggling, terrorist links, extreme and violent religious outlooks (of any religion). What is more, a Nationalist government will be perfectly within its rights to revise the immigration list since the changes made by the Whitlam government in 1972 (from memory). Anyone who has come to Australia as a consequence of the illegal changes to the Immigration Act will be vulnerable for expulsion. Thus a Nationalist government will be wielding a big stick; anyone wishing to stay will have to be on the very best of behaviour.
Having said this, it is my stern opinion that we must act with a degree of fairness, and always humanely. Besides the matter of principle, there are many reasons why brutality towards Islamics within Australia is unadvisable. The obvious consideration being the previously highlighted reasons of not sponsoring further support for terrorism and Islamic aggression against Australia (invasion). Adding these points must be that such "racism" will be seen by the airy-fairies in Geneva in an unfavourable light, more rapidly excluding us from the broader world (particularly Europe). Also, there are already calls for tighter Anti-racist legislation. Then couple this with the point made earlier about swinging Australian defence forces from terrorism to suppressing the will of the Australian people.
That is why when neo-nutzies run out and draw swastikas on mosques they are playing right into the hands of the enemy. There will be a natural inflammation of this radical and attacking sentiment but we must resist associating or assisting such. Sensible good government dictates that we make every move reasonable to delay Australia’s march into conflict – avoid such totally if at all possible. Along with this strategy of delaying conflict, we must drive forcefully for the immediate expansion of Australia’s defence capability. Any move likely to rush us unprepared into conflict must be scorned. The sad reality of Australia’s past is that over and over the previous and current generations have totally failed in their wisdom. The young generation has been ushered into war after war, ill prepared and with horrendous consequences. Nothing detracts from the fighting record of the younger generations but the leadership of wisdom of the rest is severely lacking. This is a pattern that Nationalism must break.
So, in summary, in light of the prevailing circumstances, this is what any capable Australian Nationalist leadership will do.
This will include:
What I am saying is that what Australia needs now and what Australian Nationalism must do, is answers. Good strong, capable government with real leaders is critical for the survival of Australia.
The important bit is responding to current issues with material that best highlights what the Nationalist alternative will provide Australia.