Hansonism Mk2 Shall Not Pass The Test In The Camden Struggle!
June 2 2008
As the struggle in Camden takes a new turn towards a battle in the Land And Environment Court to keep a so-called "Islamic school" out of the area (the Council has quite rightly voted down the school proposal), the media has located a new "Hanson figure" around whom to 'construct' an opposition.
In this regard we speak of the decent local lady, Mrs. Kate McCulloch, a constant critic of the Islamic school proposal who has helped draw out a mass movement of local opposition. Indeed, the Camden struggle reflects an increasing temperament in many cities and towns against the invasion of peaceable Australian areas by 'refugees' and alien religious and cultural groups, all now assertive parts of the fractious Australian 'diversity'.
Portrayed in the Sydney Morning Herald (May 31) as a new Pauline Hanson (it seems the two have met when Hanson made a few noises last year about Moslem immigration, just as she once floated a line against Asian immigration), Mrs. McCulloch spoke out for the defence of the heritage of Camden, raised the spectre of its important colonial past and the local Australian pride in this important history. All to the good. But how does the game work?
The article was composed by veteran liberal, Damien Murphy. It is in our opinion, not a question of whether the liberal journalist tail wags the newspaper dog, or whether this dog wags his tail; it is all the same creature. Hence, when Mr. Murphy, who led the media charge for African refugee settlement in Tamworth, raises a criticism of the people of Camden for denigrating "diversity", he speaks as an able propagandist for that great medium of open borders / multicultualist propaganda - the Sydney Morning Herald.
Something is being pulled. Some pundits say, as an almost knowing joke, that Pauline Hanson was a creature of the Liberal Party think-tanks. Realising there was a growing community opposition to the program of mass immigration / free trade / multiculturalism, the Liberals certainly allowed Hanson to run. The umbilical chord was never severed and after the One Nation party had exhausted itself and in various ways allowed the Liberals to do some things they wanted to do anyway, they reeled the potential threat back in. Hanson, who was not exactly astute, was a media bubble and once the party was established they coerced it into line in countless ways leading it to fight the fight by rules of what was and what was not, who was and who was not, acceptable to it. Many patriotic people were burned and ultimately demobilized by the disaster that was Hansonism. For example, Hanson who made her name as a critic of Asian immigration, spent years running from what she had said and to avoid the label 'racist' soon placed upon her by the media, quickly embraced multiracial assimilation as her ethnic-cultural policy.
What does Mrs McCulloch advocate? The lady defined herself as someone who voted Liberal federally last time, who may join the Liberal party, who has voted for Fred Nile's high-immigration party in State elections (Nile as a Christian fundamentalist doesn't like Moslems - at least until they convert!) and she urges the assimilation of Moslem migrants into Australian norms and values.
Essentially, this model of opposition to the multicultural pluriverse accedes to its basic vision of immigration drawn from wherever! The only difference is that one side wants assimilation and the other wants multiculturalism. Herein lies the essential identity between Mrs. McCulloch's current thought and Hansonism.
The notion that we can, or we should attempt to assimilate those who do not wish to assimilate, who cannot really be assimilated and who should not be the subject of any such futile effort, is to take a long drink of cultural death. With minor numbers, the assimilation case would seem to possess some sort of logic; unfortunately for its cogency, the numbers are not small; rather, the numbers increase by the day. Further, in the case of the Moslem group, it is impossible to demand its assimilation, if the same demand is not made of other groups whose numbers are truly exploding. No, it is a hopeless quest. Ultimately, Australia's European population is heading for minority status by 2070 or so; ultimately it will disappear off the Continent by 2200, with small trace elements assimilated (sic) by some of the immigrants!
Those who suggest the assimilation of non-European groups are either pushing some sort of agenda (such as the Christian Democrats, or certain Liberals and so forth) or are foolish people - or in the case of the many in the mass movement, have reached a first basic stage of consciousness. It is the latter large number of people, many of whom have fought the Camden struggle so far and who for now ask that immigrants assimilate - to whom the nationalists must appeal. In doing so, we therefore necessarily compete with those players who argue assimilation because they have a 'line', or because they are foolish and who wish to restrict the mass movement to this position.
We nationalists will seek to lead the movement towards the next stage: European-Australian ethnic consciousness, national consciousness - and with that, the necessary espousal of resistance! We are confronted with the same historical task any rational but radical party has confronted. We must take account of the human material in front of us, but without simply confirming its belief-system, we desire to take them forwards. In other words, a struggle will be fought out in Camden amongst the forces of opposition. Which line?
The assimilationist opposition, which shows where most people are at right now, could take on substantive organizational substance. This would limit the sweep of the fight and ensure its defeat. Why? Because the Moslem school is just the start. Its real function is to culture bust Camden. Culture-busting is all about disintegrating what is. Culture busting means smashing up the character of the area, undermining its Australian and European quality. What will follow is the 125,000 homes for South-Western Sydney as has been laid down for the next 20 years, the basic component of the drive to increase Greater Sydney's population to 6,000,000 by 2040. This policy is racist because it is biased absolutely against native-white-Australians and European migrants. It is oriented largely - to Asia.
In other words, the Camden struggle isn't about Moslems at all! If only because they will simply be a part of the explosion of Sydney's numbers!
The Camden movement, whether or not the Islamic school project is defeated or not, must stay mobilized for what is coming. We spoke of Mrs. McCulloch's current thought. We said that was where many were at right now. A minority has already moved beyond Hansonism mark-two.. Certain young people, young families have sensed the danger! They organize themselves. They are becoming nationalist.
Firmly, but clearly, honestly and fearlessly, Australia First will give its view. We will unite with all against the school project, but criticise openly and not from the shadows, any limitation of the struggle.
In the final analysis, Hansonism without Pauline has no prospect for success for the Camden struggle!
State Committee, Australia First Party.