It is interesting to note the mutterings of a few people each Australia Day, giving vent to their ignorance of Australian History when they complain of the date, 26th January, as the day to celebrate nationhood. It is not the date that offends but Australia Day itself. They will not be happy until all of our cultural celebrations are consigned to the ‘black hole’ of ‘white’ memory. Australian history and the building of this Nation since 1788 is something to really celebrate!

     The early settlement was part of a deliberate plan, driven by pseudo economics, as European countries sought to protect and expand their trade routes. It is still happening today with Asian and other Nations. The early settlers brought with them, their political, religious and cultural beliefs and were ordered by the King of the day, George III, to befriend any indigenous people as they settled the new land – this they did! The convict element were also selected for the skills they could contribute to developing the new land … yes, it was a form of conscripted labour but many were far better off than they would have been in the old country. You would not think so reading the socially engineered history taught today.

To THE AUSTRALIAN          The Life in Australia Historic Events Survey, as described by Darren Pennay (‘Bright side of the past leaves a big impression on us’, 24/1), does not itself seem to be very significant or authoritative in cultural terms. How many of the 2000 respondents knew enough about themselves and about the world they have lived in to be able to provide truly wise and insightful answers? It all looks like another example of ‘the blind leading the blind’. Pennay states that the survey shows us ‘who we are as a nation’ (but does not specify what that is) and warbles about our ‘rich, multicultural history’, which, however, looks meagre compared with those of Britain, China and India. Likewise his term ‘our global identity’ remains opaque.

     The survey seems to have totally missed what is the most important event of all in our current history (perhaps because it is slow-moving): the intense struggle between defenders and opponents of traditional Australia, a war operating on many fronts and one very similar to that waged in Russia in the nineteenth century between authority and revolution as described by Turgenev and Dostoyevsky.
  NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     January is here and the invasion versus settlement debate is back making news headlines. The Prime Minister wants to keep Australia Day as it is while the Greens are calling for the date to be changed. We’ve all heard the generic talking points. Team ‘Invasion Day’ says 26 January is offensive to some Australians. Team ‘Australia Day’ says 26 January is a day for all Australians regardless. Yet there is a fundamental point which goes to the heart of this debate that literally no one, to date, seems to have picked up on. Hence, this article.

     Native title can only exist if Australia was settled, not invaded. Why? Because international law recognises all territories acquired through invasion and annexation by force, prior to World War II, as lawful conquests. This ‘Right of Conquest’ doctrine was first conceived by the International Law Commission of the United Nations and later adopted as UN General Assembly Resolution 3314. Provided that all citizens of a lawfully conquered territory are granted equal rights by the local law, international law doesn’t consider the descendants of the conqueror and the conquered as two separate peoples. This in turn invalidates any claims to separate land rights under the same jurisdiction. As one of the 193 member states of the United Nations, Australia is not exempt from this doctrine.

     At present, the Liberal/Left are excited about the prospects of TV agony-aunt Oprah Winfrey running against Trump in the 2020 presidential elections. As one would expect in a media-saturated, dumbed-down culture like America, an opinion poll has shown that 48 percent of the grunters would vote for Oprah, while 38 percent would vote for Trump:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/poll-oprah-tops-trump-likely-153141049.html
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/10/poll-oprah-beats-trump-48-38-with-likely-voters-in-2020-election/

    Here is a good example of white pathology, for according to some media reports, this saint of the TV thinks that old whites, who are racist, have to die out:
https://jezebel.com/oprah-joins-the-long-line-of-people-waiting-for-old-rac-1465485814
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/01/09/oprah-might-run-for-president-we-did-the-opposition-research-for-you/?utm_term=.55bd12f1fd0b

     As detailed here:
https://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-10-22/three-things-investors-dont-know-about-europe
Europe is an economic time bomb, with most of the major players having disturbing debt to GDP ratios. For example, Germany is conventionally cited as having 75 percent as its debt to GDP ratio, but according to Axel Weber, the head of Germany’s Central Bank, Germany has a  real debt to GDP ratio of over 200%.

     Jagadeesh Gokhale of the Cato Institute published a paper in 2009 claiming Germany’s unfunded liabilities are in fact closer to 418%, so one could imagine what it really is today.

     Former Google employer James Damore, was fired from Google over a memo he released which was critical of the company’s diversity initiatives. He has now filed a discrimination lawsuit:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f6p02fijxrd7c6m/20180108%20Damore%20-%20Complaint_fs.pdf?dl=0

    Some of the points covered, if true, show that Google is a really weird place to work, if you are a white male:

     Paul Craig Roberts is a distinguished academic and was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic policy under President Reagan. We has recently asked “Are Whites Being Setup for Genocide?’ and here is, in part, his answer (spoiler alert: yes).

“Every white person needs to read this article — http://www.unz.com/article/the-end-of-white-celebrity/ — to understand how they are being demonized and marginalized to the point of oblivion. By focusing primarily on white heterosexual males, Identity Politics tries to split white women off from white men by the use of the pejorative “misogynist”, but, as the article reports, white women, such as Taylor Swift, are also publicly demonized for their whiteness.

     As reported at:
http://collapse.news/2018-01-09-double-threat-may-wipe-out-the-honey-bee-scientists-warn-pesticides-killing-them-off.html
https://naturalpedia.com/clothianidin-toxicity-side-effects-diseases-and-environmental-impacts.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5195389/Pesticides-food-shortages-killing-honey-bee.html
the honey bee is facing extinction:

“For many years now, scientists have been warning us of the decreasing honey bee population. A new research reveals that honey bees could soon go extinct due to the increased uses of chemical pesticides and the severely low amount of food supplies for these poor creatures. A University of California, San Diego study shows that chemical pesticides, as well as a lack of food for honey bees, are threatening their already low population.
Clothianidin and thiamethoxam are two of the neonicotinoid pesticides that are killing off these vital insects. Researchers found that these chemicals, combined with low nutrition, highly impact the life span of honey bees, and severely increased the number of bee deaths by 50 percent. The effect of both these lethal factors are the same as giving poison to a person suffering from malnutrition – both are lethal individually, but together accelerate mortality. The chemicals as mentioned above affect honey bees by decreasing their hemolymph (bee blood) sugar levels and cause the insect to lose energy.”

To THE AGE          Perhaps not surprisingly, as she represents a rationalist group, Tosca Lloyd appears to be unduly unsympathetic to the interests of religious people and thus unfair to them in considering laws against unjust discrimination (8/1). In some contexts what she sees as ‘discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation’ may be justified defence of the right of religious people to practise their faith without being forced to dishonour their conscience.

     One wonders on what basis, having dispensed with divine authority, Lloyd can claim that there is something called ‘human dignity’, possessed by all, which is to be protected. Another problem is that zealots opposed to ‘discrimination against’ too often forget that ‘discrimination between’ is a good thing, frequently requiring subtlety of approach and vital for the wellbeing of society.
  NJ, Belgrave, Vic

To THE AGE          Leo Gamble asks (7/1) for evidence that a change to a republic would be a ‘profound slipping into decadence’. There is a huge literature available about the decline of the West from Spengler on. Julius Evola’s book ‘Revolt against the Modern World’ is a good example and pertinent to Australia in its insistence on the importance to nations and peoples of sacred tradition and respected monarchs.

     Just look, for one thing, at the poor standard of public dress in our streets today, compared to that of seventy years ago. Or the appalling noise marketed as modern music. Evidences of degeneration are all around us; and the fact that some republics function fairly well does not cancel out the horror. Remember: after Kerensky came the Bolsheviks!
  NJ, Belgrave, Vic

To THE AUSTRALIAN          Is it possible that ‘indigeneity’ should no longer be a category to be considered in the distribution of GST revenue to states and territories (‘GST rewrite for indigenous aid’, 10/1), but that only non-ethnic categories, such as ‘poverty’, should be used? Australians generally are not averse to having some of their taxes used to help those in genuine need, but doubts have persisted ever since the first Whitlam government brought in a new definition of ‘Aboriginality’ that rorting of the system has resulted in the provision of public moneys in various contexts.

     Is it possible that we have reached a stage where ‘Aboriginals’, many of whom are only part-indigenous in ancestry, should no longer be especially favoured over other Australians? Many indigenous Australians in the basic meaning of the word have no Aboriginal blood at all.  I am one such. Nor has anyone living in Australia today himself or herself been living here ‘since the beginning’. Another matter of concern is that ‘disadvantage’ caused by a person’s own unwise behaviour does not necessarily deserve any financial support at all.
  NJ, Belgrave, Vic

     Probably I will be in the minority here, but I am not one to really like technology and a world dominated by machines. Give me the homely self sufficiency of a John Seymour any day:

     In this context I came across a surprising essay by neo-masculinity writer Roosh, arguing that despite all the creature comforts industrialism and scientific progress have given us, it has resulted in more power for the elites:
“The industrial revolution has allowed for two key events:

     A Georgie Soros funded panel has attacked white women, who the Leftoids are now labelling “racist”:
  http://www.shtfplan.com/conspiracy-fact-and-theory/liberals-take-aim-at-white-people-again-as-soros-funded-panel-attacks-the-very-idea-of-white-womanhood_12162017

 “Appearing on the Sirius XM Progress Channel’s Make It Plain, three organizers of the anti-Trump “Women’s March” spoke about the need to confront white womanhood itself while attacking any white person who didn’t vote for anti-gun Democrat Doug Jones in the recent Alabama Senate election.
“More white women voted percentage wise for Roy Moore than did for Donald Trump,” the panel’s host breathlessly claims. “So this is why this is such an urgent conversation, such an urgent panel to have quite frankly.”
As Infowars.com noted, “The panel largely centered around making white women feel guilty for their alleged complicity in upholding white supremacy.”

To THE AUSTRALIAN          Alan Scott (11/1) rightly opposes the tyranny in universities of ‘dominant theories’ used ‘to control people for the benefit of those at the top of the particular professional tree’. At the same time, and very relevantly, Maurice Newman warns (‘We’d better start swimmin’ or we’ll sink like a stone’) that ‘victimhood is a thriving industry’ and that ‘self-identifying minorities are demanding, and receiving, preferential treatment.’

     The most egregious example of this cultural corruption is the continuing refusal to allow in public forums open and free discussion of the Holocaust. Last month John Wear published his essay on ‘The Chemistry of Auschwitz/Birkenau’, examining scientific claims for and against the accepted story, and concluded that the alleged gas chambers ‘could not have been used to exterminate hundreds of thousands of people.’ 
Is this likely to be discussed in the major Australian media? It should be.
  NJ, Belgrave, Vic

To THE AUSTRALIAN          Henry Ergas has provided a well-researched statement (‘Think before it’s Crown and out’, 12/1) as to why Australians may be prudent to retain the monarchy. However, his claim that ‘heredity confers so little political legitimacy’ can be contested. When Prince Charles becomes our next monarch, he will not merely carry on a royal blood line that stretches for over a thousand years, he will bear within himself and embody the history and culture of Britain as well as a profound knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of a British sovereign. That is something which in part ‘comes with the blood’ and is not transferable save to his legitimate successor.

     Tradition (and not merely British tradition) tells us that the affairs of this world are partly shaped by influences from invisible but higher worlds, so that, in metaphysical or mystical terms, the choice of a new monarch is not something that happens ‘just by chance’ but is a conscious and meaningful contribution to the national destiny by higher powers. Royal heredity thus contains deep mystery and an associated authority.
  NJ, Belgrave, Vic

“Pro-Trump protesters stormed a speech being made by Sadiq Khan, shouting pro-Brexit slogans and calling for the London Mayor’s arrest. The disruption led to the temporary suspension of the speech.
Khan had just begun his address at a conference for the Fabian Society, a socialist group, in London when demonstrators in the audience started calling for his arrest. Some of the group held US flags and anti-EU banners as their supporters clapped and heckled the Labour mayor.
The demonstration follows US President Donald Trump’s cancellation of a planned visit to the UK capital next month. Khan, a vocal critic of the  US president, responded to news of the cancellation by saying Trump “had got the message” that Londoners were opposed to his policies.”

  https://www.rt.com/uk/415809-trump-london-sadiq-khan-protest/

     President Trump has been pounded by the liberal/Left for his alleged comments (which he denies making), about not wanting to take migrants from “sh*t hole countries.” It was crude, but this is the real world, and there are numerous accounts of the much worse foul language used by Hillary Clinton, as abuse of staff:
  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441367/hillary-clintons-security-detail-curses-foul-mouth

     As expected this debunking site says “unproven”:
  https://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/secretservice.asp 
but, of course it would be difficult to prove claims made by such agents, anonymously. Nevertheless, MSM agrees with the foul-mouthed Hillary scenario:
  https://nypost.com/2015/10/02/secret-service-agents-hillary-is-a-nightmare-to-work-with/ 
  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/21/hillary-clinton-curses-swear-words-ed-klein

     This is a new authorless section where we will post links to self-explanatory articles, requiring no comment.

http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Antisemitism/Delegitimizing-Israel-soon-to-be-illegal-in-South-Carolina-533515 
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/melbourne-attacker-another-muslim-refugee/news-story/b0beefed69319fd5fa9175d205089d59 
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/how-meny-mentally-ill-japanese-run-down-pedestrians/news-story/cc799ddc3499fc0d8d238fcb4e3283d1 

     Get ready for the nest assault on the West as the UN plans a new global mass movement of migrants to the West, of course, through the UN global compact on migration. Here is the standard justification for this, which we have all heard before:

“This year, governments will negotiate a global compact on migration through the United Nations. This will be the first overarching international agreement of its kind. It will not be a formal treaty. Nor will it place any binding obligations on states. Instead, it is an unprecedented opportunity for leaders to counter the pernicious myths surrounding migrants, and lay out a common vision of how to make migration work for all our nations.
This is an urgent task. We have seen what happens when large-scale migration takes place without effective mechanisms to manage it. The world was shocked by recent video of migrants being sold as slaves.
Grim as these images were, the real scandal is that thousands of migrants suffer the same fate each year, unrecorded. Many more are trapped in demeaning, precarious jobs that border on slavery anyway. There are nearly six million migrants trapped in forced labour today, often in developed economies.

     One topic which I often discussed with Eric Butler was the question of temperance and the prohibition of alcohol. Eric said that the main argument given at the time, was a moral one, that alcohol eroded one’s rationality and free will. Further, the claim that American prohibition was a failure, is not true:
https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/12/bring-back-prohibition/

     As one article which reviewed the evidence put it:
“The conventional view that National Prohibition failed rests upon an historically flimsy base. The successful campaign to enact National Prohibition was the fruit of a century-long temperance campaign, experience of which led prohibitionists to conclude that a nationwide ban on alcohol was the most promising of the many strategies tried thus far. A sharp rise in consumption during the early 20th century seemed to confirm the bankruptcy of alternative alcohol-control programs.