The Social Revolutionary Nature of Australian Nationalism, by Alec Saunders

Alec Saunders
Cobber’s Morning Herald
March 21, 2021

1. What is Australian Socialism

Basic Principles of a Modern Australian National Revolutionary Ideology

‘TRUE PATRIOTISM SHOULD BE RACIAL!” – W.G. Spence, “Australian Socialist”

“Every country has the inalienable right to determine the composition of its own population. Its policies on immigration are its own affair. It is entitled to enforce them without any interference from any other nation. And this applies equally to every nation, large or small, be it in Asia, Africa, Europe, America or Australia. The question of morality or ethics does not arise and cannot be artificially created.”

Arthur Calwell, Labor leader. “All peoples have the right of self-determination … to freely determine their political, social and cultural development”. Article One, Point One Of The United Nations Covenant Of Civil And Political Rights.

Until 1966, the official policy of all Australian governments – whether Conservative or Fabian-Socialist – was fundamentally to preserve the predominantly European racial and cultural character of the Australian Nation. Commonly this was referred to as the “White Australia Policy.”

The purpose of this article is to summarise the roots of this geo-political/bio-cultural imperative, and to familiarise readers with the three Australian patriotic ideologies, which held that the White Australia policy was integral to our economic, military, social, cultural, biological and ecological welfare. These three racial-patriotisms can best be defined as CONSERVATIVE, PROGRESSIVE and RADICAL.

The Conservatives were predominantly represented by sections of the Anglophilic ruling elites (so called ‘sterlings’), and they tended to be more accurately defined as Empire-loyalists rather than Australian-nationalists. This group believed that the British Isles (particularly England) was really home, and that Australia was simply an economic unit at the service of the Empire. They regularly sent their children “home” for an education, and thus were able to retain their British ethnic identity despite being ostensibly third or four generation Australians. A social division had emerged between those Old Australians who were defined as “currency” (having some convict blood) and those who were defined as “sterling” (allegedly with no convict blood) (refer to Robert Hughes, The Fatal Shore). Many of the currency group (some with sterling aspirations) sought to conceal what British imperialism regarded as a stigma on their origins. Today, this blood-stigma is the proud stigmata of all Australian progressive nationalists of Old stock (who serve as the medium for the White Australian psycho-cultural archetype), since the crimes for which their ancestors were transported were the direct result of the class struggle in Britain at the start of the industrial epoch.

Though superficially, the conservative-patriots believed in “White Australia,” their ethno-centrism was Anglo-centric and not Euro-centric. Some even favoured the exclusion of fellow Britons who were of Celtic stock, because they believed that many Celts favoured republicanism and thus were hostile to Anglo-Saxon Imperialism. The imperial-patriots’ obsession with Jacobite, Fenian and central European sympathisers (the immigrants and their descendents from the two German speaking empires who were found throughout the colonies, but in visible numbers in South Australia and Queensland and who were referred to as ‘the sausage eaters’), was paramount during the First World War. This gave rise to a counter-phenomenon in the Australian isolationist movement with figures such as Cardinal Mannix understanding that there was no sense in Australia participating in a fratricidal war with fellow-European peoples, particularly when they were being pressed into the service of finance-capitalism and imperialism. Henry Lawson set the precedent for this in his criticisms of the Boer War which likewise was simply the pursuit of capitalist/imperialist goals (then, at the expense of the white working people of South Africa).

Later, Percy Stephensen and his Australia First Movement recapitulated the anti-war position of those Australian nationalists who did not see the merit of fratricidal wars and thus their insistence on Australian neutrality in the European theatre of the Second World War. Stephensen was not unique in proclaiming this ‘Australia first’ position – his singularity simply lay in his courage to continue promulgating it during wartime. In 1939, when Menzies committed troops to fight in Europe, the Labor Party under Curtin argued that Australia should not be involved in a European war. Once war was actual, Curtin naturally supported the effort, but in his declaration of war against Japan he demonstrated that he understood that the Pacific war and the war in Europe were actually two different wars. John Curtin’s position was heavily influenced by Doc Evatt who promulgated a Pacific Monroe Doctrine for Australia and for which he was castigated by the United States. Curtin understood that once Japan entered the war on the Axis side in pursuit of her Co-Prosperity Sphere in Asia, that Australia and New Zealand were subject to fighting their own Great Patriotic War against the lebensraum ambitions of an ascending Asiatic imperialism.. Japan’s Axis membership suddenly meant that the outcome of the war in Europe had for better or worse, become Australia’s business and not simply an extension of our satellite status as part of the British Empire.

Although the Jacobite Rebellion in Britain was a war of contending pretenders to the Throne, it represented a consortium of Scottish nationalists in tandem with British Unionists throughout the kingdom who sought the restoration of the Stuart Monarchy. When it became apparant that no Stuart, let alone Bonnie Prince Charlie, would ‘ere come back again’, many descendants of Jacobite families became nationalist to the region where they were either born or had emigrated and often embraced French revolutionary ideas such as Jacobinism. Thus necessarily, Jacobite households either Catholic or Protestant were usually held under surveillance by those loyal to the descendants of George and the House of Hanover. Many of those who embraced a nationalist position reflective of the Jacobite diaspora embraced a neutralist position for their new countries and therefore found themselves in conflict with British imperialism.

The philosophic foundation for this neutralist position was articulated in old-Labor nationalist MP, Frank Anstey’s two major works, The Money Power and The Kingdom Of Shylock. An example is the following Anstey reference:

“Men may die but money makes no sacrifice. It looks upon bloody war as a rich gold mine yielding fat dividends for ever and ever without end. Human blood suckers, who risk neither life nor limb nor penny, wax fat upon Armageddon.” This Australia first position was also replicated by recent Australian nationalists during the Cold War and after – and was simply an expression of what has historically been Old Labor nationalism. A well-known historical example was Arthur Calwell addressing an anti Vietnam War / anti conscription rally in Sydney (where an attempt to assassinate him occurred); Calwell also had no problems in reconciling his ethically-traditionalist Christian (Catholic) socialism with the necessity for a secular white nationalist Australian state. His philosophical successors reappeared as National Resistance – and its descendants. All have been vindicated by history as being the correct positions.

The existence of contemporary Welsh, Irish and Scottish Nationalist movements in the British Isles today, is a sufficient indication that the conservatives’ fear for the loss of Anglo-Saxon hegemony was well-founded, simply because it was an inevitable historical process. The conservatives, as always, represented the past and were hostile to the future. The devolution of power from Westminster to the parliaments of the culturally Celtic countries of Britain is an acknowledgement on the part of Westminster that the United Kingdom can no longer operate as a centralised unitary state.

The conservatives were completely attached to British and international capitalist interests, and so they opposed all possibility of Australia developing her own economic and military capability, because this could lead to economic and political independence. They desired that Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Southern Africa should remain purely primary producers, and that England should be the “WORK-SHOP” of the Empire.

This group was hostile to social reforms of any kind, and the Idea of “socialism” was regarded as the doctrine of the “RABBLE.” Thus, by perpetuating the class antagonisms of old Britain, they were inimical to the development of a sense of national cohesiveness and solidarity between all Australians of European descent. Though they did not desire large-scale “free immigration” of coloureds or whites, as this could threaten the ethnic balance and ultimately mean a Republic, they often favoured the importation of indentured and coloured labour (Chinese, Kanakas, etc.) on a contract basis, providing that they would be compelled to return home once their economic utility was outlived. In this regard, it becomes self-evident that the conservatives were no better than the cosmopolitan capitalists who felt no solidarity with the newly evolving White Australian people.

Their willingness to subvert the interests of their own kin so as to be able to exploit cheap slave and alien labour, is an indication that these Imperial-patriots did not feel any biological or spiritual affinity with the less economically advantaged white settlers, and thus the ‘Australianity’ of the conservatives can easily be called into question. In recent times, Sir Robert Menzies can be identified with the Imperial-Patriotic tradition. Many former conservative “Immigration Restriction” lobbies have had his solidarity and patronage. By the late 1970’s this variation of racial-patriotism was an anachronism, and thus was only espoused by those Union Jack-waving geriatrics who continued to believe that “Salvation shall descend from the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (renamed Windsor when it became an embarrassing political liability to have a sausage-eater-pedigree).” A highly unlikely scenario, considering the racial and political chaos in which Britain finds herself, and which the British royal family, who are avowed multi-racialists, condones.

The proposal on the part of some Australian imperial-patriots for a trans-oceanic imperial federation whose governing capital would be London, in which all British subjects would have equal voting rights in a borderless English-speaking world, was unequivocally rejected by the Australian Workers’ Union in its resolution adopted on January 27 1917 as follows:

Mr. Last moved that, “in view of the possibility of Australia being dragged into a scheme of Imperial Federation, which would abrogate our rights and privileges under responsible government, and seriously undermine that paladium of our liberties – the Commonwealth Constitution – this convention of the Australian Workers’ Union places on record its stoutest opposition to this Dominion of the Empire being governed by the plutocrats of England which the proposed scheme would involve.”

Mr. Last said that any scheme of Imperial Federation which Australia might be dragged into at present was liable to assail seriously the autonomy at present enjoyed here, and delegates should realise what the danger was. The franchise for the British parliament was somewhat analogous to that of shire councils in the Commonwealth, but even if adult suffrage were in existence Australia, on a population basis, would be outnumbered by delegates from the other British dominions. Australia would, for instance, be hopelessly vetoed when the teeming millions of India had to be taken into account. A scheme of Imperial Federation under existing circumstances would be goodbye forever to our system of responsible government, and an attack on the principles of a White Australia, which they all held dear. Mr. Holloway seconded the resolution which was carried.

Frank Anstey’s view of plutocracy was almost identical to that of Last as evidenced by:

“The ‘Money Power’ is something more than Capitalism. It is its product, yet its master. ‘Capitalism’, in its control of the great agencies of production, is observable and understandable. The other lurks in vaults and banking chambers masquerading its operations in language that mystifies or dazzles … modern Capitalism throws ever increasing power into the hands of men who operate the monetary machine. These men constitute ‘The Financial Oligarchy’.

This anglophone world-imperial federation, against which the old-Labor nationalists railed, was the prototypal model of the New World Order of the present, the only difference being that the plutocrats’ parliament, the London Stock Exchange, is now second fiddle to the New York Stock Exchange – but the concept and the concert remains the same. So is the bulk of its ideological orchestra who are all products of the Whig/liberal laissez-faire world view, the typical expression being the economics of Milton Freidmann, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Today, Bush, Blair, Keating and Howard were and are all products of this school of economics.

Australian Nationalism does not derive its ideological origins from the Imperial-patriotic tradition but rather from the early ideas and value-system of our nativist tribal-socialist republican movement. The racial-socialist “Australian-nationalists” in the last century and in contemporary times may be defined in two categories; these are, Progressives and Radicals. Both the progressives and the radicals were associated with the formation of the early trade union movement and the Australian Labour Party. The current A.L.P. has betrayed the racial-nationalistic principles upon which it was founded and today it is only an instrument of cosmopolitan capitalism.

Both the progressives and the radicals were hostile to capitalism as they favoured the development of a homogenous European nation in the Southern Hemisphere. This nation-state would be a completely autonomous Social-Republic and run on autarchic lines. The following two points from the 1908 manifesto of the Australian Labour Party will illustrate some of the objectives of the Australian social-nationalistic movement.

“The cultivation of an Australian sentiment based on the maintenance of racial purity and the development in Australia of an enlightened self-reliant community.”

“The securing of the full results of their industry to all producers by the collective ownership of monopolies and the extension of the industrial and economic functions of the state and the municipality.”

Both the progressives and the radical-nationalists were tribal-socialists and not proletarian-socialists. The Marxist notion of a state transcending organic realities, such as race and nationality, so as to create solidarity of all urban industrial workers at the expense of one’s own spiritual and biological kindred, was regarded as a perverse absurdity by most early Australian-socialists. Thus it is self-evident that “AUSTRALIAN-SOCIALISM”, as an ideology, was hardly Marxist, and philosophically opposed to the cosmopolitan materialism of the Marxist and liberal conception of life. It is only in recent times that Marxist/liberal internationalism has infiltrated the Australian Labour movement, and as an ideology it only has infected its trendy cosmopolitan leadership and not the rank and file. The basis of our contemporary multiracial / multicultural society lay in the influence that Tom Mann who argued for a cosmopolitanism to be adopted by the Victorian Socialist Party and the whole labour movement – finally being implemented by the Whitlam new-Labor government Mann vied with Frank Anstey for intellectual influence over John Curtin, but ultimately Anstey’s position prevailed, with its unremitting commitment to a White Australia Policy. This was endorsed by the ordinary Australian workers (ie the producers of all types, reconciled in an organic national community, representing more than the urban industrial workers of the so-called proletariat and desiring the state of the whole people) who continue/d to remain adamantly racial-nationalistic despite their betrayal by the Labour leadership.

This type of socialism was neither Marxist, nor fascist, nor liberal, nor libertarian – although it shared characteristics with all of them. It is more properly defined as producerism..Since the Whitlam government endorsed the Lima Declaration, we have seen a general transfer of Australian capital to Third World countries,;l eading to the undermining of Australian manufacturing. The Liberal / National coalition governments continued this trend, abandoning their own version of producerism, known as ‘Black Jack McEwenism’ – and ultimately they adopted laissez-faire liberal neo-conservatism. This was then to be absorbed into the Hawke-Keating Labor deregulating governments. The contemporary KRuddite (Gillard) Labor Party, as evidenced by the address of Lindsay Tanner (Labor Minister for Finance and Deregulation) to the Melbourne Institute in 2008, is totally opposed to producerism ( see:”The Battle Against Producerism”). In Australia and New Zealand in the nineteenth century, producerism was defined as ‘socialism without doctrines’ by our respective labour movements.

Lindsay Tanner, who left parliament because of a lack of confidence in the coalition of cripples that constitutes the current Labor/Greens/Country-independent alliance now led by the former Trotskyoid, Julia Gillard, is a sad comment on the state of the nation in 2010. The coalition of cretins (in the dictionary sense of a colection of pathological liars) led by an Abbott in budgie smugglers, equally does not have the support of the Australian nation as the electoral result on August 21 2010 indicated.

As a consequence of the racial-socialist (that is, macro-tribal producerist) nature of early and contemporary Australian Nationalism, some Marxist academics such as Humphrey McQueen (refer to his well-known book, The New Britannia) have chosen to describe early Australian Nationalism as a proto-fascism, and view contemporary nationalism as full-fledged fascism. McQueen’s view is propagandistic, for the following reason: –

The early and contemporary Australian Nationalist movements were/are in principle and where ever politically possible anti-imperialist and universally pan-nationalist, and then, more specifically, pan-Europid racial-solidarists (i.e. they believe in the sovereignty of all peoples, especially white nations, regardless whether in the European, American, African, Oceanic, Asian or Australian regions), whilst the nazi-fascist movements were ethnic and national chauvinists, similar to the British and Zionist Imperialists. Rather than a pan-Europid sentiment, the nazi and fascist movements desired to obtain territorial gains at the expense of other white nations. Those who would have forfeited not only their liberty but also their territory, had an Axis victory occurred, would have included the white peoples of Australia, New Zealand and the U.S.S.R. The Nazi objective of “LEBENSRAUM” was an imperialistic project to dispossess the white peoples of Eastern Europe, whilst the proposed “New Asian Co-prosperity Sphere” would have meant the absorption of Australia and New Zealand into the Japanese Empire. For this reason Australian Nationalism has never been unconditionally sympathetic either to Nazism or fascism, but rather it is a movement of national-liberation, which respects the sovereign right of all peoples to racial, cultural and political independence. This pan-nationalism / co-nationalism was very evident in the perspective of John Curtin and which was mistakenly interpreted as contemporary or marxist / liberal internationalism – but it actually had its origins in the thinking of the early Scottish nationalist, Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun (1653-1716) (Refer to the address of Professor Marilyn Lake, “John Curtin: Internationalist”, available on the Internet; as well as, Section 3 of Nietzsche And Ethical Socialism For A New Millennium on this Site – and also refer to Part Four of this pamphlet, ‘William Lane And The Metaphysical And Metapolotical Foundations Of The National And Social Revolutions’.

In fact, Hitler said in his 1945 Testament:

“The descendents of the convicts in Australia should inspire in us nothing but a feeling of supreme indifference. If their vitality is not strong enough to enable them to increase at a rate proportionate to the size of the territories they occupy, that is their own look-out, and it is no use their appealing to us for help. For my own part, I have no objection at all to seeing the surplus populations of prolific Asia being drawn, as to a magnet, to their empty spaces. Let them all work out their own salvation! And – let me repeat – it is nothing to do with us.”

The spurious definition of fascism as a national-socialism, and thus related to Australian Nationalism which was, and is, socialist, is also a tendentious assumption. All the fascist movements which often claimed to be radical or socialistic were in fact seldom genuine social-revolutionary movements, but through their compromises often served as the militant arms of the old European order. The nazi-fascist movements persecuted and liquidated more genuine European radical nationalists (who were opposed to fascism’s pro-capitalist and imperialist position and challenged from within their movements and states) than they did their other opponents, such as the communists (whom they did not regard as a credible threat to their regimes.) Stalinism, Maoism, Sukarnoism, Titoism, Castroism, ‘goulash communism’, Black African socialism, Islamic Radicalism (ie.nominally Moslem, but progressive ideologies related to Nasserism and not to be confused with militant Islamic fundamentalism of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda types, which is reactionary), were/are all examples of ideologies which had/have synthesised a tribal-socialism or tribal-communism with an authoritarian and ethically traditionalist patriotism opposed to those dynamics of decadence fostered by liberalism.

These ideologies and states have not been generally defined as fascist by virtue of their nationally-specific socialism, and thus Australian Radical and Progressive nationalism are also exempt from this alien definition. Many of the previously cited states have mistakenly been defined as Marxist. They were/are semantically of the sort. However, since the failure of the Bolshevik revolution to realise the Marxist-Leninist cosmopolitan utopia, many states, which began as Marxist (in one of its versions), have been compelled by organic necessity (i.e. bio-cultural and geo-political realities) to gradually evolve into Radical-nationalistic societies. Many were, and some still are (eg. China and Cuba) in this process of evolution, and thus continue to cling to some Marxist rhetoric and ideas.

The implosion of many so-called Marxist countries (including the USSR), was the direct consequence of their dialectical contradiction between forces supporting necessary change and reactionary forces determined to maintain the ideological status quo, despite the obvious failures of official ideology. The capture of many of these states by the forces of plutocracy was a high-jacking and distortion of their natural evolutionary processes, achieved with significant CIA collaboration. The maintenance of Boris Yeltsin, plutocracy’s court-jester, in power in the Russian Federation, is now commonly accepted as the contrivance of American hireling spindoctors (as admitted in Time magazine and television ie. common knowledge), in tandem with their CIA controllers.

One nation-state, which had totally philosophically broken with Marxist ideology (with its dictatorship of the proletariat, totalitarian state, command economy etc) whilst it maintained necessary cordial political relations with some so-called Marxist states, had been Colonel Gaddafi’s Libya. Colonel Gaddafi became the inspiration and the patron of Third Position political parties throughout the West and the Third World. Gaddafi was an acolyte of Nasser, and therefore a pan-Arab ethno-nationalist and also an authoritarian-socialist. Whilst being ‘authoritarian’, in so far as he recognised that without the state to regulate public/private enterprise and to protect the resources of his people from the banditism of global capitalism, he was never a totalitarian – as evidenced by the direct-democracy component present in the system of people’s congresses and the armed people. Both Hitler and Stalin, two totalitarians, were always afraid of the armed people. Switzerland, a historically neutral country, also is a nation in arms which practises elements of direct democracy. Gaddafi’s world-view makes the position clear as to the nature of all progressive movements advocating national-liberation:

“The nation is the natural unit for socialistic thinking.”


The murder of Gaddafi in late 2011 will have severe repercussions. The so-called Arab Spring, which is overturning secular states which have enjoyed good relations with the West, will only exacerbate the existing ‘Clash Of Civilisations’, precipitating the conflageration that the globalists desire as a prelude to a Third World War, out of which their New World Order will be finally created. The majority of youthful partisans in this so-called Arab Spring were/are consciously/unconsciously tools and fools of the globalists such as George Soros, reeling from Western plutocracy’s winter of financial discontent : see: New Dawn Magazine, Special Issue, No. 16, Winter 2011, GPO Box 3126 Melbourne 3001, Australia; particularly recommended, are the articles by that prodigious author Dr. K.R. Bolton as well as items by Stephen Lendman.

Another feature of nazi-fascist ideology was anti-Semitism; or, more precisely, opposition to a “monolithic International Jewish conspiracy” (where secular, religious, Zionist, capitalist, and Marxist Jewry, had no genuine domestic conflict), a patent absurdity as understood by savvy politicians amongst whom were Winston Churchill and Stalin. (For a comprehensive appreciation of Hitler’s Judaeo-mania, refer to Bolshevism From Moses To Lenin, a record of his dialogue with the poet Dietrich Eckart – to whom Mein Kampf was dedicated. (An example of this fantasy was Hitler’s interpretation of the defeat of the ancient Saxon chieftain Widukind by Charlemagne, with the mass slaughter at Verden an der Aller in 772, of 4,500 pagan Saxons who refused conversion to Christianity. Hitler asserted their defeat was a result of Charlemagne’s subjection to Jewish domination in the form of secretly-Jewish ‘Catholic’ priests and Jewish advisers who were merchants from Marsailles.) This in part contributed to the unnecessary polarisation of persons of Jewish descent who transcended their normal ideological/theological differences and mobilised themselves into an anti-Axis war effort – thereby fulfilling Hitler’s fantasy. It precipitated his Wagnerian Goterdammerung. This centrality of anti-semitism became the case when fascism moved progressively under the ideological hegemony of Nazi Germany after 1934 – and therefore incrementally under the indirect personal influence of the ‘mind’ which produced the following quote:

“Wherever I went I began to see Jews, and the more I saw them, the more sharply they became distinguished in my eyes from the rest of Humanity. Was there any filth or profligacy, particularly in cultural life, without at least one Jew involved in it? If you cut even cautiously into such an abcess, you found, like a maggot in a rotting body, often dazzled by the sudden light – a Jew!” Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf.

Neither the early nor modern Australian Nationalist movements are opposed to the presence in Australia of Jews, either as an assimilable ethnic group (ie. those of Caucasian origin) or as a religion. If we are opposed to Zionist Imperialism, it is because we have consistently opposed imperialism of all types, whether it be Axis, American, Chinese, Japanese, West European or Soviet etc. Therefore our opposition to the policies of states, globalising movements and imperialistic institutions (such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and others which have mortgaged whole peoples in which gentiles figure in as great a proportion as Jews), should not be construed as hostility to any ethnic or religious group. The neo-con Paul Wolfowitz, one of the grand architects of the war on Iraq, nepotist extraordinaire in respect of his paramour, is an example of the patrons of world good-will who operate through the instrument of the World Bank.

Many Jews have in the past been Australian patriots and staunch advocates of the White Australia Policy as were General Monash and Isaac Isaacs. Indeed, both were opposed to Zionism and favoured Jewish assimilation into the Australian body-politic; so also did Jules Francois Archibald, founder and editor of The Bulletin magazine, who freely acknowledged his part-French-Jewish descent, but who was, without contention, a patron of Australian nationalism. He also founded and funded the Archibald art prize and the Archibald Fountain in Sydney’s Hyde Park. Although raised as a nominal Roman Catholic he married the nominally-Jewish Rosa Frankenstein in a Presbyterian Church, demonstrating his ‘liberal’ religiosity. This eclectic/ecumenical (but ethically traditionalist) approach to religion is characteristic of Australianist spirituality which differentiates Australians from the sectarian zealotry of both the Old World and the Americas. William Lane articulated the position of Australian nationalism in regard to all religions in his ‘Labour’s Religion’ (included as section 6 of this reading).

The following quotation from the Radical-nationalist Bulletin magazine, published on 2nd July 1887, defines most aptly the objectives of Australian nationalism. The contemporary radical and progressive nationalist movements reaffirm the sentiments therein expressed. They did not divide Europeans from each other on spurious criteria.

“By the term “AUSTRALIAN” we mean not just those who were merely born in Australia. All white men who come to these shores with a clean record and who leave behind the memory of the class distinctions and religious differences of the Old World, all men who place the happiness of their adopted land before imperialism, are Australian”.

It should be remembered that prior to Donald Horne’s assumption of the editorship of The Bulletin magazine, its’ masthead proudly proclaimed – ‘Australia For The White Man’. Horne was responsible for its removal. It displeased the newly emergent liberal intelligentsia which today, are defined as the chattering-classes. Horne and this ilk of trendy renegades, who either wittingly or through delusion eroded the nation’s patrimony, will be consigned to the rubbish-heap of history by a re-awakened Australia aroused by the resurrected progressive movement of national redemption. We must neither forgive nor forget that it was after 1972 that the trendy new Labor criminals, Gough Whitlam and Al Grassby, publicly acknowledged what had hitherto been surreptitious policy initiated by the Liberal government of Harold Holt, to end ‘White Australia’. Whitlam and Grassby proclaimed “the White Australia Policy is dead, give me a shovel and I’ll bury it” – and then systematically they and their successors, both Labor and Liberal proceeded to bury alive the White Australian nation, through mass coloured immigration. But the ghost of White Australia continues to haunt “this tired brown land” and will not be put to rest until her children, “the dispossessed majority”, have resumed their country from “the future eaters” – and are masters of their own destiny.

Thus, the indigenous or nativist quality of Australian nationalism is readily apparent, for the above stated reasons, that neither early nor contemporary, racial-socialistic Australian Nationalism was/is in any way consciously inspired by the ideologies of the nazi-fascist era in Europe. Fascism, as an ideology, was dissipated in the ashes of the Third Reich, because it became inimical to the geo-political and socio-biological imperatives of the European continent. (To obtain an elucidation of these ‘imperatives’, the reader should refer to the material on Jean Thiriart on this site.) The Old World petty-state chauvinism of the 19th century, which influenced European fascism, have no place either in our New World, or in the new millennium.. We have never been the last of yesteryear, but always the first of tomorrow! Australian Radical-nationalism simply both preceded and succeeded the fascist era, ie. 1922 – 1945. (Mussolini declared 1922 to be Year One of the Fascist Era.) It should also be remembered that the more intelligent fascists like the pan-European Sir Oswald Mosley formerly the leader of the British Union of Fascists – repudiated the distorting totalitarian character of fascism which was instrumental in generating the Second World War; “fascism is a corpse regardless of how cleverly it is embalmed”, he concluded. Our own P.R. Stephensen said of fascism that it was “the schoolboy bully armed”. Indeed, he went on to say in his The Foundations Of Culture In Australia (1936):

“Visions of race-grandeur become dangerous only when they imply the extermination or subjugation of other races: our Ideal of a White Australia implies no such murderous doctrine. We can be ‘expanding and swift henceforth’, not at the expense of other peoples, but by our own virtue and under our own Australian initiative and dynamic; and in our own land.” The early progressive-nationalistic vision of a new Australian Nation varied between two parameters. There were those who desired an independent, egalitarian social-democratic republic and those who favoured the formation of a moderately authoritarian, meritocratic-populist, state-socialist republic. Within the progressive-nationalist classification can be placed prominent personalities such as J.T. Lang, Billy Hughes, W.G. Spence, Arthur Calwell, etc. (the list is endless). The progressives favoured a gradual evolution towards their goal, which they believed ultimately would arrive at a racial-nationalistic tribal-collectivist society – but, in their opinion, this would require time and patience.

Consider Billy Hughes who began his career as a progressive nationalist in the old Labour tradition. He later fused with the imperial-patriots to form the Nationalist Party and then advocated an Australia First position within the context of British imperialism as evidenced by his defence of the White Australia Policy at Versailles, which in fact contested Westminster designs that sought to placate their Pacific and maritime ally, Japan. Hughes’s form of Australia First imperial patriotism as opposed to the secessionist nationalism of the various republican movements was to become the predominant ideological direction of many great Australians including Ben Chifley and later Labor Party nationalism generally. Sir Robert Menzies’s imperial patriotism was devoid of an Australia First component and verged on Women’s Weekly anglophilic monarchic sycophancy. His cultural cringe contributed strongly to the retardation of an uniquely Australian white anglophone cultural identity.

The radical-nationalists (a historic nomenclature employed originally by the revolutionary wing of the racial-nationalist Labour movement of 19th and early 20th centuries) derived their name from the French revolutionary Jacobins, and believed that a militant approach should be utilised to escalate this inevitable process. The radical-nationalists were the principal precipitators of the violent confrontations which resulted in the expulsion of coloured labour, and which ensured progressive social-reforms (e.g. Lambing Flat, shearers’ strikes in Queensland) as well as the “WHITE AUSTRALIA POLICY.”

Like the progressives, the radicals too could/can be divided into two categories. The majority of radicals are slightly more state-socialist in their orientation than the progressives, but simply militant in their methodology. Under this classification were the radical Australian artists such as Henry Lawson, Banjo Paterson, Bernard O’Dowd and Norman Lindsey. The extreme socialists which were to be considered “left” of the Lawson-radicals, were the “tribal-communists”, such as William Lane.

The Lane-radicals were inspired by the Cromwellian revolutionary ferment, amongst which was a rejection of Western civilisation in favour of a return to the Germanic tribal-communism of the early Anglo-Saxon pagan-pantheistic tribes. They were also ideologically motivated by some French revolutionaries who desired a return to the Gallic pagan-pantheistic tribal-communism of early Celtic society. (Leon Poliakov’s The Aryan Myth, discusses these British and French cases.) Needless to say, their conception of communism had/has nothing in common with Marxist cosmopolitan materialism. For a more comprehensive anthropological interpretation of this tribal communism, which the early white Indo-European speaking peoples practised, refer to Vere Gordon Childe’s The Aryans. Childe was a universally accepted academic of exceptional proportion and also a socialist in the old labour tradition which may have influenced his anthropoliogical research .The outcomes of his research most certainly influenced the labour movements throughout the European world and not simply Australia. To the chagrin of contemporary Marxoids, and those from the 1930’s to the 1950’s, Childe never conformed to their principal locomotive of history ie. class struggle. He did not proclaim the inevitable triumph of the proletariat. In fact, his pricipal concerns were with how cultures are able to assimilate economic dynamics – such as technology – and their cultural necessity to have philological equipment capable of its comprehension and transmission.

The following material in this collection (which is reproduced from other nationalist material such as the tabloid, “AUDACITY”) on two prominent Australian-Socialists, Henry Lawson and William Lane, will provide an indication of the social-revolutionary vision of Australian nationalism.

This position was restated by a number of radical-nationalist groups in the 1970’s. They were inspired by the old Labour tradition. This began with the student-activist National Resistance, whose principal founder, E.F. Azzopardi, was directly commissioned by his mentor Jack Lang. He was admonished to re-found a cadre inspired by The Bulletin, The Century and other Australia First traditions, who would, in a Janus-like fashion, serve as the bridge between the spiritual founding fathers of the Australanist Idea and the imminent movement of national renewal. The radical Australianist tabloid, Audacity, first published in 1977 and re-established in 2007 by cadres associated with the original Audacity, was to be the instrument (and is again) that Lang envisaged. Although racially ambivalent, a zero population position was later advocated by the politically significant Australians Against Further Immigration party after 1988. It too, showed an interest in this tradition. These ‘deep-green’ ecologically-centred patriotic groups were often denounced by liberals and marxists as well as cosmopolitan Christians (both of the liberal-internationalist and right-to-life conservative varieties) for being “eco-fascists” because they refused to accept that migration was a solution to the Third World population/food crisis. It should be remembered that Arthur Calwell said that the future solution to this crisis is not to be found in emigration but in a variety of domestic answers supported by the affluent countries.

The ‘new Labor’ criminals who in alliance with other anthropo-chauvinist ‘world-consuming aedopists’ actualised the doctrine of an economic/cultural/racial integration into Asia – “the Asian destiny” – saturated our labour pool, universities and professional classes with unassimilable aliens. Simultaneously, they often purported to be spiritually inspired by the labour tradition by making references to Jack Lang (like Keating did); they perpetrated the Orwellian swindle whereby day becomes night and night becomes day, and can only be judged by the following proclamation of Lang himself.


William Lane and the Generic Pan-Nationalist Consensus Against a Uni-Polar Plutocratic World

“See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist – it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn’t built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super-exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist – just because it’s anti-human. And race is in fact a human characteristic – there’s no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all the junk that’s produced – that’s their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance.”

Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky, pp. 88-89, The New York Press, 2002.

“Capitalism has neither colour nor country.”

William Lane

“The basis of all slavery and all slavish thought is necessarily the monopoly of the means of the working, that is of living. If the state monopolised them, not the state ruled by the properties classes, but the state ruled by the whole people, to work would become every man’s right. Nineteen out of twenty laws would be useless (i.e. unnecessary.)”

William Lane – The Working Man’s Paradise, Page 119

“Surely we are all tainted and corrupted, even the best of us, by the scrofulous cowardice, the fearsome selfishness, of a decaying civilisation! Surely we are only fit to be less than human, to be slave to conditions that we ourselves might govern if we would, to be criminal accomplices in the sins of social castes, to be sad victims of inhuman laws or still sadder defenders of inhumanity! Oh, for the days when our race was young, when its women slew themselves rather than be shamed and when its men, trampling a rotten empire down, feared neither God nor man and held each other brother and hated, each one, the tyrant as the common foe of all! Better the days when from the forests and the steppes our forefathers, burst half-naked and free, communists and conquerors, a fierce avalanche of daring men and lusty women who beat and battered Rome down like Odin’s hammer that they were! Alas, for the heathen virtues and the wild pagan fury for freedom and for the passion and purity that Frega taught the daughters of the barbarian! And alas, for the sword that swung unscabbarded by each man’s side and for the knee that never bent to any, and for the fearless eyes that watched unblenched, while the gods lamed each other with their lightnings in the thunder-shaken storm! Gone forever seemed the days when the land was for all, and the cattle and the fruits of the field, and when unruled by kings, untrammelled by priests, untyrannised by the pretence of law, our fathers drank in from Nature’s breast the strength and vigour that gave it even to this little babe to fight its hopeless fight for life so bravely and so long. Odin was dead whose sons dared go to hell with their own people and Frega was no more whose magic filled the molten fire and veins of all true lovers and nerved with desperate courage the hand of her who guarded the purity of her body and the happiness of her child. The White Christ had come when wealth and riches and conquests had heaped wrongs on the head of the wrongers; the cross had triumphed over the hammer when the fierce freedom of the North had worn itself out in selfish foray; the shaven-pated priests had come to teach patience as God-given when a robber-caste grew up to whom it seemed wise to uproot the old ideas from the mind of the people whose spent courage it had robbed. Alas for the days when it was not righteous to submit to wrong nor wicked to strike tyranny to the ground when one met it, no matter where! Alas for the men of the Past and the women, their faith and their courage and their virtue and their gods, the hearts large to feel and the brains prompt to think and the arms strong to do!”

William Lane, The Working Man’s Paradise, Pages 130-131. (It was first published in 1892, under the nom de plume “John Miller” and was republished in 1980 by Sydney University Press.)

Lane’s anti-Romanism should not be construed as opposition to the Indo-European principles upon which the Greco-Roman Golden Age was based. He, like Nietzsche, Hegel, Blake, Emerson, Thoreau, etc., admired Greco-Roman values when they respected the noble heroic sentiments of our common Indo-European ancestors, as a complete reading of Lane’s writings indicates. What he objected to was the Greco-Roman period of decadence and decline, for which Christianity became a necessary panacea.

Lane adhered in part to the Indo-European pagan-pantheistic world-view (whilst also generally adhering to a broad mysticism that included a Christian ethic in a type of transcending synthesis which anticipated the contemporary New Age movement and what Aldous Huxley defined as the “perennial philosophy”), which maintains that a cyclical process determines the life of all cultures. In this regard, Lane was no different from Hegel or Nietzsche or Spengler, all of whom believed that barbaric intrusions were necessary as a means to destroy that which is putrefying and to install in its place a new life-affirmative culture. Thus all of them welcomed the barbarian invasions as a necessary antidote to the living death of the Roman necropolis. In holding this outlook, Lane belonged to the same Radical school of Australian Nationalists to which Lawson, Lindsey, O’Dowd, etc. belonged. The only point of difference between he and they was that Lane was a communist while they were socialists.

Lane, like all the early “Australian-Socialists”, was a racial-nationalist as well as a pan-Europid racial-solidarist. He was like his Australianist fellows and viewed Australia as a new realm where the Indo-European pagan-pantheistic values would express themselves as an active reverence for nature as felt by our ancestors when they were living in harmony with the ecosystem and this would institute a new culture and, ultimately, a new civilisation whereby a new people, formed from the most vigorous and heroic stocks from old Europe, would one day lead Europid man to greatness, just as their Indo-European forefathers had done before the dark age of decadence. Nowadays this perspective may be defined as the ‘biocentric world view’ of our deep-ecology movement, a force which has been propagandistically disparaged by Gaia’s despoilers – as ecofascism. (For a contemporary valuation of the relevance of our Indo-European folkloric reverence for nature and its contemporary absolute necessity of respect, refer to: Stein Jarving, “Volvewitches And Valkyrjer: Magic And Paganism In Prehistoric Scandinavia.”)

Lane was anti-western; he perceived that the Western liberal-cosmopolitan capitalistic civilisation was hostile to life and inimical to the interests of Europid Man. In fact, he viewed the West in the same light as the decadent Roman Empire, and he hoped that it would be overthrown by a new Europid barbarian invasion, by a white people who still valued its Indo-European traditions. In this regard, Lane’s ideology was very similar to the anti-Nazi North German Radical-nationalists of the early 1920’s centred around ideologues such as Arthur Moeller van den Bruck (who was also one of the German-language translators of the works of Dostoyevsky) and Ernst Niekisch. Moeller van den Bruck and Niekisch rejected that Germany was spiritually a Western nation, and they looked towards Russia for a new Indo-European renaissance. They believed that because Russia had not been contaminated by Western liberal-capitalist ideas and was still relatively primitive (and therefore vigorous) she would one day sweep westwards destroying the new Roman Empire, as it gasped its last breath from its own internal decay.

When Lane refers to our “communist ancestors”, he in no way implies the Marxist cosmopolitan materialism of our Western Internationalist proletarian revolutionaries. By communism, Lane referred to the organic-tribalistic-collectivist society, which the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples and all Indo-European peoples possessed, before their dispossession by the purely economically centred Roman Empire – and its successor, the Judaeo-Christian, cosmopolitan-Western civilisation!!

Therefore Lane’s communism was founded upon organic socio-biological realities and not upon some weirdo mechanical theories, which would reduce mankind into raceless, cultureless automatons and appendages of purely economic thinking and interests.

As a consequence of Lane’s socio-biologism, he may be regarded as a prophetic thinker. Marxism, which was a product of English rationalistic-materialistic reductionism, has failed. It failed because, like its materialistic utilitarian compatriot, international capitalism, it denied the uniqueness of organisms and believed that all reality could be reduced to economics. Capitalism being the thesis and Marxism its supposed antithesis. In reality, Marxism was not antithetical to capitalism but simply its inversion, and thus confined in its thinking by the same determinants which precipitated capitalism.

For the same inorganic reasons that capitalism, as a philosophy is bankrupt, so likewise Marxism was finished long before the fall of the USSR. The only orthodox Marxists were/are in the Western world and not in either Eastern Europe or the Third World.

Since the Soviet Union in the 1930’s embarked upon the course of Soviet patriotism, Great Russian and pan-Slav nationalism (synthesised to Stalin’s programme of “Socialism in one country”) communism had undertaken a radical transformation, which has in fact brought it towards the tribal-communism that Lane postulated. The same is applicable to China (see: Harrison Salisbury’s 1969 classic, The Coming War Between Russia And China; Ronald Segal, The Race War, Pelican Books, 1967 and John Barron, KGB: The Secret Work Of Soviet Secret Agents, Corgi, 1974) and almost every nation, which the West believed was Marxist. Though many of these nations have continued to use Marxist rhetoric, they did so because it remained expedient to their geo-political objectives, which were often imperialistic.

Though Australian Nationalists support all peoples in their struggle for national-independence and national self-realisation, and thus we respect the achievements of the Chinese national-people’s revolution : Since the collapse of the USSR, the Chinese have progressively become aware of the globalist intentions of the cosmopolitan plutocrats and may yet play a wild card in geo-politics, we have as our primary consideration the welfare and interests of the bio-cultural/geopolitical organism defined as the “AUSTRALIAN NATION”. In the period 1977-90, the growing Japanese and American economic and military investment in communist China served as a prerequisite for another World War, in which a Washington/Peking/Tokyo Axis could have attempted to envelope the Europid peoples of Europe, Africa, Australia and New Zealand against their kindred in Eastern Europe. For this reason we demanded armed neutrality for Australia as well as an end to Yankee, Great Han and Nipponese economic and political imperialism, which threaten/ed the stability of this planet.

We should never forget that Chairman Brezhnev of the USSR said to Margaret Thatcher in 1980, referring to the possibility of the Cold War becoming a ‘hot war’:

“The only question is whether the white race will survive.”

In expressing this perspective, Brezhnev was simply consciously or unconsciously, recapitulating what Feodor Dostoyevsky postulated was the world historical mission of the Great Russian people, be they Czarist, Bolshevist, National-Bolshevist, or something yet to be determined. This was predicated upon the idea that it remained true to its Dostoyevskyan soul and Hegelian mission (to reiterate Spengler’s postulates) of which Bolshevism was an advent distorted by nineteenth century cosmopolitan materialism and senseless bloodshed often of alien provenance. This view finds some echo in Henry Lawson’s poem, “Vanguard”: “For the vanguard of the white man, is the vanguard of the Rus.” Dostoyevsky in a speech on June 8 1880 said:

“The vocation of the Russian man is indisputably an all-European and world-wide vocation … Oh, the people of Europe do not know how dear they are to us. And I believe that we (that is to say, of course, not we but the Russians of the future) will all eventually understand, every single one of us, that to become a real Russian will mean precisely this: to strive to bring conciliation to the contradictions of Europe, to show a way out of the sorrows of Europe in our own Russian soul, universally human and all-uniting: to find a place in it, with brotherly love, for all our brothers, and finally perhaps to speak the final word of the great harmony of all, of the brotherly unison of all the nations according to the Gospel of Christ.”

Through two major world wars, Europid peoples throughout the world have suffered great biological, economic and cultural cost, in insane fratricidal conflict. The victors have been the Coca-Cola imperialists, who have transformed this planet into a giant repository for MacDonald’s/Coca-Cola and similar vestments of capitalist cultural enlightenment. All peoples, regardless of their race, have been subject to this economic and cultural imperialism.

Many non-white peoples have undergone tribal-socialist cultural revolutions in which they have expelled the fast-food mongers and their culture-distorting compradors. The white peoples of Australia, New Zealand, Western Europe, South Africa and North America are yet to undergo similar cultural revolutions so as to free the earth of this bacillus.

It is for this reason that Western Euro-centric Radical-nationalists should not have been influenced by the anti-Soviet propaganda of the Peking/Tokyo/Washington Axis. The Soviet Union was the only European power, which biologically defined nationality. Citizens had stamped upon their passports their nationality, and this was ethnically determined. Thus an Uzbek, regardless of where he resided, would always be registered as an Uzbek. The issue from a marriage between a Soviet Asiatic and a Soviet European was listed as Asiatic for statistical purposes (in the West, the reverse is the case and therefore the actual figures for non-Caucasians are falsified), and this classification remained upon all their documentation and upon the documentation of their progeny – unless it was self-evident that biological assimilation had been complete. There were quotas to restrict the number of Soviet Asiatics in the European part of the Soviet Union, and none did have permanent residence status until after Perestroika. Separate development had been the norm, and the white nationalities were concerned with the growing birth rate of the U.S.S.R.’s coloured peoples, as the white birth rate had been at Z.P.G. for the preceding twenty years. Of course, since the fall of the Iron Curtain, economic and spiritual circumstances have engendered a climate where the white population is now in radical decline, well below Z.P.G. level. President Putin may in the Russian Federation serve as a break on this spiralling process of decline, but he is not necessarily the best solution.

Whilst all Soviet peoples were encouraged to be ethnocentric and thus benefit from the U.S.S.R’s nationalist anti-cosmopolitan policy, the Soviet Union also had the potential to become – for the White Race throughout the world – a strong champion. In an age when the coloured populations of the West are rapidly increasing, the U.S.S.R. could have been the only great power on earth which unashamedly and uncompromisingly would advocate and maintain Caucasoid hegemony within its sphere of influence. It is for this reason that many Marxists who are in fact, liberal cosmopolitan intellectuals, became so hostile to the U.S.S.R.; they entered into an anti-Russian alliance with the cosmopolitan plutocrats and liberal-Christian churchmen so as to destroy the authoritarian, ethically traditionalist, tribalist nature of Soviet socialism. This tendency hysterically continues with western Marxists denouncing the so-called Red-Brown phenomenon in modern Russia – as a resurgent fascism. An example of this attitude is expressed in Martin Lee’s The Beast Re-awakens, Little Brown and Company, 1997. Needless to say, by their amorphous, ahistorical definition of fascism, any authoritarian patriot, Left or Right, is a fascist.

Soviet socialism was pan-Europid racial-solidarist, and the USSR’s leaders made many overtures since Khruschev’s time for close collaboration between all Europid peoples, regardless of their economic or political systems. Any power, which provoked such antagonism to itself, from this anti-Europid cosmopolitan element, should have been considered as a potential friend of the growing Euro-centric Radical-nationalist movement in the then-contemporary West. This perspective was held to be a truth by many of the then-contemporary European nationalists. For a more comprehensive understanding of the non-Marxist socio-biological bases of Soviet-socialistic ideology, refer to the work by the eminent Soviet geneticist, Professor L.N. Gumilev, entitled, On the Biological/Geographical Conception Of Ethnic History, which was published by “Voprosy Istorii” in 1974.

Another interesting feature of Soviet thinking, which brought it remarkably close to Lane’s national-communitarian ideology, was the ongoing Slavonic cultural and folkloric renaissance. All Soviet peoples were encouraged to promote their particularity via racial/national/cultural self-affirmation and self-realisation, within the parameters of the economic and military unity of the Soviet State. Those of Asiatic character, this author understands, are generally outside of the spiritual appreciation of the Australian people. Our Indo-European heritage meantime implies a natural sense of racial-solidarity with the white peoples of Eastern Europe.(Refer: Anne Ferlat, “Neo Paganism And New Age In Russia” at age.pdf)

In Eastern Europe, all Europid peoples were encouraged to take interest in their Indo-European (Slavonic, Baltic and Teutonic) and Finno-Ugrian folkloric traditions, pagan religion and history. The Soviet cultural organization “RODYNA” (motherland) encouraged the preservation of Eastern European antiquities, and there were even measures afoot to reintroduce the ancient Slavonic pagan-pantheistic religion, or at least a more sophisticated equivalent such as the theosophy of Vedanta, which is related to all the early religions and philosophies of the ancient Indo-European world. (The reader may consult: Alexander Yanov, Russia’s New Right: Right-Wing Ideologies In The Contemporary USSR, University of California Press; David Shipler, Russia: Broken Idols, Solemn Dreams, Macdonald Futura Australia; Walter Lacquer, Black Hundred: The Rise Of The Extreme Right In Russia, Harper Perennial, 1993; Kevin Coogan, Dreamer Of The Day: Francis Parker Yockey And The Post-War Fascist International, Autonomedia, 1999; Bruce Clark, An Empire’s New Clothes, Vintage, 1996) (For the relationship between Vedanta and Western European philosophies such as Pythagorean, Platonic and Neo-Platonic systems, refer to the writings of Sir William Jones, a father of comparative mythology.)

This folkloric renaissance in Eastern Europe coincides with the renewed Western European folkloric revival, which demands the integration of two thousand years of Western Christian civilisation into a new European culture and political unity, largely based upon our common spiritual-biological unity of pre-Christian times. We are speaking of a new transcendent Indo-European spiritual identity. To quote the French ethnocentric nationalist and pan-European solidarist, General Charles de Gaulle, “ONE EUROPE FROM THE URALS TO THE ATLANTIC” is an overriding imperative for the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Australian Radical-nationalism has, from its inception, been pan-Europid racial-solidarist (in the nineteenth century Australian socialists spoke of the need to establish a Caucasian ‘entente-cordiale’), rather than petty-state chauvinist; and thus our early theoreticians may be perceived as men of vision who could anticipate the future by an understanding of organic logic. In this light, William Lane stands as a man of extraordinary dimension.

Lane, like Hughes, and the majority of early Australian Nationalists, was a first generation Australian of British descent. The fact that he was not Australian-born, did not colour his world-view in favour of an Anglocentric, monarchic perspective, but rather to the contrary. Lane belonged to the Cromwellian radical-nationalistic social-republican tradition of English Caesarism. Lane’s biological definition of the Australian identity was Eurocentric and not Anglocentric.

His conception of the Australian people and the role that they are to play in world affairs can best be illustrated by the following two quotations:-

In The People, which was the journal of the “Australian Socialist League”, Lane wrote: “In Australia, Anglo-Saxon, Teuton and Latin are coming together as one homogeneous whole…. They demand that all undesirable races (ie. unassimilable, ed.) be immediately and absolutely excluded.” In the Worker, which was the organ and initiator of the Australian Labour Federation and ultimately the “Australian Labour Party”, Lane made his position clear: “We must be White First, or nothing else can matter.” Lane proclaimed the Labour movement’s struggle to be “more than a national or social movement, it is a true racial struggle.”

By a summation of William Lane’s pan-Europid national-communitarian ideology, it is self-evident that he, like most early Australian and British radical-nationalists, was related in his ideology to the various national-revolutionary and radical-nationalistic movements and thinkers in continental Europe. Lane’s view, which favoured an atavistic existentialist revival (i.e. a return to our Indo-European socio-biologically determined essence), was almost identical to that of the French communards, Blanquists, historical Sinn Fein, Narodniks, Union of the Russian People, etc.; but in particular his anti-Westernism and pro-rustic/Puritanism places Lane exceptionally close to the North German advocates of national-bolshevism. (Refer to: Professor Alexander Dugin, “The Metaphysics Of National Bolshevism” (extract from The Knight Templars Of The Proletariat at Dugin was an adviser to Zyuganov, Putin and to Medvedev)

The following extract is a paraphrasing of sections from A.W. Dulles, Germany’s Underground, New York, 1947, H.B. Gisevious, To the Bitter End, Boston, 1947, and Sebastian Haffner, The Rise And Fall Of Prussia, London, 1980. These words indicate the community of interest between Lane’s ideas and the Western ‘national communitarian’ tradition. The British journal, Scorpion and articles from the French movement ‘GRECE’, also contributed in this formulation.

The Niekisch/Moeller van den Bruck school of Radical-nationalism had / has little in common with the unfortunate Nazi-fascist era. Its roots are to be found in the pro-Slav, pro-Russian (whether Tsarist or Socialist) Conservative-Revolutionary ethical-socialist implications of Otto Von Bismarck’s Prussian-Germanism. In the words of Goethe, in his In der beshrankung zeight sich erst der meister, Bismarck’s greatness lay in his restraint. According to the historian Condon,” the history of modern Europe can be written in terms of three Titans: Napoleon I, Bismarck and Lenin. Of these three men of superlative political genius, Bismarck probably did the least harm.” However, Nazism was coloured by the political culture of its Bavarian and Austro-Hungarian origins and powerbase, and thus in part sought to recapitulate the Austro-Hungarian empire where the German and Magyar speaking blocs ruled over the predominately Slav ethnic groups which were all intent on national self-determination. It was also reactionary and chauvinistically, anti-Slav, and belligerently anti-Russian as Hitler held Russia responsible, initially for Tsarist Pan-Slav nationalist agitation and later Judaeo-Marxist pacifist agitation and revolutions – factors he concluded contributed strongly to the defeat of the Central Powers in the World War (refer to his fulminations in Mein Kampf). Nazism was also pro-Anglo capitalistic and hostile to genuine Radical-nationalist thinking, (including Hitler’s refusal to support genuine colonial revolutions against backward imperialism), a position which Hitler later regretted as evidenced by his Testament as translated by Trevor Roper. Mussolini, who in his alliance with ex-communists like Bombacci founded the ill-fated Italian Social Republic, also regretted Fascism’s departure from its initial revolutionary impulse.

Both in the cases of Hitler and Mussolini, it was more attempting to shut the gate after the horse had bolted. North German Radical-nationalists such as Ernst Niekisch (and their ideological counterparts throughout the later-Axis world) were either liquidated or incarcerated under the Axis regimes for professing this social-revolutionary ideology. Niekisch was placed in a concentration camp by the Nazis in 1934, and in 1937 he was condemned to life imprisonment. Niekisch and his national-revolutionary co-ideologues found great appeal amongst contemporary Western European youth, who believed that the “enemy of Europe” (Yockey) was never the U.S.S.R, despite its totalitarian excesses, but rather the liberal-cosmopolitan establishment and its Coca-Cola imperialism.

To present a juxtaposition between the national liberationist orientation of Australian nationalism which decisively distinguishes it from fascism, is that prominent persons such as Doc Evatt, John Curtin, Ben Chifley and Arthur Calwell, had supported national liberation struggles in our immediate area and often were called upon to adjudicate between the colonial powers and the nationalist movements, at times to the chagrin of these powers, as evidenced by the case of Indonesia. They proclaimed a Monroe Doctrine in Oceania with Australia and New Zealand as its centre. The Third World peoples welcomed Australia’s intervention, demonstrating that White Australian nationalism was neither imperialistic nor chauvinistic – and they interpreted the White Australia Policy in terms of their own ethnocentrism. Non of these Australian nationalists took seriously the McCarthyist model of a monolithic communist bloc. They all understood that human beings are naturally subject to tribal aspirations – including that inevitably there would be rivalry between China and Russia (refer to the diplomat-intelligence-officer Harrison Salisbury: The Coming War Between Russia And China..

Their observations have been validated by the dynamics of history giving rise to the twenty first century. Professor Gennady Zyuganov president of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and formerly a presidential candidate for the Russian Federation confirms the perceptions of the previously cited Australian nationalists. I quote Zyuganov:

“We (Russians) are the last power on this planet that is capable of mounting a challenge to the New World Order – the global cosmopolitan dictatorship. We must work against our destroyers, using means as carefully thought out and as goals orientated as theirs are: the unity of all nationalist forces is as necessary to this end as air.” (Russian nationalist magazine, Soil Tied To Our Blood, 1994)

Zyuganov’s opinion here encapsulates the reason that the Anglo-American-Zionist bloc, compliments of George W. Bush and his successors, have included post-Yeltsin Russia as one of their targets. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation is a national communitarian party and not a Marxist-Leninist one, as evidenced by Zyuganov’s manifesto, My Russia: The Third Road. He promulgates a mixed economy, only part-command structured, but not the Stalinist model and philosophically he repudiated dialectical materialism.

In consideration of the contemporary political developments in the world, the type of national-communitarianism advocated by William Lane appears to be the overriding ideology of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Contemporary nationalists will not neglect Lane’s contribution to our Radical-Australianist ideology. One day Australian Nationalists may yet see William Lane receiving global recognition, as one of the most perceptive philosophical and political seers of the nineteenth century. If not, he will always have a place in the hearts of a proud and free Australian nation

2. Henry Lawson and the Hegelian Holistic Revolution

From – “To be Amused”

You ask me to be gay and glad

While lurid clouds of danger loom,

And, vain and bad and gambling mad,

Australia races to her doom…

You bid me make a farce of day

And a mockery of death,

While not five thousand miles away

The Yellow millions pant for breath!

Store guns and ammunition first,

Build forts and warlike factories,

Sink bores and tanks where drought is worst,

Give overtime to industries.

The outpost of the White man’s race,

Where next his flag must be unfurled

Make clean the place! Make strong the place!

Call in White men from all over the world!

Amazing Foresight

Henry Lawson – poet, patriot, swagman, social-revolutionary, political satirist and one of the primary spiritual founders of “Australian Radical-nationalism” – was vindicated by history. His prophetic warnings pertaining to apocalyptic global upheavals which would redetermine the political and economic status of the West generally and Australia in particular, have been fulfilled.

The most appalling examples have been two fratricidal wars of such dimensions as to remould forever the economic, political and bio-cultural patterns of this planet.

Referring to World War I, the eminent historian Arnold Toynbee drew an analogy between it and the Peloponnesian wars. Both shared the same significance of heralding the decline of great cultures through internecine struggle. Following the Second World War the West entered the epoch of absolute decline with the surrender of its hegemony through “wars of national liberation” in the colonies, and with the promotion of the mass “Coca-Cola” cultural distortion of the remaining vestiges of its High Culture and its particularist Folk Cultures.

An issue of the nationalist paper AUDACITY (November 1982) featured an article: “The Third Development Decade.” This dealt with the Third World food/population crisis, quoting statistics and estimates for the next decade. In this Malthusian Armageddon, presented as the only plausible scenario (exempting an act of “Divine Providence”), Lawson’s poems assume a new importance and urgency. “To Be Amused” embodies the essential solutions for the survival of the Australian people in the coming storm.

From – “The Storm That Is To Come”

By our place in the midst of the farthest seas we are fated to stand alone –

When the nations fly at each other’s throats let Australia look to her own;

Let her spend her gold on the barren West for the land and it’s manhood’s sake;

For the south must look to the south for strength in the storm that is yet to break.

Now who shall gallop from cape to cape, and who shall defend our shores?

The crowd that stands on the kerb agape and glares at the cricket scores?

And who shall hold the invader back when the shells tear up the ground? –

The weeds that yelp by the cycling track while a nigger scorches round?

There may be many to man the forts in the big towns by the sea –

But the East will call to the West for strength in the storm that is yet to be:

The West cries out to the East in drought, but the coastal towns are dumb;

And the East must look to the West for food in the war that is to come

The rain comes down on the Western land and the rivers run to waste,

While the townsfolk rush for the special tram in their childish, sense-less haste.

And never a pile of lock we drive – but a few mean tanks we scratch –

For the fate of a nation is nought compared with the turn of a cricket match.

I saw a vision in days gone by, and would dream that dream again,

Of the days when the Darling shall not back her billabongs in vain.

There were reservoirs and grand canals where the sad dry land had been,

And a glorious network of aquaducts mid fields that were always green.

I have pictured long in the land I love what the land I love might be,

Where the Darling rises from Queensland rains and the flood rushes out to the sea.

And is it our fate to wake too late to the truth that we have been blind,

With a foreign foe at our harbour gate and a blazing drought behind?

When The World Was Wide

With the versatility, colour, insight and foresight truly representative of genius, Lawson’s life and works rank him akin to the romantic adventurers of the Elizabethan period (perhaps a Raleigh of prose). He reminisced of mightier, grander days, when the world was wide and Australia could boast of Byronian characters such as Breaker Morant.

From – “When The World Was Wide”

The world is narrow and days are short, and our lives are dull and slow,

For little is new where the crowds resort, and less where the wanderers go.

Greater or smaller, – the same old things we shall see by the dull roadside –

And tired of all is the spirit that sings of the days when the world was wide.

‘Twas honest metal and honest wood in the days of the Outward bound,

When men were gallant and ships were good – roaming the wide world round.

The gods could envy a leader then when “Follow me, lads!” he cried.

They faced each other and fought like men, in the days when the world was wide.

South, East and West in advance of Time – and far in advance of thought –

And is it for this damned life we praise the god-like spirit that died

At Eureka stockade in the Roaring days, with the days when the world was wide!

New Leaders: New Ideas

Unconsciously subscribing to “Hegelian Dialectics,” Lawson glorified the heroic stratum of society – a milieu to which he himself belonged. That element within a people transcends economic classification. It is motivated by a nobler “raison d’etre” than simply the satisfaction of immediate personal, material and biological needs. It is this heroic culture bearing stratum that incarnates the Hegelian zeitgeist and is the real locomotive of history and not Marx’s economic determinist claptrap.

It is through such extraordinary personalities, who, despite risk to life, limb or personal happiness, elect in times of national or cultural crisis to champion the needs of their respective tribes, peoples or cultures, that humanity has been graced with signposts leading them from the labyrinth of Palaeolithic caves to Cape Canaveral in the space of but fifty thousand years.

As a protagonist of the “Carlylean Cult of the Exceptional Human Being,” (refer: Thomas Carlyle, Heroes And Hero Worship) Lawson belongs to the same artistic tradition as A.B. Paterson, Bernard O’Dowd, A.H. Adams and Norman Lindsey. All were Australian Nationalists. Lindsey and O’Dowd were proponents of Nietzsche’s Heroic philosophy of life as well as the values inherent in Classical Greek and Norse mythology. For an articulation of this value-system, and its archetypal mythic basis in the eternal verities of our Indo-European culture-soul, refer to the radical traditionalist Julius Evola’s Revolt Against The Modern World (Rochester: Inner Traditions International). Complementary reading to Evola’s various works are Robert Graves, The White Goddess, Caitlin Matthews, Sophia: Goddess Of Wisdom, Sir James Fraser, The Golden Bough, Erich Fromm, Psychoanalysis And Religion, The Sane Society and To Have Or To Be etc.; these works in part cover the existential questions raised by Evola and others. The aforementioned Australian artists reflected this eternal “Value System” in their poetry and paintings, thereby attempting to popularise it as the only sound alternative to the bourgeois “culture” prevalent in the West of their day (and, unfortunately, our day also).

The following extracts from Lawson’s poetry are demonstrative of this “Hegelian-Nietzschean” world-view, and should be considered as pre-requisite for a modern Australian Nationalism.

From – “For Australia”

Now with the wars of the word begun, they’ll listen to you and me,

Now while the frightened nations run to the arms of democracy,

Now when the blathering fools are scared, and the years have proved us right –

All unprepared and unprovided, the outpost of the White.

From – “Australia’s Peril”

Listen through House and Senate – listen from east to west

For the voice of one Australian who will stand above the rest,

Who will lead his country’s dawning, who will lead in his manhood’s noon –

The man may come with the hour – but the hour may come too soon.

From – “Cromwell”

…. In my country’s hour of need,

For it shall surely come,

While run by fools who’ll never heed

The beating of the drum,

While baffled by the fools at home

And threatened from the sea –

Lord send a man like Oliver –

And let me live to see.

From – “The King Of Our Republic.”

If you find him stern, unyielding, when his living task is set,

I have told you that a Tyrant shall uplift the nation yet;

It is within the light of these four quotations that Lawson’s socialism and republicanism, as evidenced also by “Faces in the Street” and “Eureka”, assume a Holistic perspective. They offered the Australian people an alternative World-View to that which was then and is now being foisted on them by passe bourgeois and Marxist ideologies.

The following extracts are particularly pertinent to our contemporary political situation. The conditions, which gave rise to them, are being recapitulated today. Lawson’s reactions and solutions are explicit. We would do well to heed him!

From – “Eureka”

To arms! To arms! The cry is out,

to arms and play your part,

For every pike upon a pole will find a Tyrant’s heart!

Now Lalor comes to take the lead,

the spirit does not lag,

And down the rough, wild diggers

kneel beneath the Diggers’ Flag;

Then rising to their feet, they swear,

while rugged hearts beat high,

To stand beside their leader and to conquer or to die!

Around Eureka’s stockade now

the shades of night close fast.

Three hundred sleep beside their arms,

And thirty sleep their last.

But not in vain those Diggers died.

Their comrades may rejoice,

For o’er the voice of tyranny is heard the people’s voice:

It says, reform your rotten laws,

The Digger’s wrongs make right.

Or else with them, our brothers now

Will gather to the fight.’

‘Twas of such stuff the men were made

Who saw our nation born,

And such as Lalor were the men

Who led the vanguard on,

And like such men may we be found,

With leaders such as they,

In the roll up of Australians on our darkest, grandest day.

From – “Freedom On The Wallaby”

So we must fly a rebel flag,

as others did before us;

And we must sing a rebel song,

and join in rebel chorus.

We’ll make the tyrants feel the sting,

of those that they would throttle.

They needn’t say the fault is ours,

if blood should stain the wattle.

From – “Faces In The Street”

They lie, the men who tell us, for reasons of their own,

That want is here a stranger, and that misery’s unknown;

For where the nearest suburb and the city proper meet

My window sill is level with the faces in the street.

Drifting past, drifting past,

To the beat of weary feet,

While I sorrow for the owners of those faces in the street.

And cause I have to sorrow, in a land so good and fair,

To see upon those faces stamped the marks of want and care.

I look in vain for traces of the fresh and fair and sweet

In sallow, sunken faces that are that are drifting through the street.

Drifting on, drifting on,

To the scrape of restless feet,

I can sorrow for the owners of the faces in the street.

Once I cried “O God Almighty! If thy might doth still endure,

Now show me in a vision for the wrongs of Earth a cure.

And lo, with shops all shuttered I beheld a city’s street,

And in the warning distance heard the tramp of many feet,

Coming near, coming near,

To a drum’s distant beat,

‘Twas despair’s conscripted army

that was marching down the street!

Then like a swollen river that has broken bank and wall,

The human flood came pouring with the red flags over all,

And kindled eyes all blazing bright

With revolution’s heat,

And flashing swords reflecting rigid faces in the street –

Pouring on, pouring on,

To a drum’s loud threatening beat

And the war hymns and the cheering of the people in the street.

And it must be while the world goes rolling round its course,

The warning pen shall write in vain,

The warning voice grow hoarse,

But not until a city feels Red Revolution’s feet

Shall its sad people miss awhile the terrors of the street,

The dreadful everlasting strife

For scarcely clothes and meat

In the pent tract of living death –

The city’s cruel street.

The Social Republic

As is self-evident from these and other extracts, Lawson was proudly a social-revolutionary and a Republican. But the Social Republic he advocated had NOTHING in common with the Marxian drivel nor with the present-day liberal Fabian nonsense.

On the contrary, a summation of Lawson’s works necessarily produces a revolutionary manifesto, the foundation for a progressively evolving nationalistic social order. The following, intended solely as an example, is based upon principles distilled from his poetry: –

  1. National ownership and control of the factors of production, exchange and distribution within the parameters of a “planned economy” co-ordinating private and public enterprise. Military integration as a feature imperative to the aforestated planned economy. A government which is socially considerate and humane whilst simultaneously guardian and patron of the Cultural and Biological integrity and exclusiveness of the Nation.
  2. A meritocratic form of government which expresses an “Organic” as opposed to “Class” conceptualisation of society. Democratic and Republican in the Classical Greco-Roman sense (where Civic Duty and Privileges coincide as mandatory to Citizenship) as opposed to the 19th century Bourgeois-Marxist sense which denies national cohesiveness through laissez-faire egotism and proletarian mediocrity. Such a “programme” has of necessity appeared again in Australia. It is held to by the emerging nationalist movement.

A Philosophy To Meet Danger

In as much as such a society would result from the synthesis of the matriarchal Democratic-egalitarian and patriarchal Elitist-authoritarian traditions peculiar to our Western Heritage, its general nature can be outlined as follows; –

Democratic and egalitarian insofar as all artificial obstacles to social-mobility will have to be removed (i.e. status of parents, status derived from membership of exclusive fraternities, “the old school tie”, status derived from bank balance, etc.).. whilst facilitating genuine opportunities for the acquisition of skills necessary for social advancement within a healthily expanding economic, cultural and political climate. Such were Lawson’s objectives.

This system would be elitist and authoritarian insofar as, if there were no artificial determinants to produce the other, contemporary, elite, then its leadership must logically be the result of exceptional talent and dedication to the national-body, and the authority of that leadership should not be contested simply to satisfy personal egotism or sectional, as opposed to national interests.

Those outstanding people who, having achieved national recognition for their peculiar qualities, and having their authority periodically ratified by mass popular support by means of plebiscites, would act as the nation’s “Tribunes” (Roman) or “Ephors” (Greek) for the duration of the period allotted to office. Their task would be to act as “Ombudsman with Teeth” to whom the permanent national bureaucracy would be held accountable. In such a capacity they would ensure that national policy was genuinely representative of national feelings and needs, whilst being constitutionally empowered to act as the Protectors of individual sovereignty and felicity as well as Protectors of the independence and well being of the nation as a whole.

(For supporting evidence refer to all the poems quoted in this article in their entirety from: Lawson H., Collected Verse, by Colin Roderick, ed: Angus & Robertson, 1967. or any anthology of his works published prior to 1972 – the year of Al Grassby’s debut as art critic and censor.)

In conclusion, the following extracts are self-explanatory, reaffirming the historical validity of Lawson’s vision and demonstrating the continuity of the radical-nationalist world-view.

The geo-political realities which engendered this perspective have not altered in any regard favourable to Australia, but rather have been exascerbated with the advent of nuclear weapons and sophisticated means of communication. The capability for mass population shifts by newly aroused Third World peoples, combined with a progressive decline in Western self-esteem and the prospect of a third internecine war on the horizon, makes all of all of Lawson’s work– and especially the following extracts – all the more relevant. –

From – “The Vanguard”

(referring to the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, but which may prove to be more appropriate today)

“Tis the first round of the struggle

O the East against the West,

Of the fearful war of races

Fr the white man could not rest.

Hold them – IVAN! Staggering

Bravely underneath your gloomy sky:

Hold them IVAN we shall want you

Pretty badly by and by,

Fighting for the Indian Empire

When the British pay their debt,

Never Briton watched for Blucher

As he’ll watch for Ivan yet!

It means all to young Australia –

It means life or death to us,

For the Vanguard of the White Man

Is the vanguard of the RUSS.

From – “The Star Of Australasia.”

We boast no more of our bloodless flag

That rose from a nation’s slime;

Better a shred of a deep dyed rag

From the storms of olden time.

From grander clouds in our peaceful

Skies than ever were there before

I tell you the Star of the South

Shall rise – in the lurid clouds of war.

It ever must be while blood is warm,

And the sons of men increase;

There’ll come a point that we will not yield, no matter if right or wrong;

And man will fight on the battlefield while passion and pride are strong –

So long as he will not kiss the rod,

And his stubborn spirit sours,

For the scorn of Nature and the curse of God are heavy on a peace like ours.

There are boys today in the city slums and the home of wealth and pride

Who’ll have one home when the storm is come,

And fight for it side by side.

All creeds and trades will have soldiers there – give every class its due –

And there’ll be many a clerk to spare for the pride of the jackaroo.

And fools, when the fiends of war are out and the city sky’s aflame,

Will have something better to talk about than an absent woman’s shame,

Will have something nobler to do by far

Than jest at a friend’s expense,

Or blacken a name in a public bar

or over a backyard fence.

The selfsame spirit that drives a man

to the depths of drink and crime

Will do the deeds in the hero’s van

That live to the end of time.

The living death in the lonely bush,

The greed of the selfish town,

And even the creed of the outlaw

Push is chivalry – upside down.

‘Twill be while ever our blood is hot,

While every the world goes wrong,

The nations rise in a war,

To rot in a peace that lasts too long.

And southern nation and southern state,

Aroused from their dream of ease,

Must sign in the Book of Eternal Fate

Their stormy histories.

Out of Lawson’s vision of a tumultuous climax to three thousand years of Greco-Roman history, Australia’s destiny will be secured by qualities of character and personality intrinsic to our ennobled posterity. This idea was best expressed in the form of “Australian Engineers.”

From – “Australian Engineers”

A new generation has arisen under Australian skies,

Boys with the light of genius deep in their dreamy eyes.

Not as artists or poets with their vain imaginings,

But born to be thinkers and doers,

And makers of wonderful things.

Boys who are slight and quiet,

Boys who are strong and true,

Dreaming of great inventions –

Always of something new;

With brains untrammelled by training,

But quick where reason directs,

Boys with imagination and unclouded intellects.

Radical-nationalists salute the genius of Henry Lawson, and humbly but eagerly await the call of destiny

3. Fundamentals of Old Labour Nationalism

The following are a number of relevant quotations from prominent Australian Nationalists. They are an integral feature of our history and social-nationalist ideology.

The following quotation by Henry Lawson regarding Chinese is equally applicable to all unassimilable alien groups and serves to demonstrate the superpersonal character of Australian nationalism as an ideology – as opposed to personal bigotry on the part of some people. Private friendships with individuals from unassimilable groups (as held by Lawson, O’ Dowd and others) have never precluded one holding Australian Nationalist sentiments or participation in political activity.

The present large ethnic ghettos of Middle and Far Easterners is further proof that Australia should never have departed from the White Australia Policy.

The regular racial attacks upon white Australians (particularly women – “skippies”) by these unassimilables (who are often Australian-born) is a confirmation of the validity of what Arthur Calwell prophesised regarding the outcomes of the permissive, liberal, multicultural society. The existence of an overt Moslem fundamentalist fifth column (as evidenced by young militant spokesmen who place their Islamic faith above their Australian citizenship) is multiculturalism’s ‘chickens coming home to roost’. These cultural parasites who constantly whinge and demand tolerance/acquiescence to their pecadillos in the form of so-called ‘cultural senstivity’ from the host majority culture, have never been willing to tolerate/acquiesce to our value system. Where are the formal apologies on the part of the Moslem community to the relatives of white Australians and other westerners who died in Bali, or who suffered at the hands of their renegade criminals and rapists?

The fact the ethnic-Chinese mayor of Darwin (a descendent of colonial times) fought for the retention of the White Australia Policy in the 1970’s, in the ackowledgement that all this policy implied was Australia should remain a predominantly Anglo-European country, is also evidence that as individuals all people are assimilable. It is numbers which makes assimilation impossible.

“I am anti-Chinese as far as Australia is concerned; in fact, I am all for a White Australia. But one may dislike or even hate a nation without hating or disliking an individual of the nation.”


“No matter where the pressure comes from, the Australian people will continue to resist all attempts to destroy our White society.

I reject in conscience, the idea that Australia should or can ever be a multi-racial society and survive.”

ARTHUR CALWELL, Progressive-nationalist.. Quoted from this one-time Labor Immigration Minister’s autobiography, Be Just and Fear Not, Rigby Ltd., Sydney, 1972.


“The white population is being driven out of the labour market by an inundation of Mongolians; when the white man is driven to desperation, there will be desperate times..”

NED KELLY, Letter To Sir Henry Parkes, 1879.; Australian bushranger, republican, political radical, Australia’s Robin Hood cum Che Guevara.


And no man single-handed,

can hope to break the bars.

It’ll be a thousand like Ned Kelly,

who’ll hoist the Flag of Stars.

JOHN MANIFOLD, nationalist poet.


“All that is necessary for us to urge in justification of this measure (Commonwealth Immigration Restriction Act of 1901) is that these people do differ from us in such essentials of race and character as to exclude the possibility of advantageous admixture or intermarriage if we are to maintain the standards of civilisation to which we are accustomed….

Our civilisation belongs to us, and we to it; we are bred in it and it is bred in us. It fits us and is our means of progress and advancement. These people have their own independent development, their own qualities and forms of life and government, which naturally are attached to them.

They are separated from us by a gulf, which we cannot bridge to the advantage of either. The attitude of Australia is not an offensive one when it becomes understood that it is based upon these principles. It is not based upon claims of superiority.

Where is the standard of comparison just to both? … Arguments which are used in favour of exclusion do not call for any reflection whatever upon the character or capacity of the people excluded.”

Prime Minister ALFRED DEAKIN, addressing the Federal Parliament in 1901.

Deakin was a progressive-nationalist who was responsible for the first pension legislation at a Federal level. Although not a member of the Labour Party, he compromised with Labour on these principles.


Extract from “AUSTRALIA”

“Last sea-thing dredged by sailor Time from Space,

Are you a drift Sargasso, where the West in halcyon calm rebuilds her fatal nest?

Or Delos of a coming Sun God’s race?

Are you for light, and trimmed, with oil place?

Or but a Will o’Wisp or marshy quest?

A new demesne for Mammon to infest?

Or Lurks millennial Eden ‘neath your face?”

BERNARD O’DOWD, Radical-nationalist


“…I still think that Australia needs the sort of revolution that will produce fundamental far-reaching changes. Every country needs such a revolution every now and then to make some beneficial changes in its social, political and economic affairs. England needed a violent revolution to get rid of Charles I and then peaceful revolution after the Restoration to get rid of his ill-fated son, James II in 1688.

The last thing I want to do is shock native born reactionaries and kill them off prematurely by hinting at the word revolution in this country. Yet what else is there to talk about if man is to survive in the mess that capitalism has made of our society with its wars, its pollution of the air, the sea and the land and its degradation of our moral, social and economic health?

The United States came into being through a violent revolution that started in 1776 and finished with the creation of a new society on the other side of the Atlantic to that of the Old World. And then there was the French Revolution, the bloodbath that commenced in 1789 and ended with the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815. It was a revolution that was hundreds of years overdue, but was never completed.

A century later in 1917, the Russian Empire disappeared in a comparatively bloodless uprising followed by a long and terrible civil war, inspired and aided by foreign intervention and later, by the shocking era of Stalinism that cost the Russian Nation the lives of millions of its unfortunate people. The Russian Revolution was at least three hundred years overdue.

There have been other revolutions in the history of Europe and Asia as well as those to which I have referred, but none of them had had the significance of those, which I have cited.

We need sweeping changes that will result in the creation of an Australian Socialist society. Unfortunately, the great majority of Australians are too smug, too greedy, too slothful to care about the benefits of Socialism.”

ARTHUR CALWELL, Be Just And Fear Not


“Ninety percent of people of Australia support me in my attitude today,” he said. “Australians are not going to turn Australia over to those “inspired by an angry vocal minority of pseudo-intellectuals,”

These pseudo-intellectuals think they can promote the cause of a permissive society by flooding this country with people from all parts of the world.”

” I have a tremendous respect for the Chinese who have yellow skins and have pride in their race.

I have a tremendous regard to the coffee coloured Indians who have a great respect for the colour of their race, and for both peoples because of their regard for their cultures, their histories and their achievements.

However, he said, Australia “has got to be held by people who are predominantly Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian and Southern European.

These are the only people who can make an integrated community. Why should anyone be hurt by a recitation of the truth?”

Arthur Calwell, in the Australian press, 1971.


“We are for this Australia, for the nationality that is creeping to the verge of being, for the progressive people.”

WILLIAM LANE, The Boomerang 1887.


“While we plough our fields and measure our calico, and swing our hammers, history is being made and we ourselves are taking part in a stirring drama. Here we face the hordes of the east as our kinsmen faced them in the dim distant centuries, and here we must beat them back if we would keep intact all that can make our lives worth living. It does not matter that today it is an insidious invasion of peaceful aliens instead of warlike downpour of weaponed men.”

WILLIAM LANE, The Boomerang newspaper,18 February 1888.

Extract from “OUR LAND”

Bernard O’Dowd (Radical-nationalist)

From Northern strife and Eastern sloth removed,

Australia and her herald gods invite

A chosen race, in sternest ordeals proved,

To guard the future from exotic blight.

Yet on our margin other folk are set

Who, it is well, should keep a while away,

Too long apart to mingle wisely yet

(E’en I who love the Hindoo, Chinese, say!)

Yea, will we steel us to the death to fight –

In such poor means alone avail – whom’er,

Or Asian throng, or island brown, or white

Blood-brother e’en, would cloud our prospect fair,

To guard the future from exotic blight.

And not alone to feel the mouths of children at her breast

Australia wafts her sibyl call wherever white men are;

But, warden of the boundaries, lone outpost for the West.

She dare not risk the paling here of splendid Europe’s star.

Out in the night we seem to see piratic dangers sparkle,

And, on our moon’s horizon growing, omens grimly darkle!

O come ye of the white race hither, come ye to her call!

‘Tis not alone for us the word she sends you o’er the sea!

As ye shall rise up while we soar, our failure means you fall –

The fall of truth, the fall of love, the fall of liberty!

BERNARD O’DOWD, Collected Verses, Lothian, 1944.

4. William Lane and the Metaphysical and Metapolitical Foundations of the National and Social Revolutions

This polemic was first published as part of a pamphlet in 1985. Its contents have a rare poignancy in the current 1986 situation, with the possibility of a major global conflict.

(Author’s 2002 comment: since 1986, the power elites of the Anglo-American-Zionist bloc and its plutocratic allies have consistently carried out acts of cowardly aerial terror against Libya, Iraq, Yugoslavia and more recently, Afghanistan, under the plethora of platitudes of waging wars for democracy (or dime-ocracy?). In most cases, it has been to secure natural resources such as oil, gas and to open the world to the market economy. The reader should refer to: Ted Wheelwright, Oil And World Politics: From Rockefeller To The Gulf War, Left Book Club Co-operative, 1991. They are now threatening to escalate this with wars against North Korea, Iraq and Iran and possibly Russia and China. Since the collapse of the USSR, the plutocrats have gained the presumption that they are invincible, but then “those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.” A misguided riposte to this aerial terror (possibly a superpersonal karmic event – ‘what goes around comes around’) was the September 11 2001 aerial assault on New York. This bloody folly played into the propagandistic palms of the One World imperialists and their satraps such as the former Prime Minister of Israel, Bibi Netanyahu, as evidenced from his ‘slip of the tongue’ comment to the New York Times: the Twin Towers attack was “very good” for Israel; “Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy”. The Twin Towers attack has given the imperialists unqualified license to attempt to impose their will and institute their New World Order. Refer to Noam Chomsky, September 11 Chomsky, an objective American critic of Jewish descent, has been threatened with murder and has often been terrorised by the Zionists and their gentile allies.)

Though this author’s primary concern is for the welfare of the Australian Nation (and thus the reader will note a commitment to neutrality and independence for Australia), I must re-endorse what I have written as an appendix, or new section, of The Social Revolutionary Nature of Australian Nationalism.

In 1985-6, I had the opportunity to visit Libya and observe that country and the Gaddafi government. I suspected that the forces of international finance/monopoly capital, certain enemies of the Australian Nation, were using Libyan activities as an EXCUSE to unleash a conflict, which could have easily become a world war.

There is such a thing as the Anglo-American-Zionist bloc in world politics. Its appetites are dangerous. The peoples of Europe, indeed all peoples, have bled enough for unattainable goals. This author does NOT agree with terrorism, be it individual or state directed, but he does not approve of it IN GENERAL. We cannot be selective when we condemn it. Consider the recent death of Samantha Smith, a young peace campaigner in the United States. She visited the U.S.S.R. and returned to the United States to advocate the relaxation of the new Cold War. Her “crime” was her innocence. Was she murdered? After all, did not President Kennedy authorise the assassination of Castro and many other figures – even minor ones? It is VITAL that people understand that terrorism is NOT a monopoly of Arabs or Socialists or whatever, Zionist Israel has committed terrorism, as has the United States.

Understanding for example, the Zionists, has little to do with anti-Semitism. In the 1930’s Jack Lang in the precursors of his paper The Century (the instruments of the Lang Labor Party) saw how global capitalism often allied itself to the Zionists to achieve its ends. Today this same bloc denigrates all movements towards nationalism and independence. Even Jim Cairns, in his Oil On Troubled Waters implied that Australia should reduce its dependence on this bloc. The American Wilmot Robertson in his Dispossessed Majority gave a fair account of the nexus between the Zionists and “U.S. Imperialism.” The Canadian, John Jewell has written on Soviet anti-Zionism for the U.S. group White American Resistance.

There follows, initially, a quote from Arthur Calwell, which refers to certain internal U.S.S.R. political matters of relevancy to some aspects of the present global conflict debated in the forthcoming section.

“The 1917 revolution in Russia was warmly welcomed by the country’s Jews. They had bitter memories of Czarism and the pogroms, and naturally they helped Lenin in the October Revolution. Almost everybody in the Russian public service refused to serve the Bolshevik regime. In the Russian Foreign Office, for example, all the posts vacated, right down to charwoman, were taken by Jewish men and women. Leon Trotsky, Grigori Zinoviewff, and Lev Kameneff are the names of three highly intellectual Jews who joined Lenin’s administration. But the anti-Semitic feelings of the Russian people have been so long ingrained, that Stalin, having purged many Jews in the 1937 faked trials, had arranged for the infamous trial of seven Jewish doctors on bogus charges of having conspired to murder Russia’s leaders, before death overtook him in 1953. It was this alone which saved his intended victims from extermination….”

From Be Just and Fear Not.

(Readers Note: For a fuller discussion of Stalin, anti-semitism and the Jewish component of Russian communism, see: Louis Rapoport, Stalin’s War Against The Jews: The Doctors’ Plot And The Soviet Solution. New York: The Free Press, 1990 ; Arkady Vaksberg, Stalin Against The Jews, 1994)

In an age dominated by a myriad of ideologies, philosophies and theologies, with more interpretations of each than there are planets in the Cosmos – it becomes easy to comprehend why the great mass of people have developed a degree of cynicism in regard to ANY and ALL panaceas of salvation – be it political, economic or theocratic redemption!

Cynicism is a disease, which ultimately leads to nihilism. Nihilism debases a people and finally results in complete indifference to ANY and ALL conditions in which a NATION, or an INDIVIDUAL, may be subject to. In such a degree of degradation and apathy, a people disintegrate into countless grains of sand – having only the most superficial economic relationship to one another.

This type of alienation produces further debasement of LIFE and the ALIENADO (Spanish for tormented and demented) or alienated, finally repudiating life in a tormented and abysmal orgy of impersonal and often deviant sexual extravagances, drugs, alcoholism, crime and death. More often, those who find such a pathetic end, are the more sensitive and creative elements within a people, who intuitively recognize (by their higher faculties of perception) that the Age in which we are living, is the final stage in the spiralling decline of a civilisation.

William Lane’s novel The Workingman’s Paradise is an extraordinary insight into the struggle of Higher Men, for self-overcoming and self-realization, as the preliminary pilots of a NEW and HIGHER IDEA – by which the masses will find completeness. This IDEA is one, which begins and ends with eternity (to employ a Nietzschean phrase) and emanates from the SOUL of each people in their struggle for the creation of an ethical-socialist national-community. A pre-requisite for the achievement of such a progressive New Order necessarily depends upon the nobler and more idealistic elements, who will pioneer the path. For them it is imperative to retain the strength not to repudiate the loftiness of their mission, as upon their shoulders rests the destinies of their respective peoples.

When Rome collapsed because of its innate moral/psychological/political crises she was the wealthiest and most militarily prominent power, in her immediate quarter of the world. Affluence and the possession of the superficial means of waging war (be it Roman Legions made up mostly of foreign mercenaries and client forces, or thermo-nuclear weapons, ‘smart-bombs’, proxy armies and satrap paramilitaries) are not necessarily symptomatic of the vibrancy of life or of a healthy political organism.

According to the prominent philosopher of history, Oswald Spengler (author of The Decline Of The West) our modern Western civilisation is destined for the same fate within our lifetime, as that which befell the ancient Roman one. The sooner the more aware segments of the Old West, recognize this integral apocalyptic reality, and repudiate any and ALL allegiance to the corpse of Western society – the closer shall be the appointed hour when a nascent shoot shall spring forth from the soil which was the West, and flower into NEW EUROPID PEOPLES developing into NEW EUROPID CULTURES. In the same fashion as our contemporary Western civilisation began as a culture, during the Gothic ages, as the result of a synthesis with the heroic pagan-pantheistic folk cultures (of the Indo-European barbarians of the migration period) and the nascent Christian culture (which had succeeded the decadent materialism of the Roman Empire), so a new spirituality is re-emerging in the West. It is repudiating the shallow materialism of our cosmopolitan capitalist civilisation, in favour of a return to our folkloric origins in Indo-European antiquity. Thus new Europid peoples are in the process of being born, who will necessarily produce new cultures, once the putrid corpse of Western liberal-democracy and its mass consumer society, has joined its decadent anti-type the ancient Roman (of its final stages and not to be confused with the GOLDEN AGE of Graeco-Roman civilization), in its catacombic origins.

Therefore the movement for a New Indo-European GOLDEN AGE is necessarily anti-bourgeois and anti-organised-globalising-Christianity , as a decadent form of liberal cosmopolitan Christianity (which bears little similarity to either that of the Zorasterianised/Hellenistic Essene Jesus of Nazareth or to those true Christians who live according to His spirit) is the dominant ideology of the West, and continues to contribute to Western Cultural imperialism, and thereby is an accomplice in the cultural dispossession of its subject peoples.

The movement for an Indo-European renaissance shares with all peoples on this planet, the common goal of emancipation from Judaeo-Christian/Marxoid-capitalistic Western domination, the souls of our respective peoples – which the Western cosmopolitan plutocrats have distorted and ensnared for consumer commodities, or was it for “thirty pieces of silver”? (Refer to the writings of Alain de Benoist and the ‘GRECE’ school, The Scorpion magazine, the German Thule school of Pierre Krebs and the work of Professor Alexander Dugin, which articulate the ‘tradition’ known in Europe as ‘Conservative Revolution’.)

This IDEA of a NEW ORDER and new Europid Culture, is the Life-affirmative vision which William Lane shared with Spengler, Hegel, Nietzsche, Thoreau, Emerson, Spinoza and countless other European, American and Australian proponents of a Deistic but secular ethical-communitarian, view of Life. (Refer to other essays in this Collection.)

The great Libyan pan-Arab progressive-nationalist, Muammer Qadhafi in his “Third Universalist Theory” has re-presented the Eternally valid recognition, that the twin locomotives of History are SOCIALISM and NATIONALISM (as organic non-materialistic ideologies). To be more precise – socialism applied in the national context and specifically formulated so as to reflect the harmonious integrity of the national-body-politic – with its unique bio-spiritual and geo-political particularity.

“The concept of man is that of the nation, the concept of the nation is that of the tribe, and the concept of the tribe is that of the family…”

“…the nation is a tribe, after it has grown and its branches have multiplied and become transformed into clans, then into tribes.”

“The national state is the only political form which is consistent with the natural structure of society.”

“…Despite the political factors which necessitate the establishment of the state, the basis for the life of individuals is the family, the tribe, then the nation…”

“…The national struggle…. is the basis of the movement of history, because it is stronger than all other factors since it is in the origin…it is in the nature of the human group…. the nature of the nation. It is the nature of Life itself. Other animals, apart from man, live in groups. Indeed, the group is the basis for the survival of all groups within the animal kingdom. Nationalism is the basis for the survival of nations. Nations whose nationalism is destroyed are subject to ruin.”

(Author’s 2002/2003 comments: Neither Gaddafi nor Saddam Hussein are Moslem fundamentalists. Although both they and their countries are nominally Moslem, they have historically aligned themselves with European secular socialist/social-democratic societies. The tragedy of Bali cannot be laid at their doorsteps. The Moslem fundamentalists have equally in the past targetted these Arab socialist states. It was Richard Heineberg, author and journalist who said: “It was Libya’s Muammar Qadhafi – not George Bush or Bill Clinton – who was the first world leader to call for the arrest of bin Laden, in 1994, following terrorist attacks on his nation.” According to David Shayler, in his “The British, Mulslim Terrorism And September 11”, Britain’s MI-6 continued to have associations with al-Qaeda up to 1996 when they collaborated with it in series of assassination attempts on Gaddafi’s life. Bush, Blair and Bibi will one day be judged by the high court of history. (See: and the book Mansour O El Kikhla, Libya’s Qaddafi: The Politics Of Contradiction, University Press of Florida.)

It should not be forgotten that not so long ago both the USA and the USSR supported both morally and through materiel Iraq’s war against the Moslem fundamentalist Iran and its Shiite Iraqi allies; nor should it be forgotten that Osama bin Laden and his al-Queda were American proxies in the war in Afghanistan against the USSR. Their mujahadeen allies continued to foment strife in the Balkans, Chechnya and other areas, where they continued (and continue) to receive the favourable nomenclature of ‘freedom fighters’ by their CIA controllers! The Northern Alliance, the Anglo-American-Zionist proxy government of Afghanistan were formerly Soviet allies against the CIA’s Osama bin Laden directed mujahadeen. Twelve months before ‘September 11’, America was planning to invade Iraq so as to secure access to a depleting resource – oil. Refer to the document entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, authored by the think tank called Project For The New American Century ; Richard Heinberg, The Party’s Over: Oil, War And The Fate Of Industrial Societies, New Society: March 2003.)

The principal factor of disintegration which has precipitated Western Capitalistic Decadence has been its cosmopolitanism and economic/cultural imperialism. This supposedly transcendental economically-determinist view, transgressed against organic realities such as the bio-cultural/geo-political specificity of the NATION. This most debasing soulless tyranny in the form of a global mass society devoid of any spiritual ethnic, territorial or historical uniqueness – all stamped with the mark of a civilization in it death knell has been the lunacy of Western cosmopolitan plutocratic ambitions.

Thus from Tokyo, Peking, Sydney, Paris to the deepest African wilderness, the Global Plutocrats have left their greasy and syphilitic paws. Peoples with thousands of years of High History, and Cultures such as the Japanese, Chinese, Europeans and Arabs, have had their innate value systems overturned so as to facilitate the insane objective of one Global Village (or is it shopping centre?) in which all look alike, affect bourgeois manners, dress alike, consume alike and finally die identical deaths from the global toxaemia of fast foods, mass pollution, deculturation, unnecessary economic competition over undesirable (from an objective stand) life-styles. Thus poples suffocate, swamped in the asphalt values of a Marxoid/Capitalistic materialist-progress-mania and Coca-Cola/McDonalds/Aids/libertinism, and its ideological excrescence.

As the other essays in The Social Revolutionary Nature Of Australian Nationalism have demonstrated, Marxism in its authentic cosmopolitan-materialistic form is completely non-existent outside of the Capitalist West. The so-called Marxist nations have ceased to regard internationalistic dialectical materialism seriously, at least since the Stalinist Revolution of the 1930’s. All the Stalinoid ideologies (Maoism, Castroism, Titoism, Third World Socialism etc.) have essentially radical-nationalist potentials or underpinnings, which have synthesised socialism – with the bio-spiritual/geo-political reality of the NATION. This was an inevitable organic evolution and demonstrative of the fact – that GREAT MOTHER NATURE, in her PROFOUND WISDOM, would not tolerate the aedopistic tamperings of insane rebellious troglodytes, who deluded themselves that by “Rationalist/Materialist” methods, they could overrule the SUPERIOR WILL of the GREAT ARCHITECT of the universe. The Causes for LIFE manifesting itself, and evolving into a multiplicity of forms was an ORGANIC IMPERATIVE, which would not allow its own confusion. It is from this same imperative that the idiosyncratic uniqueness of the LIVING/BREATHING organism defined as a NATION, derives its WILL to perpetuity.

It is for this reason that all genuine Western socialistic national-revolutionaries, share some affinity with all Third World socialistic-nationalists, be they Gaddafi’s Libyans or the Sandinista, the Peronista, and similar formations in Latin America. The various ideologies of progressive and/or radical Australian nationalists, such as J.T. LANG, Billy HUGHES, W.G. SPENCE, A.CALWELL, B.O’DOWD, Henry LAWSON and William LANE etc., all desired for the Australian people – the preservation and self-realization of our Nation, within a non-chauvinistic anti-belligerent NATIONALIST-PEOPLE’S-COMMUNITY. This potentially is also the objective of every genuine progressive and/or radical nationalist Nation-State, or movement in the world today. That which we have desired and continue to desire for ourselves, we affirm for all national-people’s movements (regardless if some continue to use Marxoid semantics as a pragmatic revolutionary methodology) which have asserted for themselves their Right of Existence as Sovereign peoples – free from the nihilistic encroachment of global corporate capitalism and its anti-organic machinations.

(Note: December 2005. For the continued ideological relevance of the Sandinista and its relationship to what is generically known as ‘ethical socialism’ within the patriotic context, refer to the speech given by Alejandro Bendana to the commemoration of the 61st anniversary of General Sandino. This commemoration was held in Managua’s Olaf Palme Convention Centre on February 21 1995. See the Internet.)

(Author’s February 2007 Note: For a comprehesive appreciation of the relationship between Gaddafi’s Third Universal Theory and Juan Peron’s Third Justicialist Position and the Sandinista and Third Position parties in the West, see the biography of former Peronist minister, Horocio Calderon (a personal friend of Gaddafi and Peron): Al-Qadhafi: “Jerusalem Operation”, 1983. This work was translated from Spanish into many languages, including English. The ascendency of Hugo Chavez and the emergence of a patriotic bloc of Latin American nations represents an acknowledgement that the essence of the Peronista and Sandinista remain historically correct. The momentary historical defeat of political ideologies or states is simply the history of ‘might makes right’ Their re-ascendency is a confirmation that the issues these groups sought to address certainly were never solved by the imperialists. The grievances remained. The new Bolivaran vision that acknowledges the position of Cuba and Castro (which has also undergone historical changes) is equally a valid confirmation of these ideas as is the re-growth of nationalist and patriotic forces in what was – the Soviet Union.)

We are LIVING BEINGS who share an innate solidarity with “ALL OF LIFE” in its struggle for continuity and self-realization. We are not nor ever shall be simply economic units and factors of consumption and production. Economics is a function of life and not its determinant. Therefore we completely reject the insane hallucinations of the Anglo-American-Zionist bloc – recognizing fully that it is the Thatcherite-Reaganist plutocratic alliance, which shall answer to History for its crimes against LIFE.(Author’s 2002 note: The unholy trinity of Bush, Blair and ‘Bibi’ is simply the new millennium’s continuation of the imperialistic Freidmannite London School of Economics, with its laissez-faire liberalism on all levels, including the liberal use of military force. It aims to fulfill the semi-messianic dream of a New Jerusalem within the parameters of a global Anglophone plutocratic dictatorship, a new monolingual Babylon The Great destined to suffer the fate of the Tower of Babel.)

“What does it matter, after all?” he murmured to himself. “There is nothing worrying over so long as one does one’s best. Things are coming along all right. We may be only stumbling towards the Light but we’re getting there just the same. So long as we know that what does it matter?”

“What am I?” he thought, looking up at the stars, which shone the brighter because the moon was now hidden behind the train. “I AM THAT I AM, as the old Jew God was, as we all are. We think we can change everything and we can change nothing. Our very thoughts and motives and ideals are only bits of the Eternal Force, that holds the stars balanced in the skies and keeps the earth for a moment solid to our feet. I cannot move it. I cannot affect it. I cannot shake it. It alone is.”

“No more, he thought on, “Can Eternal Force outside of me move me, affect me, shake me. The Force in me is as eternal, as indestructible, and as infinite, as the whole universal force. What it is I am too. The unknown Law that gives trend to Force is manifest in me as much as it is in the whole universe beside, yet no more than it is in the smallest living thing that swims in a drop of water or floats in the air. I am a part of that which is infinite and eternal and which working through man has made him conscious and given him a sense of things and filled him with grand ideals sublime as the universe itself. None of us can escape the Law even if we would because every act and every thought and every desire follows along in us to that which has gone before and to the influences around, just as the flight of a bullet is according to the weight of the bullet, and its shape, and the pressure and the direction it was fired, and the wind.”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, pp.222-223

“Can it be that Nemesis sleeps for us, he who never slept for any, he who has never yet saw wrong go unavenged or heard the innocent blood cry unanswered from the ground? Can it be that he has closed his ears to the dragging footfalls of the harlot host and to the sobs of strong men hopeless and anguished because work is wanting and the sighing of wearied women and to the death rattle of slaughtered babes? Surely though God is not and Humanity is weak yet Nemesis is strong and sleepless and lingers not! Surely he will tear down the slum and whelm the robbers in their iniquity and visit upon us all punishment for the crime, which all alike have shared. Into the pit which we have left digged for the children of others shall not our own children fall?”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, pp. 129-130.

“This accursed competitivism of ours has not friends but those who fear personal loss by a change of system. Not one. It has hirelings, Praetorian guards, Varangians, but not a devoted people. Its crimes are so great that he is a self-condemned villain who knowing them dreams of justifying them. There is not one man who would mourn it for itself tomorrow. A dozen times this century it has been on the verge of destruction, and what has saved it, every time is simply that those who assailed it had not a supreme ideal common among them as to how they should re-build. It is exactly the same with political action as it is with revolutionary movements. It will fail until men have faith.”

“How can we get it? Asked Ned, for Geisner had ceased speaking and mused with a far-off expression on his face.”

“If we ourselves have it, sooner or later we shall give it to others. Hearts that this world has wounded are longing for the ideal we bring, artist-souls that suffering has purified and edged are working for the Cause in every land, weak though we are we have a love for the Beautiful in us, a sense that revolts against the unloveliness of life as we have it, a concept of what might be if things were only right. In every class the ground is being turned by the ploughshare of discontent, everywhere we can sow the seed broadcast with both hands. And if only one seed in a thousand springs up and bears, it is worth it.”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, p.116

“Civilisation is destroying itself. The socialistic idea is the only thing that can save it. I look upon the future as a mere race between the spread of Socialism as a religion and the spread of that unconditional discontent which will take revenge for all its wrongs by destroying civilisation utterly, and with it much, probably most, that we have won so slowly and painfully of Art and Science.”

“That would be a pity” said Ned. He would have spoken differently had he not gone with Nellie last night, he thought while saying it.

I think so. It means the whole work to be done over again. If Art and Science were based on the degradation of men I would say “away with them!” But they are not. They elevate and ennoble man by bringing to them the fruition of elevated minds. They are expressions of high thoughts and deep feelings; thought and feeling which can only do good, if it is good to become more human. The artist is simply one who has a little finer soul than others.”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, p. 117

“You know what being a Socialist means, Ned?” asked Geisner, looking into the young man’s eyes.”

“I’ve got a notion,” said Ned, looking straight back. “There are socialists and Socialists, just as there is socialism and Socialism. The ones that babble of what they do not feel, because it’s becoming the thing to babble, the others have a religion and that religion is Socialism.”

“How does one know a religion? – When one is ready to sacrifice everything for it. When one only desires that the Cause may triumph. When one has no call for self and does not fear anything that man can do, and has a faith which nothing can shake, not even one’s one weakness.”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, pp.114-115

“All that any religion has been to the highest thoughts of any people, Socialism is, and more, to those who conceive it aright. Without blinding us to our own weaknesses and wickedness, without offering to us any sophistry or cajoling us with any fallacy, it enthrones Love above the universe, gives us Hope for all who are down trodden and restores to us the Faith in the eternal fitness of things. Socialism is indeed a religion demanding deeds as well as words. Not until professing socialists understand this will the world at large see Socialism as it really is.”

William Lane, preface, The Workingman’s Paradise.

“The basis of all slavery and all slavish thought is necessarily the monopoly of the means of working, that is of living. If the state monopolised them, not the state ruled by the propertied classes but the state ruled by the whole people, to work would become every man’s right. Nineteen out of twenty laws would be useless (i.e. unnecessary).”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, p.119

In his “Cosme Publication,” September 1898, page 2, Lane wrote of his “absolute and unshakeable faith in what we commonly call “God.” And when I say God, I mean neither the idol built of wood or stone by the crude hands of savages nor the idol build of words and phrases by the equal heathenism of higher races. I mean by God the sense of oneness, the livingness, the completeness, of that inconceivable power which working through matter called us and all the wondrous universe we see into being. That power I know and feel is supreme beyond all conceiving. Nothing is beyond its control.”

The same issue of Cosme is instrumental to the articulation of Lane’s conceptualisation of communism, which is the common view of all the protagonists of some form of organic-ethical socialism… “To me communism is part of God’s law. He who tries to live for his fellows as for himself, he who with all his heart and soul endeavours to be a communist himself, freely and to mould on communistic lines the social organization without which man cannot live on earth, he is, in so far, serving God and obeying God’s law.

By communism, Lane implied the organic-tribalistic-collectivist society, which the early Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples and all Indo-European peoples possessed before their dispossession by the purely economically-centred decadent Roman Empire – and its successor the Judaeo-Christian, cosmopolitan western civilisation.

In “Cosme Monthly” September 1896, page 4, he wrote regarding the new settlement he founded some forty five miles south of his “New Australian Commune” in Paraguay…”Colonia cosme is a common hold of English speaking whites, who accept among their principles. Life marriages, Teetotalism and the Colour Line. And who believe that communism is not merely expedient but is right.”

Under the nome de plume of John Miller, Lane wrote in page 5 of the Brisbane “Worker” of the 13/6/1891…”Class governance is a usurpation, a tyranny which has its roots in the ages when military castes, ground the peaceful tillers of the soil into slavery. Our parliamentary system, of which the very opponents of one-man-one-vote profess to be so proud, is only a degenerated survival of the assembly at which in primitive times our Teutonic forefathers gathered, free and equal, to make for themselves laws for their common governance.”

In the Brisbane “Daily Mail” of the 18/2/1930, John Lane recounted how William Lane would announce … “We Germanic people came into history as communists. From our communal village we drew the strength which broke Rome down, and the energy which even yet lets us live.”

Lane’s conception of one indivisible, national-people’s community is specified in the following quotation from the “Boomerang” of the 19/11/1887…

“Australia is not a sect or a section, it is not a caste or a class, or a creed, is not to be a Southern England (note: Southern England was more pronouncedly class orientated than the Midlands) nor yet another United States. Australia is the whole white people of this continent.”

Lane’s ethno-centrism should not be misconstrued as a belligerent ethnic chauvinism of either the nazi-fascist or Zionist type, but to the contrary. Lane, like Gaddafi, and many other socialist thinkers, recognized that the only organically realizable communitarian society – must necessarily be based upon Natural Living Realities, such as specific tribal, family, ethnic, spiritual, historical and other unique geo-political determinants. Therefore Lane’s ethno-centrism was not based upon the imperialistic HERRENVOLK/CHOSEN PEOPLE psychology, which seeks to dispossess peoples or to enslave them, but rather was/is an integral feature of all progressive and/or radical-nationalistic ideologies the world over.

Such societies favour autarchy and prefer to trade between sovereign nation-states, rather than allow transnational corporate bodies to determine (purely from their own profit motive), the economic development of nations. Their foreign policy is necessarily pan-nationalist within the parameters of specific geo-political spheres, where co-nationalistic commonwealths (i.e. in the dictionary sense and not to be confused with the British commonwealth) regulate economic /military integration for the mutual advantage of all participant states.

Co-nationalism or a global community of confederate sovereign state-socialist nations, is the only organically viable and desirable form of internationalism. Within this context the internationalist aspirations of all genuine socialists shall achieve its realisation. The Marxoid notion of a global dictatorship of the so-called proletariat is as obnoxious and anti-human an idea, as is the purely economic ideal of the global consumer society. This is the essence of Gaddafi’s “Third Universalist Theory” which is endorsed by all genuine radical and/or progressive-nationalists, as well as that which is also endorsed by the still partly Marxoid/materialistic Stalinoid movements.This position wasanticipated by Scottish nationalist, Andrew Fletcher of Saltoon 1653 – 1716, as evidenced by the quote below. Both nationalism and internationalism are reconciled in pan-nationalism / co-nationalism formulating an inter-Nationalism

“Show me a true patriot, and I will show you a lover not merely of his own country, but of all mankind. Show me a spurious patriot, a bombastic fire-eater, and I will show you a rascal. Show me a man who loves other countries equally with his own and I will show you a man entirely deficient in a sense of proportion. But show me a man who respects the rights of all nations, while ready to defend the rights of his own against them all and I will show you a man who is both a naionalist and an internationalist”

Being cognizant of organic realities, it is completely understandable as to why Lane’s socialism was necessarily Australianist and Indo-European in conception. It could be nothing more nor less, as the Australian people since European settlement, have been predominantly Indo-European in character.

Like all these profound thinkers, Lane recognized the power of the “Unknowable One” whose all-pervasive hand shapes “ALL THINGS”, and by which human history has been manipulated towards a finale struggle between Light and Delusion, between Objective Reality and human caprice.

This apocalyptic battle between the champions of Life and those who would enslave and negate its Rights – shall usher in a NEW AGE. In the “NEW ERA OF THE MASSES” (to quote a Gaddafian phrase) all the peoples of this planet shall finally be free to pursue their God-given Destiny independent of maniacal materialistic manipulations and distortions.

“I am the breath of the lute, I am the mind of man, gold’s glitter, the light of the diamond and the sea-pearl’s lustre Van.”

“I am both good and evil, the deed and the deed’s intent – temptation, victim, sinner, crime, pardon and punishment.”

“Yes,” said Geisner; “that and more. Brahma and more than Brahma. What Prince Buddha thought out too. What Jesus the carpenter dimly recognized. Not only Force, but Purpose, or what for lack of better terms we call Purpose, in it all.”

“And what Purpose; what is it? Ned was surprised to hear his own voice uttering his thought.”

“Who shall say? There are moments a few moments when one seems to feel what it is, moments when one stands face to face with universal Life and realizes wordlessly what it means.”

“When one in anguish and sorrow unendurable. When one has seen one’s soul stripped naked and laid, with all its black abysses and unnatural sins, the brutishness that is in each man’s heart known and understood – the cowardice, the treachery, the villainy, the lust. When one knows oneself in others and winds into a mist of despair, hopeless and heart-wrung, then come the temptations, as the prophets call them, the miserable ambitions dressed as angels of light, the religions which have become mere drugged pain-lullers, the desire to suppress thought altogether, to end life, to stupefy one’s soul with body pain, with mental activity.” “And if,” he added, “if in one’s heart Humanity has lodged itself, if one’s pain is for others more than it is for oneself, then it may be that one shall feel and know.”

“To me the purpose of life is Self consciousness, the total Purpose I mean. God seeking to know God. Eternal force one immeasurable Thought. Humanity the developing consciousness of the little fragment of the universe within our ken.”

William Lane, The Workingman’s Paradise, pp. 76-77.

“…A great Thought so sublime that we can trust like children in the Purpose of the forces that give it birth.”

“To you and to me this Thought speaks and pleads, wherever we are, whoever we are, weakening our will when we would do wrong, strengthening our weakness when we would do right. And while we hear it and listen to it we are indeed as gods, knowing good from evil.”

“It is ours this Thought, because sinful men (my note: Lane’s conception of sin is the pantheistic one of a TRANSGRESSION against the “SELF” and a disregard for the sanctity of life) as we all are, have shed their blood for it in their sinfulness, have lived for it in their earnest weakness, have felt their hearts grow tender despite themselves and have done unwittingly deeds that shine as brightly to our mental eyes as do the seen and unseen stars that strew the firmament of heaven.”

“The brute-mother who would not be comforted because her young was taken gave in the end to the Christs who have surrendered all because the world sorrows. And we, in our yearning and our aspirations, in our longings and our strugglings and our miseries, may engender even in these latter days a Christ whom the world will not crucify, a Hero Leader whose genius will humanize the grown strength of this supreme and sublime thought.”

“Let us not be deceived! It is in ourselves that the weakness is. It is in ourselves that the real fight is between the Old and New. It is because we ourselves cling to the old fears and kneel still before old idols, that the Thought still remains a Thought only, that it does not create the New Order which will make of this weary world a Paradise indeed.”

Neither ballots nor bullets will avail us unless we strive of ourselves to be men, to be worthier to be dwelling houses of this Thought of which even the dream is filling the world with madness divine. To curb our tongues, to soften our own hearts, to be sober ourselves, to be virtuous ourselves, to trust each other – at least to try – this must we do, before we can justly expect of others that they should do it. Without hypocrisy, knowing how we fall short of our ideal, we must ourselves first cease to be utterly slaves of our own weaknesses.”

5. Afterword

Though I have always favoured a strong “Socialism” within the Australian historical tradition, I would like to state a qualification: it would be INCORRECT to demand total state ownership of the factors of production, distribution and exchange. Rather, there should be a MIXED, part command-structured economy, which permits private property with genuine non-exploitive private enterprise (which could include even sole proprietor larger companies) as long as these bodies act in the national and social interest and fulfil the political objectives of the Australian national people’s state. Such enterprise should be open to both public scrutiny and where appropriate – public subsidy. Businesses, which do not provide essential commodities or have low utility in the provision of services etc., do not deserve state support.

This new ethical-socialist economy would implement aspects of the old Social Credit and National Credit policy – namely the public control of money issue. The traditional welfare state and syndicalist ideals of the early “Australian-Socialists” should apply. For those persons who may prefer a more communalistic lifestyle, I can see nothing wrong in a state-subsidised (initially), scrutinised and patronised system of alternative collectives in certain areas of production. This would include agri-business.

In such a mixed economically pluralist society every individual from the former corporate executive to the counter-culture “communalist” to the environmentalist, could find a legitimate social niche in which he could optimise his inherent desires. Therefore, while the nation would realise itself politically, the individual could achieve his personal goals.

“The State of the Whole People” and NOT the Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat has always been the objective of the Australian nationalist movement, of the early and contemporary “Australian-Socialists.”

The maxims of such a society would be:

“Order without Oppression; Liberty Without License.”

“Whatever will benefit Australia, that we are for; whatever will harm Australia, that we are against.” William Lane.

“Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come.” Victor Hugo.

6. Labour’s Religion, by William Lane

First published in The Worker, 1890

Every week, as penance for my sins, I tread with naked mind the wordy waste of the Worker’s exchanges.

It is a Pilgrim’s Progress fraught with many tribulations. Last week, for instance, I stubbed my mental toes against this jagged flint in the columns of Drake’s Commonwealth.

That a large number of prominent Labour leaders, all over the world, are atheists, agnostics, and miscellaneous freethinkers, is undeniable. Even the Brisbane Worker, the official organ of the Australian Labour Federation, is openly materialistic – contemptuously discarding spiritual and moral forces as factors in the solution of social problems.

This is said in support of the allegation that “the Labour party is irreligious;” though Senator Drake is good enough to add that “personally he does not think a majority of Labour electors are irreligious”.

Labour electors will no doubt signify at the ballot box later on what they think of patronizing exoneration. The Worker, speaking out of the mouth of its Fool, gives thanks forthwith that among its manifold delinquencies it has at least done nothing to earn it the imprimatur of this Quack.

Irreligious? What is it to be irreligious? Nay, turn the question round – To be religious, what is that?

We pluck a flying feather from thy wing, O Drake, to write this answer.

There are many ways of being religious. You may be religious like a bishop, by rule and rote and ritual. Or like the witch doctor of some savage tribe, dancing with bared blade among the faithful, seeking a victim for the sacrifice.

Or like the gentle Sister of Mercy, afloat on a calm current of good deeds. Or like the whirling dervish, lashing his piety to the frenzy point of self-mutilation.

Or you may be religious like the poet, in whose soul the beauty of nature sets the Angelus ringing. Or like the rude iconoclast who smashes all definite shapes of God, and is mute and reverent before the all-pervading sense of the Eternal.

Or you may see God in the Eucharist, like the pious Catholic. Or like the Pantheist behold his Real Presence in all that is – the flower that you pluck for loving, the toad that you turn from for loathing; the mighty ocean and the protoplasmic ooze upon its floor; the towering mountain and the pebble at its base; the suns, the moons, the stars, burning forever in unfathomable deeps, and the microscopic parasite whose universe is a single atom; in these, like the Pantheist, seeing not the works of God merely, but God himself.

When little minds say that the Labour party is irreligious, they mean that it does not bind him within the covers of a book, or lock him up in a box, to be let out once a week for the exclusive benefit of the elect.

They mean that it is not religious in their particular way, which is often some very narrow way, cramping the soul instead of filling it with the divine afflatus that lifts to heaven.

These little minds, measuring us with their little creeds! Little in their judgments because little in their comprehensions.

The largest conception that most of them seem capable of is the hell to which they consign the vast majority of men who do not conform to their littleness.

There are many ways of finding God that they wot not of. You may tread the Milky Way, and knock at the gates of the stars seeking him. Or you may seek and find him in the gutters of life.

The Labour party finds him in the service of humanity. Can one strive to make Man better than he is, and be irreligious? Can one carry the light of hope into dark places, and know not God?

Answer, O little minds!

The Worker, they say is “openly materialistic”. Let us plead guilty to the impeachment.

We believe in good food, good clothes, and decent houses to live in.

We believe that men are influenced by their material surroundings. We believe that virtue doesn’t get a chance to blossom in the slums, and that the sweater sows more seeds of evil than any devil of mythology.

We believe that matter and spirit are so mysteriously united that they suffer or sing together, and together are uplifted or debased.

Squalid conditions produce squalid souls. A noble people can exist only in an ennobling environment.

Nothing in the wide world is so sensitive to its surroundings as the Spirit. The tenderest bud calls for less care. The soil in which it is to grow must be carefully adjusted to its needs. Its delicate youth must be shielded from the blistering winds that blow from the mouth of the Pit. It must be assiduously cultivated, for the Garden of the soul reverts rapidly to its primitive wildness.

The Labour party does not meddle in the supernatural, if that’s what the little minds mean.

It sets up no God to be worshipped on pain of damnation. It realizes that for each of us God is something different, while still in essence the same.

It concerns itself only with the material side of existence; but it realizes that the materialistic is the sun, soil, and shower in which the flowers of the Spiritual unfold and have their being.

Even the saint must eat. Uprooted from the sap-giving earth the buds of holiness wither and fail. What do you expect to find in the slums – saints or savages?

To be materialistic in the Labour sense is not to be irreligious. Nay, it is doubtful if this stigma of the little minds can be fastened even upon those who assert that nothing exists but matter. For grant these what they claim, and matter then becomes the Eternal and Inscrutable.

Whatever the philosophic outlook, always for thoughtful minds there looms the great mystery of Consciousness, or Intelligence, or Spirit – call it what you will.

Say that it is inherent in the nature of matter from without; nothing is solved either way: You don’t get rid of mystery by sticking a label on it.

How does matter think? What is the Thinking Principle?

To most men who have reflected deeply upon this subject there has come the conviction of some transcending Power in the universe.

They have not all called it God; they have not all presumed to be upon confidential terms with it; but it seems to me that there you have the root idea of religion.

We do not all see God alike – not even in the shaving glass; though some of us seem content at such moments to hold the mirror up to nature, and seek nature’s God no farther.

The little minds can conceive of no God beyond the limits of their parochial theologies.

The Labour party knows that in all that is in nature there is something of the divine. It knows that the Soul is influenced by its environment, and it guesses it was for this reason God gave us a lovely and fertile world to dwell in.

The Labour party is materialistic, but its materialism aims at putting an end to the present ungodly distribution of God’s wealth.

Irreligious! The Labour party irreligious! These little minds, constructing God to some paltry pattern of their own!

The Labour movement is Christ’s movement. Like Christ it comes to preach the gospel of the poor; to convince men of the iniquity of riches in private hands; to pull down the mighty from their seats, and exalt the lowly.

And like Christ it preaches the redemption of the race through brotherhood and equality, and the upraising of a temple not built by hands.

In the Master’s words it says, ” Come unto me all ye who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest”.

Yet in the millennium we hope for there will be left a comfortable margin for human imperfections. Socialism is a business proposition for plain men, not a prospectus for angels. We don’t expect the lions to lie down with the lambs; nor is it necessary that all our Drakes should be swans.

%d bloggers like this: