We Are For Real Australia Not The 'Mainstream': Why And How Will Australians Move From The Main Stream To The Ex Stream??

Jim Saleam and Brendan Gidley for ANZAC Day 2009


We mean deliberately - to play on words. We do not mean with this article, that Australians should, or will, opt out of the political discourse and adopt crazed ways and nutty slogans ('extremism') as their answer to the current crisis of globalism. Quite the contrary. We mean that the time is rapidly approaching when a wide swathe of Australians, whom we call here Real Australia, will reject the pathways of the traditional, normal politics of the main stream, to take the other pathway - the outsider pathway, the 'ex' stream. We say that it is right. We say that it is really - the only pathway. We say that already people are moving in that direction, providing the party of Australianism, the Australian people's party in embryo called Australia First, with the core clientele it requires to grow.

The globalist order is now cracking apart and the New World Order is under challenge everywhere, by many diverse forces and for a multitude of reasons - such that the opportunity for a clear (but difficult) fight for Australian independence can be acted upon. That is the fact. This is no time to say of Australians that "people aren't ready", or "we must wait to get resources", or "they're too brainwashed and too comfortable yet", or even worse - to retreat to a happy closed world of a club or a speaking group, or an intellectual society, or even a pretend 'radical' group. In these associations we'd have an environment where all sorts of plans may be discussed, or ideas for utopias or for action laid out, where schemes from the interesting to the unreal can be entertained, but nothing is ever done.

Australia First recently authored a manifesto on this crisis: For The Globalising Australia State, The Hour Of Reckoning Has Struck. The full version appeared on the Internet at: http:ausfirst.alphalink.com.au/crisis.html

And its argument is being borne out day by day! The crisis of the current New World Order is one where it depends upon the strength of the 'world economy' being maintained in countries like India and China, where it depends upon the stability of certain countries not to be undermined causing its military resources to be stretched to breaking point, where the financial sickness of the old globalism weakens capitalism, meaning it can no longer even fight its wars for resources. The globalisers spun a yarn that involved integrating the world's economies and political structures to make capitalism (the order of the banks and the multinationals) more secure; now we see that a crisis anywhere, is a crisis of everything.

And what do we find? Even in the last three weeks prior to the publication of this article, predictions of war, insurgency and revolution have been made by many sober commentators in precisely the areas where the New World Order system needs to feed its industries or to stay quiet. In Iraq, the trillion dollar war that probably was instrumental in the current break-down of globalism, the puppet government has finally acknowledged the resistant-power of the Ba'athist insurgency and realises it must fight ever harder just to physically survive. The fall of the Occupation Government, so beloved of the Canberra political clique, must destabilise the Middle East, heralding great world disorder. An American military expert predicted before the US Senate that Pakistan is six months away from state-collapse, perhaps then causing Central Asia to lapse into super-chaos. So much for the Afghan war and the billions of dollars poured into shoring up Pakistan. The Maoist-communist insurgency in India has broadened and found new unity and recruits, as the fragmented world of India's ultra-communists gets new direction amidst the world economic downturn. They may bring down the Indian state and economy within a few years - and with it the remainder of the globalist fantasy. And China? Threatened as it is from disorder within courtesy of mass unemployment and economic slowdown, it still feels its global reach as a new superpower a tempting aphrodisiac to meddle in the affairs of others. At the March G20 Summit, its rise as a power was noted by all. It now interferes openly in Australia's internal affairs.

New World Order economics and New World Order politics are dying. The two are bound up. A new era may be born from the collapse of the old. It is not necessarily a 'good' world either, but for our country to have the chance at freedom, the old must pass away. The globalist elite know all this.

And the panic is obvious! The chocolate-all-sorts president of the American superpower struts the world stage, backtracking on "post September 11" US policy everywhere. Peddling himself as a little bit white, a little bit black, a bit Moslem, a bit Christian, even a bit Jewish, he wants peace now, stability, cooperation, whilst he seeks to save capitalism from its excesses. But then, he increases the US military commitment in Afghanistan! Yet, faced too with economic collapse in America, he would open the borders and amnestize all illegal immigrants, driving millions of his 'countrymen' to poverty and violence. Those whom the gods destroy, they first make mad!

And what do we find in Australia? Desperation too. Money handouts. Plans for nation-building infrastructure projects. Political police disruption of minority organisations. The Australian traitor class appreciates, as Prime Minister Rudd has conceded in January, that this crisis is no passing phase, but a major problem of historical proportions, one capable of destroying a century of liberalism and its ultimate creation - globalism. The regime, the state itself, the ideas of liberalism and globalism, the people who live off the system and uphold it, all may fall. In the old days that was called revolution. Australia has heard no such warning of Armageddon in its history save once - from John Curtin who was faced with Japanese invasion. Yet the Armageddon of this current regime which has condemned our Nationality to death - can only be one that we welcome and hardly fear.

Our national poet Henry Lawson put it that a great crisis would face the country and test its mettle. It would demand leadership. The nationalists would welcome the opportunity to put Australia aright. For a long time many patriotic people have warned of many problems in our country. Poverty. Moral laxity. Social breakdown. Family collapse. Drugs. Let alone the great campaign of the elites to destroy our very national identity and heritage. Nothing could ever be done because the regime stood upon the rock of economic power. No more. Unemployment rises, businesses fail. The regime has become just-a-little-vulnerable. There emerges the hint that we will have the once-in-a-century chance to win a battle for Australia on Australian soil, to change everything, to create the co-operative Commonwealth, to win what the old heroes of Labour called the 'workingman's paradise', to secure the future of the Australian People.

The question we have is this: why would Australians opt to fight a major crisis of the regime itself with mainstream politics? And what do we mean by the Main Stream and its politics?

Mainstreaming essentially means reaching for the very people still enthralled by Establishment ideas and values - and parties. Whether by fear of change, by conventionalism, by financial bonding or whatever, the Main Stream is wedded to the regime. Died in the wool Labor, Liberal and National voters, National Federation of Farmers' members, union chiefs, media bosses, leading bureaucrats, Australia's wealthier shareholders and property owners, and so on and on - support the regime. And many ordinary people do too.

What mainstreamers usually don't get is that political change, real change, is not a product of mass electioneering with competing party 'images' put before the public. Change cannot occur while great masses are prepared to support the regime. And grumblings aside about this or that government, or party boss, or erroneous state policy do not mean a rejection of the liberal globalist society. Clearly, some 70% of Australians most certainly support the regime and of the rest, there are varying degrees and qualities of radicalisation and ideological disposition. The liberal globalist regime has weaknesses, but it rests upon strong social and legal (and physical-force) props. No mainstreamer (and yes, at this time too, no nationalist), is going to change this, at least not right at this moment.

The Main Stream group is the majority of this society and it is all about the politics of image and elections. It is for the politics of compromise and concession. For those would-be Australianists who proclaim themselves mainstreamers, it means trying to the win this mass support, the majority support, via the methods of those in the elites who have held state power. It is a fantasy.

A mainstreamer thinks that the problem of the perceived lack of success for the nationalist movement up to now at least, lies in particular policy notions or in certain attitudes held by us - which together, 'put people off'. In truth, there may be any number of utterly sensible things and now apocalyptic predictions which we do say, or could say, that 'put people off'. That is the real issue. Who said the Main Stream mass at this juncture, even amidst the early-signs of the collapse of globalism, really wants to do anything? Or thinks consistently enough and in a sensible patriotic manner? If it really did these things, Australia would not be where it is now. A mighty mass movement of resistance to globalism would already exist! But here the mainstreamer plays with his own thought processes, deciding that the Main Stream really does agree with him (minus a few bad eggs), but is restrained from doing so publicly through its fear of stigmatisation via any open agreement with non-mainstreamers. This Main Stream mass supposedly decides elections, or values, or street level success, everything. Our victory, the mainstreamer decides, means cracking into this market - now or as quickly as possible. It means making the Main Stream mass less 'fearful' of us and us being, talking, acting - just like them. Yes, but in part, they are the problem too! It is the Main Stream suburbanism, consumerism, liberal attitudes to the values of the regime, that render its support problematical for a very long time.

Note this: the mainstreamer does not seek to persuade Main Stream people to nationalist positions, but rather he tries to conciliate them with sweeter sounding phrases; this would mean producing a formula which appears to have 'support', but which is shallow enough to be stolen by any Establishment candidate or activist prepared to mouth a few words in that direction (witness: Hanson and 'border protection' and the Liberal Party's Tampa affair). Not that this would put a mainstreamer off. How many times have we heard decent people say that the Liberal Party "stole One Nation's policies"? If it could do so - there was something wrong with the policies. Our current crop of mainstreamers ignore the experience of One Nation's mainstreamer faction. Arrogantly, they think they will do better!

Australia First is differentiated from those persons and groups who think, that by becoming of the 'Main Stream', they can reach the dizzy heights of political success. Quite the contrary. We recognize that the crisis into which the country is falling demands the initiation of struggle far in advance of the consciousness of this dead-mass, at this time. The foundation of a new national movement and its struggle to acquire and hold a clientele, demands a particular aggressive logic. Sweet reason is just not part of it. As we fight to do that, we cannot be overly concerned at how the Main Stream mass might perceive us. And there is the rub!

Essentially, the 'formula' of the mainstreamers is one that involves 'image' and that means trimming policies and pandering to media - as we shall explain.

The mainstreamer is overwhelmed by cosmetic appearance. Any person, any action, any symbol, any issue etc, who/which can be held (by media and our political opposition) to be non Main Stream, sends him into a frenzy of denial and repudiation. Hence mainstreamers will abandon friends, maintain public facades that they may or may not believe in, confuse their associates who can no longer decide what they do actually believe, create fluffy programmes and adopt non threatening (sic) imagery. Our problem with this is that it is not a clever game (sic), but a process that finally leads to the transformation of the mainstreamer would-be-nationalist into his opposite. He becomes a version of what he says he is supposedly fighting. There is at this time an Australian example of that in micro-form and one larger case of it, but we need name no names here. There are foreign examples too (in so far as the Euro experience of nationalist politics can always be imposed upon our conditions). Times are changing and these people too must think about which path to take. We need insult as little as possible.

What we are saying is that mainstreaming is actually a strategic recipe for failure, not for success. The Main Stream myth is often held out to minority organizations as a cure for marginalisation. The temptation is always there to revise our ideas out of existence and to opportunistically seek easy pathways.

The regime stands. That tells us something.

We are in a different phase of political growth. We are also having to build a party and movement which aims not for government change but regime change - which means we are not planning a Main Stream challenge!! Ultimately, we seek to change the very way Australians live and think; thus, our nationalism challenges much that Australians are conditioned into. This means - the Main Stream does not want to know us at this time. One can moan on about that and invent any number of clever games to get them to move over, but really facts are facts.

Right now, we are building a new activist nationalist party. We must lay a basis for growth. Rather, we seek to represent Real Australia, those people who are prepared to stand up for their families, communities and heritage. This means and implies we rely upon elements of Australia's workers, farmers, small business and other patriotic working people who have already taken the path of struggle. It means we look for issue groups and other associations (cultural, intellectual and so on) where we can get a hearing and build resources. Their numbers will grow and are growing.

We are therefore fishing in the pool of Real Australia, not the Main Stream. The latter still live in the cloud cuckoo land of the lotus eater. They are our fellow Australians, yes, but they do not see what we see and feel what we feel. As for the mainstreamer pseudo nationalist who would lead us nowhere, we need to shun him as a plague! This commonsense approach says we will not be deflected from our path.

We need have no fear. It is the actual conditions that are producing the social elements we need to sustain the movement. There is a mighty awakening of Australians. Australians will not necessarily seek the mainstreamer logic as their solution. Why suppose that they will? Rather they will form up to defend their families, livelihoods and industries in increasing numbers.

Resistance to a nationalist challenge will also build. This will necessarily lead to confrontation. This resistance would come from liberal groups involved in anti racism (sic), refugee advocacy and multiculturalist propaganda; it would come from leftist groups whose policy is essentially globalist; it would come from sections of the mainstream parties and the liberal media; it would come from alien immigrant groups. It is unlikely that this opposition would always be entirely 'peaceful' nor be noted for its use of ordinary normal (mainstream) methods. Such a situation may also not endear Australia First to the Main Stream.

Nonetheless, it is the deepening of this crisis that can be relied upon. The awakening of the Australian people can also be relied upon. But decidedly, we must rely upon our own energy and devotion to the Australian People in whose cause we fight. It is the will which is decisive.


Home: Defend Australian Nationalism