Darrin Hodges And 'Old Victor' At Whiltelaw Towers
The war of words between Old Victor at Whitelaw Towers and Australian Protectionist Party (APP) spokesman Darrin Hodges, has been enlightening for all in the nationalist camp. I believe that Old Victor has brought out key psychological arguments that suggest our critic Mr. Hodges is motivated not by detached ideological concerns so much - as by a degenerative malice.
Even so, I would suggest that Mr. Hodges's rancour directed at me personally and politically in particular shows a high degree of calculation. It was the initial starter-point of the APP attack upon the old Australia First (I use the term 'APP' although many of their leading cadre at that time were inside Australia First) was to attack me in lieu of anyone else by name. This tactic allowed that every sin, every failure, every error, within the party, could be heaped upon one individual. If that person could be removed, those others who agreed with his line would fall with him by default - and possibly too, it was thought that some might make their peace with the new order. Either the APP faction would have taken over the old party - or damaged it fatally on the way out. As we now know, this clique overestimated its success and left too soon (sic), believing that Australia First was destined for division and collapse.
In point of fact, the APP leaders merely hardened the cadres of nationalism and a rebirth of Australianist principle got under way. That story we have told elsewhere.
As far as the new Australia First is concerned, this tactic of attacking me singly, still has application. Curiously, as Old Victor has exposed the wonton neo-con politics of APP, the reply of Mr. Hodges has often been - to attack me rather than spit further venom at the 'rednecks' and 'white-trash' at Whitelaw Towers.. That is peculiar, in so far as I am not connected to Whitelaw Towers. The model remains that I must appear to APP to encapsulate certain arguments that are anathema to their neo-con politics, within my writings and within my personal history - and I must be assailed at every opportunity, and any who share any aspect of the world-view of nationalism criticised through the prism of me and my ideas and my history. I am flattered, but this line has limited impact because I just don't represent the totality of the movement!
So, why do it anyway? In the latest clashes with Old Victor, Mr. Hodges shifted some ground. This time, rather than lie that I am a "Moslem supporter" who harbours affinity for Islamist terrorism (he says that because I condemn both Islamism and Zionism. a position he just can't abide), he has claimed (falsely) that I have described myself as a "racial Marxist" in the pages of Audacity! He goes on to say that I have synthesised my Australian nationalism with some type of socialism - and therefore, I am the enemy (of Australian free enterprise conservatism, I suppose?). This switch in direction tells us a little of the origins of Mr. Hodges's politics. He has given "enemy" a new meaning.
Twice in my life, I have opposed the direction of the conservatives both in the Liberal-National parties - and elsewhere. When very young I became ultra suspicious of those who supported the Vietnam War; yet, whilst abhorring the 'attacks' on our troops made by the leftists, I could not bring myself to say that their critique of the war was completely wrong. I refused to agree with the 'Right' which shouted and screamed for a war the establishment ultimately discontinued and which employed state-sanctioned violence against the Left. I thought sincere patriotic people were being manipulated to drum up support for a moron war and to fight the Left only to the benefit of the business class. For my presumption, some of these rightists said I was a leftist and from that a tale arose as repeated from time to time by the very camp of Liberals who now lend succour to the APP. Their predecessors in the Liberal-National conservative wing said I was a 'national bolshevik', a type of communist with nationalist predelictions. The then-young aspiring leaders of this conservative fraction have grown through time as I have, neither losing sight of the other. For me, these reactionaries always represented a useful tool for the Liberal Party because they sometimes played with the idea that they were really 'hard' patriots and that the type of nationalism I was forever involved in, a dangerous radicalism. That Mr. Hodges should now say the same sort of thing as these Liberals means he has identified those who feed his thoughts.
And to the present cause of the ruccus with them and Mr. Hodges. The second time I moved against the conservatives was when they announced themselves protagonists of the 'war on terror', when they licensed people to mouth off about unintegrated Moslems and radical Islamist preachers and sold the idea that Israel was the great friend of Western conservatism. I cried whoa!! I said that this was a scam to tie patriotic people to the establishment and that Islamism and Zionism were equal opponents of Australian freedom. For my presumption, I was called "pro Islamic". In the same way as I was a communist when I questioned both sides of the Vietnam War!
The shift of ground back to my supposed communist affinities must have a reason for being?
In my view, the new line has life because, in the crisis of Australian globalist capitalism, there is a potential for a true nationalist politics. That politics demands we think in terms of a new Australianist ideal with its roots in the soil of the popular and labourist traditions and the great seam of independence thought. The protectionists' pale Liberal type patriotism may be called upon by the conservative reactionaries to truncate any movement of this Australianist type. The APP may have as its function the running of a line that misleads and demobilizes popular struggle and nationalist ideology. It must play a chameleon game, moving under false colours. whilst always being the opposite to nationalist politics. It might be called on to play act at nationalism as a type of counter-gang force.
So if Mr. Hodges is motivated by malice, it must be a spirit tempered by calculation. It means that the APP is already planning the next round of struggle against the nationalists.
In the interim, all are watching for the next bout with Old Victor.
Home: Defend Australian Nationalism