Francis Parker Yockey's Thought In Australia

Dr. Jim Saleam

June 11 2003

The Kevin Coogan biography, Dreamer Of The Day: Francis Parker Yockey And The Post-War Fascist International (New York: Autonomedia, 1999), made no reference to Francis Parker Yockey's thought having had any impress, upon Australia. That was hardly surprising, whatever else may be the shortcomings of the Coogan text. Australian 'Right' affairs seldom make much impression upon European and American research and, in any case, material is difficult to come by. This short article will redress the lapse. It assumes some 'pre-knowledge' in the reader of the broad parameters of the subject and hence avoids going over 'old ground'. Neither does it discuss the precise elements of Yockey's political philosophy (a vast subject), preferring to concentrate on certain key issues which affected the Australian scene.

Yockey Arrives: The Les Leisemann Story

It should not be assumed that Yockey's thought and activities were at any point - unknown in Australia. The mini-saga of Yockey in Australia, begins with a Queensland identity, Leslie Leisemann. He had a 'colourful' past. As a 1930's advocate of the Social Credit doctrine, and a contact of the Australia First Movement of P.R. Stephensen, he found himself interned for a period during the Second World War. (1) Whilst detained, he made the acquaintance of Thomas Potts Graham, an English anti-semite, of all-but-paranoid disposition. (2) The two became firm friends, and remained in close contact after the war, and until Leisemann's death in the 1980's. Graham introduced Leisemann to the 'refinements' of anti-semitic doctrine and the two attempted correspondence with any Australians of similar mind - or 'potential'. They also corresponded with anti-semites overseas and accordingly exchanged letters with Arnold Spencer Leese, British publisher of the Gothic Ripples bulletin. Some other Australians also carried on correspondence with Leese in the 1950's. (3) Somehow too, Leisemann and Graham found Francis Parker Yockey's ideas and movement, around about late 1950.

As the record shows, Yockey had published his magnus opus, Imperium, in 1948. In late 1948, he and other helpers founded the European Liberation Front (ELF) and issued its manifesto, The Proclamation Of London. Yockey's project was to ideologically equip the marginal forces of Continental 'neo-fascism' with a new doctrine for an imminent crisis. He argued that these forces should 'tilt eastwards', favouring the Soviet side in the 'coming' clash with the United States; his logic rested upon the basis that Soviet rule or hegemony over Europe could never last and it was anyway 'spiritually' a less corrupting force than the American imperialism. Yockey predicted a European super-state which, in one way or another, would embrace Russia. (4) This rather simplified version of his geopolitics given here allowed for a national-revolution in America against plutocracy, but did not count on it - and relegated the white-colonies of the old European empires (such as Australia) to the position of minor pawns on a great chess board. We need not register any Australian angst at Yockey's geopolitics. Whereas a fraction of the Euro-nationalist forces approved of the doctrine (many did not), and whereas some Americans had dealings with it, the means by which it arrived in Australia were not as clear.

In 1975, I conversed with Leisemann in Brisbane. He informed me that he had in his possession "many" numbers of a bulletin issued by Yockey. He recalled it as Frontfighter. This was, of course, the newsletter of the European Liberation Front. Regrettably, his offer to turn them over to me was thwarted by a Queensland rainstorm which flooded out an old shed where Leisemann stored his papers. (5) It seemed that Leisemann had distributed Frontfighter to interested persons; however, although his memory was defective, he made it plain he preferred Leese and said there were "problems" between the two. Never particularly intellectually-minded, Leisemann did grasp the essential point: Yockey thought that the Soviet Union was an enemy of Zionism (usually Leisemann said: "the bloody Jews") and Leese thought the reverse. (6) At some point in the early 1950's, Leisemann maintained he heard nothing more of Yockey, but he had seen, but never read, Imperium, courtesy of an unnamed German immigrant in Queensland (hence it had come to Australia in the 1950's). Leisemann was interested that the National Socialist Party of Australia (of which he was then a strong supporter, indeed had been one since 1964) had "adopted" the book - as shall be discussed.

A German Brings The Word

Leisemann's claim that Imperium had made it to Australia in the 1950's was correct. Klaus Nikolai was a German immigrant living on Bribie Island when I met him in 1975, by way of chance contact. (7) However, interestingly, there was no personal link between him and Leisemann. Nonetheless, Nikolai's story was a useful one, both generally and in terms of tracing the influence of Yockey in Australia; hence I shall reconstruct it and precis it accordingly. He told me:

"I am a war criminal, I suppose…..

I was educated in Germany in the 1930's under National Socialism. Because I seemed promising, I was set to a 'Napola School', that is a political school controlled by the party. I eventually joined the Waffen SS, and in 1941, found myself as a junior officer, fighting on the Eastern Front….

Up til then, I believed the official ideology. It wasn't always said but we were told in the 1930's the Russian peoples, the Slavs in general, were 'subhuman'. We Germans were the Nordic Aryans, the master people. I never thought too deeply about it until I went into the Soviet Union. There was also a lot of war propaganda about the evils of communism, and much of it was true as we know, and we were told we were ridding the world of an evil system….

We entered an area where some Ukrainian peasants had arrested the communist officials and had proclaimed some sort of local government. An order came to my unit arrest them. It wasn't an unusual order and seemed sensible while we sorted things out. Later we were told to execute them, over fifty of them. I questioned the order. After all, they were Ukrainians and I thought we were 'using' them against Stalin; they didn't dislike us and had nominated all the communists to us and turned their prisoners over to us too. The order was confirmed at regiment level. I took it further and at that point I was told that the execution order had come from the other wing of the SS and had to be obeyed. I knew the penalty for disobeying an order. We shot them. And then you wonder why we lost that bloody war?!"

Nikolai said that this Eastern Policy of the Nazis had nothing to do with fighting communism or anything else logical. It was "madness", "colonialism" against "part of the white race". He went on:

"There are these American groups, you know with swastikas and things; they say they are 'National Socialists'. They say we were out to save the white race and to fight communism and they admire us. Don't ever believe their rubbish about what that war was about…."

Nikolai was subsequently wounded and discharged home. He later served in the Volkssturm, the 'People's Army' levy that fought as the German militia force in the last six months of the war. In 1949, he joined the Socialist Reich Party (SRP) of Major-General Otto Ernst Remer, a large-scale German nationalist party finally banned by the Constitutional Court in 1952-3, ostensibly as a "revival" of the Nazi party, but actually because it opposed the American control of Germany and would work (did work?) with the Eastern bloc to achieve reunification. At some point later, Nikolai migrated to Australia. It was when he was in the SRP that he first saw Imperium and heard the name of the European Liberation Front.

Nikolai said that Yockey had an influence on the SRP (that was correct) and advocated a unity of all the true nationalists. His book was a "new beginning" because it identified "American liberalism as a greater enemy of European culture than Soviet communism". Indeed, the SRP were officially 'neutralist', a position many Germans favoured. (8) It seems that Nikolai had acquired a copy in English (a major coup given that the book was published in so few copies) along with other materials published in German, and had brought these works to Australia. Nikolai subsequently introduced certain "I suppose right-wing" Australians to Yockey, but it cannot be said his efforts made any real impact. It might be that Australian 'Right' politics was staunchly in the pocket of the ruling conservative parties and the very idea of a 'neutralist' policy, in Germany or anywhere else, could easily have been viewed with suspicion, if not as - communist propaganda. Nonetheless, the Nikolai narrative confirmed Leisemann: Yockey's thought did arrive in Australia in the 1950's albeit without any perceptible effect upon the affairs of the Australian 'Right'.

The 'Nazi Party' Introduces Yockey To Australians

Ironically, in view of Yockey's actual interpretation of German Nazism (as below), the main force that introduced Imperium to an Australian audience was the Rockwell-line neo-nazi National Socialist Party of Australia (NSPA), formally founded in January 1964.

The first leader of the NSPA was the colourful Arthur Charles Smith (born 1935). I have discussed Smith in my doctoral thesis (9). Smith was at heart an Australian radical-nationalist, marginalised by years of isolation in several small neo-fascist type groups (Workers' National Party, Nationalist Workers' Party, National Unity Party) and through association with an equally colourful, if not usually criminal, coterie of associates. Smith found his way to Colin Jordan and then George Lincoln Rockwell and "the gimmick" of Nazism ("the gimmick": Smith's words quoted to police investigators). Here was a way to mobilise and publicise the 'Right' in a dramatic way. Unfortunately, this "gimmick" overwhelmed the nationalist impulse, causing the birth of a very different form of politics - but this takes us to far. We start with the NSPA founded by Smith, and other persons such as Donald Lindsay (10), Edward Cawthron and Brian Raven.

Smith was spoken to again for the purpose of this article. (11) As usual, he was precise. He recalled that Rockwell had "promoted" Yockey - which was certainly true at one point in the late 1950's/1960-1. However, there was later "some issue" taken by Rockwell (true: Rockwell denounced Yockey was a "Strasserist", a view favoured by Arnold Leese's spiritual heir, Colin Jordan, a subject discussed at greater length shortly). Smith had "read the book" possibly in the early 1960's, and opined that few in his Sydney circle were interested in it; its complexity left them far behind. "It was Ted Cawthron who took it up". Although from time to time, groups directed by Smith from 1964-72 would book halls under the name of the 'Francis Parker Yockey Debating Society' and so on, the book played no role in that immediate milieu. And as Smith conceded, his version of Australian National Socialism avoided any strident effort at intellectualisation "as Cawthron tried to do."

Hence we arrive squarely at the chief Australian progenitor of Yockeyist thought.

The Case Of Dr. Edward Cawthron.

The main figure in the propagation of Yockey's thought in Australia in the period of the 1960's and 1970's must be Dr. Edward (Ted) Cawthron.

My doctoral thesis also discussed Cawthron. However, this area can now be expanded out to address the present issue. (12)

Cawthron, born in 1940, studied science at Adelaide University, graduating with a Bachelor's Degree with Honours. In 1970, he graduated from the Australian National University with his Doctorate, his thesis composed upon a matter of nuclear physics. Cawthron had worked at the National University under the renowned Sir Mark Oliphant, his scientific acumen not in dispute (13)

But Cawthron's passion was politics. His appearance in the ranks of the Australian Nazis should not occasion the reader to assume that he was a 'neo-nazi' as we currently understand it (14), nor a partisan of the Rockwell model of the 1960's. Cawthron was acquainted with the writer and assisted in an academic project initiated in 1978; he was quoted by me thereafter. (15) It became clear in interviews, and Cawthron then confirmed it openly, that he always had idiosyncratic views about the 'relevance' of German National Socialism to the Australian scene - and had ultimately developed during his "Nazi period", a fulsome reservation about the emerging neo-nazi ideology coming out of the United States. He had confirmed what others in the neo-nazi milieu had derisively said of him - that he was not a neo-nazi and was planning to phase out the group which ironically he ultimately came to control.

At first, Cawthron affiliated to the NSPA, indeed helped to form it (1963-4), because he had two basic motivational 'ideas'. First: his particular interpretation of Australian nationalism placed him outside of Australian right-wing norms - because he was a nativist, not a follower of the narrow 'British idea' of our national identity. He thought a very different type of force, a militantly activist one, was necessary to mobilise a whole new popular clientele and that only a nativist nationalist movement could secure Australia's European (not simply British) heritage and freedom. Second: he interpreted the Second World War as a type of "European Racial Civil War" which had undermined the position of Western Civilization in the world. It had been wrong therefore to wage war against Hitler. Further, in his early period, he equated Soviet communism with the negative aspect of the colonial revolution and the crisis of Western Civilization, seeing the rise of each as a consequence of the war. But he was not a 'Hitlerite' as such (16) nor was he ever as outwardly vulgar as Rockwell's Nazis, whose provocative conduct inspired some in Australia. He accepted "the gimmick" might work in building a new force and in breaking old moulds, but he urged "professionalism" and the absence of uniforming and other Germanic imitations. In other words, Cawthron's 'Nazism' was therefore at the start - highly conditional.

However, as the 1960's wore on, and with the failures of the NSPA to prosper, Cawthron came to see 'Nazism' as - a tactical mistake. Then, he 'found' Imperium around 1965-6. Certain passages in Imperium were obviously critical, but also cryptic, references to Nazi Germany. Cawthron referred me to three passages that moved him to revise his views:

"The materialist race-thinking of the 19th century had particularly heavy consequences for Europe when it was coupled with one of the early 20th century movements of Resurgence of Authority. Any excrescence of theoretical equipment on a political movement is a luxury, and the Europe of 1933 - 2000 can afford none such. Europe has paid dearly for these old-fashioned racial theories and they must be destroyed."

"The racial snobbery of the 19th century was intellectual and its adoption in a too-narrow sphere by the Resurgence of Authority in Europe between the first two world wars was a grotesquerie."

"The attempt to interpret history in terms of Race must be abandoned. The 20th century sees it quite otherwise. It had a vogue of a century. It is now quite dead. Its last formulation, and its most radical, attempted to intervene in the sphere of action. That was the last attempt. An Empire of a thousand years duration - yes, but that has been actualized - in India, China, Egypt." (17)

Indeed, Yockey had amplified these thoughts in The Enemy Of Europe (1953), a pamphlet that sought to mobilise neo-fascist cadres and historical-fascist residue into a new politics. He said:

"Everyone must now openly admit that the engrafting of the outworn nonsense of the vertical race theory onto the glorious European Resurgence of Authority brought about by the European Revolution of 1933 was an enormous tragedy - all the more so since the coupling of these two ideas was in no way necessary or even logical." (18)

Cawthron could see by 1967 that there had been 'neo-fascist' objections to key components of the ideology and practise of Nazi Germany, criticisms which were valid and compelling. Nazi Germany had pursued a false 'racial doctrine' which had set Europeans against each other, the very thing which the neo-nazi movement claimed Nazism did not do and which they would negate with their new racial faith.

Cawthron's conditional Nazism had secretly snapped. It was Yockey's thought which had explained "the truth" as he saw it. Yet, Cawthron believed that maybe only Yockey had articulated this "truth" and otherwise he was "alone" with it in 1960's Australia whilst in total contradiction to his beliefs, being a major player in a 'Nazi movement'. Cawthron reported that he shared these revelations with no one except certain Hungarians who were exiled followers of the Hungarian 'Arrow Cross' party. These Hungarian wartime fascist collaborators with Germany were grouped in the Hungarist Movement's Australian section. Surprisingly, these Hungarians appreciated Cawthron's dilemma. They told him a 'Nazi' party was wrong tactics and that "to serve his nation and people", Cawthron had to be an "Australian nationalist" and a "socialist" rather than an abstract "white racialist" out there fighting communism in alliance with conservatives. They added that the relations between all races and nations should be on the basis of "co-nationalism" (co-operative nationalism), a recognition of the worth of all and their right to pursue their identity politics. (19) Cawthron took all that on board. He would work through what he had, with the people he had and move towards a different radical nationalist political movement. It was a bizarre situation. Yet, as he reported to this writer, he had noticed the emergence of anti-immigration groups after 1968 and could visualise the creation of a new movement, something a little like the then-new National Front in Britain.

Cawthron reported that the more he thought of this new path, the more he became intrigued by Yockey. Cawthron said he knew nothing, at the time or very little, of Yockey's political activities in the United States and in Europe - neither his aversion to the puerile 'racism' of the Americans and their paranoid anti-communism (which caused them to bloc with their own Establishment), nor his rejection of those European 'nationalists' who thought that in siding with the American superpower they could acquire enough political capital to advance forwards. Cawthron never found out that Yockey was a major mover in that political sub-culture, as one whose refusal to lean 'rightwards' had earned him 'enemies'. Yet, Cawthron also set out down a similar road.

In 1966, Matt Koehl, the man who would succeed Rockwell, and who would recast American Nazism as the certain parent of the contemporary neo-nazi phenomenon, first published Some Guidelines For The Development Of The National Socialist Movement. (20) He argued that Nazism had the qualities of a new Aryan religion and that the new movement had to take on a refined doctrinal significance. He cited a number of 'heresies' against the revelation of Nazism. There were those who denied or down-played the central role of the Jew in everything anti-Aryan. Some refused to centre their faith on a recognition of the centrality of Hitler and his mission. There were others who were "social nationalists", people who wanted a people's nationalism like a "host" of inter-war European movements, but because they failed to have a "transcendent" racial doctrine (sic), they were on the wrong track and should not be copied now. The fascists were no good because they weren't racists (sic), whilst the national bolsheviks were just communists who happened to be for the white race. Worse they were descendants of some bad guys who gave Hitler grief (like the Strasserites) in the original Nazi Party. There were "cosmopolitans" who thought of friendly alliances with the nationalists and racial-nationalists of other non-white peoples, and who therefore were defacto traitors. And the co-nationalists failed to bring all Aryans into the one boat because the old national rivalries stayed extant! Koehl's tour de force was an amazing piece of nonsense which made the neo-nazis what they were - and are. There was to be just one National Socialism: Hitler made it, Rockwell resurrected it and Koehl became its inheritor (at least for a while). It was a cult, a new religion in political clothing.

As Cawthron explained: "I committed every one of those heresies at one time or another." Because of the quality of the people around him, not only in the NSPA, but in the Right scene generally, Cawthron introduced these heresies piecemeal and awaited their gestation. It was to be Imperium which would force the pace.

What did Cawthron want Imperium to do for his movement? It is necessary to appreciate Cawthron found himself trapped in a quandary. He saw the Koehl-enunciated 'heresies' as actual expressions of a new and coherent political philosophy. However, he was compelled to deal with people who understood little of it. He made the linkage between Imperium and these 'heresies' (he was definitely on track there!) and developed a programme and politics to achieve their realisation. Basically, Cawthron was arguing for a package of ideas and activist principles:

- there would be an new Australian nationalist movement, based on a nativist appreciation of the national identity.

- the movement would defend 'White Australia' and the global interests of the European Civilization.

- the movement would fight for the liberation of all peoples from imperialism and for the right of all peoples to acquire national independence.

- the movement would demand popular change to bring government to the people, to increase the potential for democracy not diminish it.

- the movement, in freeing Australia of foreign economic control would reward labour, rescue the environment and create a new social system.

In enunciating these goals, Cawthron had broken, completely, from the pattern of subordinated-to-the-system right-wing politics. He wanted to reach out to different groups and challenge the conservative parties.

But to do it with his resources, he had to centralise the 'Nazi' forces, slowly change the temper of the group, seek new alliances, members and new symbols (he took up the Eureka Flag) and phase out the old, imperceptibly - such that neither participants nor political policemen got wind of it and resisted the change to political relevancy. And with the underlying political philosophy of Imperium, the rich references into the well-springs of an alternate (to liberalism and marxism) discourse, he had the seeming authority to act. At least, that was the plan.

Cawthron reported that, at a time he recalled as early in 1970, he received a letter from Matt Koehl admonishing him for his obvious reliance upon Imperium. Koehl told him that "it is not really a National Socialist text". Cawthron understood that - but not Koehl's exact reasons for his opinion. It was a matter of what Koehl knew and wasn't telling. Essentially, Koehl was aware of Yockey's criticisms of German Nazism because he had moved in similar circles in 1950's America. He therefore sought to constrain others from going off in this direction. Koehl was aware that his British counterpart, Colin Jordan, acolyte of Arnold Leese, loathed Yockey and all that came with his thought. He knew that Jordan was a staunch advocate of racial faith, rigid anti-semitism (believing in 'the USSR is under Jewish control' nonsense) and was a critic of any type of ideological or political innovation. (21)

Cawthron's writings in the period 1967-70, as expressed in The Australian National Socialist Journal (ANSJ), point to the decisive influence of Yockey. Some six editions appeared. (22) Indeed in 1969, the ANSJ underwent a format change and appeared similar in colour and cover design to the magazine, Western Destiny. Cawthron agreed that this change was deliberate and was meant to suggest he was launching out in similar ideological directions. After all Western Destiny included in its ranks writers and sponsors of the Yockey philosophy, including the later French New Right theorist, Alain de Benoist. (23)

The Cawthron regime did not last, and he was deposed from control of the NSPA in late 1970, allowing the more pliable (from a political police perspective), to take charge. Those who were close to Cawthron and who were probably ready to make the change with him, faded away. Although Imperium and Yockey would be mentioned from time to time in the literature of the group thereafter, the lure of Yockeyism was repudiated in practise. The NSPA embraced political violence against the Left and lived out its next five years as a black-bag-operation that utilised all means of thuggery against 'communists'.


The spread of Yockey's works throughout the embryonic nationalist and broader 'patriotic' movement was constant in Australia after the Cawthron period. Imperium was known to the Melbourne-based Eureka Students' League (1975-6) and the Sydney-based National Resistance/Australian National Alliance (1977-81) and thence National Action (1982 ff). It was ultimately sold through the Australian League Of Rights book-service in the 1990's. (24) Other Yockey texts, such as The Enemy Of Europe and The Proclamation Of London, circulated throughout the 1980's under the auspices of different persons, including Cawthron. (25) In saying this, it does not follow that those who examined Yockey's writings were converted to an esoteric system; rather, it means at best that ideas and arguments could pass into a pool and be employed by individuals and cadres as inclination or circumstances permitted. It also does not follow that Yockey's ideas were taken up by many people at all as sort of suitable reference-point for their own opinions, nor that dogmatic Yockeyists emerged in Australia. Yockey's writings are still circulated in Australia.

Nonetheless, it can be said that Yockeyist arguments were employed at different points in the local discourse. This was done by Alec Saunders in the 1980's via his influence with the Brisbane 'National Vanguard' group and directly and indirectly via 'Australian National Action'. (26) The present writer used certain Yockeyist references in internal debates in the latter group. (27) The well known neo-nazi activist, Jack van Tongeren, also quoted Yockey. (28) Occasionally, Yockey is referred to in minor and more esoteric circles (29). This article, despite its form, might also encourage further investigation by a new generation of thinkers and activists who will adopt what they choose, adapt what they desire - and junk the rest. If ideas are living things, they receive as harsh a fate as anything else. "Such is life", said Ned Kelly.


Clearly, Australia has never been immune to developments in the international 'Right' scene. However, our politics are peculiar to ourselves and we have tended to remain unsophisticated by the standards of the European movements of nationalism, nationalist populism and so forth. Not that we 'colonials' out here in the antipodes truly mind if only because a certain insularity is part of our consciousness. Yet, we do manage to 'adopt' (and then adapt) overseas ideas to our circumstances. In that way, Yockey can be appreciated and his 'use' in the political struggle bore this rule out.

It is clear that he was 'known' here very early and through Cawthron his ideas were eventually introduced to a wider audience. Once established locally, his influence could travel well and has remained one piece of background hum in a noisy din.

The impact of Yockey was always upon individuals, particularly cadres and certain leaders. It might have been reassuring to some to soldier in a broad stream inspired by the giants of Western intellectual creation, or to others, it was possibly helpful to have recourse to a major work of political philosophy when occasion demanded. Whatever the case, it was there upon demand.

It is likely that Yockey will remain an occasional reference in the on-going process of intellectual formation within the ranks of the Australian nationalists. Of course, Yockey's geopolitics system is dated now, and it is fair to say that aspects of his thought have no direct relevance to any movement of Australian freedom. Even the Yockeyist applications of conservative-revolutionary thought find little modern echo in general. I again quote Kelly: "Such is life."




1. Leisemann's career is covered in: David Harcourt, Everyone Wants To Be Fuehrer, Sydney 1972 and David Harcourt, "An Assault On The Jew-Democratic Nuthouse", in Henry Mayer (ed.) Labor To Power, Sydney, 1973. There are two ASIO files on Leisemann (one quoted below) and other unquoted sources from the investigations completed into wartime detainees.

2. Thomas Potts Graham is mentioned in: Bruce Muirden, The Puzzled Patriots: The Story Of The Australia First Movement, Melbourne, 1968. Graham had a membership in the National Socialist Party of Australia until its collapse in 1975. Graham was also connected the neo-nazi leader Jack van Tongeren, having met the latter in early 1984, twelve months prior to the foundation of the Australian Nationalists Movement. This contact may have continued until a return to England about 1988 took the octogenarian out of the Australian scene.

3. AA CRS A6126/26 Item 1060 De Wykeham De Louth. This Australian Security Intelligence Organisation ASIO file, now lodged at Australian Archives, concerned an associate of both Leisemann and Graham, noting the wide array of international and local contacts achieved by its subject. Leisemann's contact with De Louth was confirmed in his own File. It could be concluded that this Queensland troika was responsible for the importation of Leese's material, with De Louth offering a type of pamphlet service from about 1951. It is likely Leisemann introduced his other friends to Yockey's material.

4. Francis Parker Yockey, Imperium: The Philosophy Of History And Politics, Sausalito, 1969, pp. 582-586, 595, 616. Yockey returned to these themes in The Enemy Of Europe (1953) with a 'softer' view on Russia than the former book appeared, on the surface at least, to suggest. In the introduction to The Enemy Of Europe, Yockey confirms that his new position on Russia was implicit in Imperium. In The Enemy Of Europe Part II, Reedy, Va., 1981, p. 82, Yockey suggested a Russian occupation of Europe might lead to their mutual integration. This was a revolutionary notion. (Note: For convenience here, I do not give Yockey's works as published under any pseudonym, but in his proper name.)

5. The author was introduced to Leisemann by his nephew, Errol Robert Niemeyer, in 1975. Niemeyer was then the "secretary of the NSPA Queensland branch" (his description). Niemeyer was ubiquitous on the Brisbane 'Right' scene. The author visited Leisemann at his Upper Brookfield property and was shown a couple of the Yockey documents which were readily accessible. Some time later the collections were offered, but stayed unclaimed.

6. I refer fist to: AA A6119/84 Item 2305 Leisemann, Leslie Volume 2. This ASIO file contained a report dated 27 May 1965. It referred to Leisemann as: "Leisemann is a pathetic figure. He is completely obsessed by his hatred of Jews and is an utter fanatic. He would find it difficult to think of any subject without also thinking of Jewish influence. He is highly strung, nervous and excitable." (Para. 14) "After talking to him for about an hour, we are firmly of the opinion that he would not exercise any influence over any normal person". (Para. 15) Then, having heard and seen the man, the author can only concur with the ASIO assessment; Leisemann's description of the Yockey and Leese dispute was not far wrong as Coogan's book revealed. The same ASIO file contained a Colin Jordan article of December 24 1950 on the "Moscow Jews".

7. A person connected to the National Socialist Party of Australia had purloined his details and passed them onto me. Nikolai had written to the NSPA merely for "information".

8. Kevin Coogan, Dreamer Of The Day, pp. 183 - 188, discusses the Yockey/Remer connection. Remer would ultimately found the 'League Of Bismarck Germans' in the 1980's to agitate for a Russo-German détente.

9. James Saleam, "The Other Radicalism: An Inquiry Into Contemporary Australian Extreme Right Ideology, Politics And Organization 1975 - 1995", PhD Thesis, University of Sydney, 1999, pp.83 - 89.

10. Don Lindsay died in 1993 and was considered worthy enough to have his an obituary article published in The Australian newspaper. See: Philip Lindsay, "Nazi Was Kind To Animals", The Australian, 2002. (Exact date will be supplied) Lindsay died a Buddhist, after a remarkable swagger-like political career which included Maoism.

11. Arthur Smith. Mr. Smith, 68, now lives quietly under another name, in a country town. He was interviewed a few years ago for a major doctoral history thesis composed by a student at the University of Western Sydney. Remarkable new information was adduced on the affairs of Australian 'Right' politics. Mr. Smith is retired from all political activities.

12. James Saleam, "The Other Radicalism", pp. 90 - 92.

13. AA CRS A6119/89 Item 2246 Edward Robert Cawthron. This ASIO file refers to investigations into Cawthron's CSIRO appointments and later his work at ANU. It is also clear Cawthron was under close surveillance (the file cuts out in 1967) and even that his own father informed upon him.

14. The question of 1960's Australian 'neo-nazism' and its differences with the later product of the 1970's and subsequently, has been raised by the author. Essentially, the former seems an 'anti-communist' phenomenon - primarily - down to 1975. The latter seems more focused on racial issues, more 'international' in form and occultist. See "The Other Radicalism", Chapter Six.

15. James Saleam, "American Nazism In The Context Of The American Extreme Right 1960 - 1975", M.A. (Hons) Thesis, University of Sydney, 1985. The final production of this thesis brought the author into a renewed correspondence with Cawthron and further interviews.

16. There are various comments in the Australian National Socialist Journal (usually in the editorials) which hinted at a new nationalism, the contextualisation of German Nazism, the down-playing of German symbolism and so forth. Of course, the journals also published standard neo-nazi materials from Hitler and Rockwell which pleased some of the readers; this was balanced by articles on Australian folk heritage.

17. Francis Parker Yockey, Imperium, pp. 274, 301, 302.

18.Francis Parker Yockey, The Enemy Of Europe Part I, Reedy (W.Va), 1981, p. 44.

19. Jim Saleam, "The Other Radicalism", p. 92.

20. Matt Koehl, Some Guidelines For The Development Of The National Socialist Movement, Arlington, 1969. It is also the argument in "The Other Radicalism" (Chapter Six) that this work, in conjunction with Koehl's Adolf Hitler: German Nationalist Or Aryan Racialist?, set out the fundamentals of neo-nazism as it evolved. Most neo-nazi groups, whether they know of or acknowledge the Koehl texts, adhere to similar arguments.

21. An inevitable conclusion from the data in Kevin Coogan, Dreamer Of The Day, pp 508 - 514.

22. The Australian National Socialist Journal is held in several major Australian libraries. For genuine researchers, the author maintains copies.

23. Kevin Coogan, Dreamer Of The Day, pp. 515, 520, 532.

24. From interviews with participants carried out for "The Other Radicalism". LOR book-service list, Melbourne, 1998.

25. Dr. Ted Cawthron, interview with author, 1988. Cawthron died in a bush-walking accident in 1989.

26 Alec Saunders. Saunders's text The Social Revolutionary Nature Of Australian Nationalism (on this Site) echoed Yockey's ideas on the organic nature of the state and society. A subsequent Saunders' pamphlet, Nietzsche, The New Age And Ethical Socialism (1986), mentioned Yockey and his The Enemy Of Europe. (The edited and modified version of that pamphlet appears on this Site.)

27. Recording of the Second National Conference of Australian National Action, 1985.

28. The magazine of the ANM, The Nationalist, occasionally quoted from Imperium. Jack van Tongeren reputedly read the book in the late 1970's. I do not provide precise references here.

29. I have been told that Yockey's name has been mentioned in theosophical and New Age circles and in publications etc. connected with Nexus and New Dawn magazines. At this time, I have not checked these assertions.

Home: The Francis Parker Yockey Collection