Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (4)
One of the most commonly lamented observations of modern politics is how polarised it, and subsequently society in general, has become. Progressive pundits and corporate media refuse to label traditional thinking as anything less than “far right”, often preferring even more pejorative language. Only those claiming to be right of centre while embracing ideas traditionally of the left, like Malcolm Turnbull, can be graciously described as “moderate”.
Meanwhile, little nuance is entertained when describing those to the right of “moderates”. Never mind that the founding fathers of Australia, America and our common British legacy in justice and democracy shared at least an affection if not outright devotion to Christian principles. It is now alleged that to advocate the timeless definition of marriage or the sanctity of human life at every stage makes one “far right”.
Further, to agitate for removal of fetters to fundamental freedoms of speech and religion – the central pillars of liberal democracy – is to manifest hatred, intolerance and bigotry (according to Progressives).
Woe betide any who should believe in national sovereignty, strong borders & sensible immigration limits. You might as well admit you’re a “fascist” in the ranks of those who celebrate Australia Day, salute the Australia’s flag and honour the monarchy!
But what of those left of centre, in the eyes of their counterparts on the right?
Conservative pundits and alternate media refuse to label “progressive” thinking as anything less than “progressive”, sometimes preferring more pejorative language like “leftist”. Those embracing ideas traditionally of the left but rejecting their more novel ideas — the morality of gender theory and the immorality of mining, to cite but two examples– like Mark Latham, are warmly welcomed by right wing voters and commentators alike.
Another classical liberal, Dave Rubin, articulates his amazement that “the left left me” in the hurtling rapidity with which the policies defining leftism have left him spinning where he always was while progressivism is now much further away from where they once had much in common. But that is the nature of the Left is it not? They believe all change is positive progress: never harmful, degenerative or regressive.
Conservatism on the other hand believes history is instructive, and ancient boundaries should at least be understood before they are moved, let alone demolished. We appreciate that our forebears were fallible, but not fools. We have no interest in changing everything for the sake of it. We are not hurtling with great rapidity from positions Conservatives held centuries ago.
If politics is problematically polarised, it is because the destruction of everything tried and true has been conflated with progress. It is because leftists are determined to destroy, not only the institutions and sensibilities which created the most favourable conditions for human flourishing in world history, but everyone who stands in their way.
Dave Pellowe blogs at The Good Sauce
Start with this:
Non-heterosexuals and non-binaries actually seek power, power and more power -not “equality”.
They want the powers to have everything their way, at no cost to themselves.
They oppose heterosexual nuclear families in which to raise children.
They want compensation for any slight they might feel or discomfort they might imagine has been directed at them.
They want the power to act out all their grievances about anything and everything in ways that are costly to heterosexuals.
They want to pretend that they are uniquely gifted to see what is wrong with society -esp what is wrong with heterosexuals.
The’s more, but that’s where to start.
Now, if any homosexual or non-binary does not have any of these characteristics, they are welcome to present themselves to any ABC talk program or to the Waleed Ali show and explain themselves.
This will be a great service to the many homosexuals and non-binaries who indeed think, feel and act in the narcissistic, greedy, self-centered ways I set out above.
Meanwhile, it would be useful if more heterosexuals and more binaries also get smart, pull ’emselves together, sober up, toughen up, and be prepared to be proper citizens by sacrificing their own time and their own money -and actively engage in local politics at Lib and Nat branch level and do the work necessary to establish and maintain a new Proper Australia.
A Proper Australia might still be feasible to establish -even after these many decades of marxist-inspired parasitism and anti-Westernist destruction, as seen in:
-the collapse of the criminal justice systems, the abuse of the weaknesses in the Constitution to enshrine the malignities of multiculturalism and to ensure anti-Westernist immigration and refugee inflow, the utter dumb-down in the schools, the censorship in the universities and mainstream media and now social media, the attempts to emasculate the ADF by feminisation and by demonising the SASR and the Commando Regiment, the strategy now pursued by the ALP and its various allies to make Australia a province of China while destroying our capacities to generate our own electricity and refine our own oil, and by destroying our ability to manufacture our own frypans, let alone motor vehicles.
(Australia must rely on China even to make our solar panels, windmills and storage batteries!)
There still might be time to establish a new Proper Australia, but Proper Australians need to get on the job immediately.
And if any homosexuals and non-binaries want to make ’emselves useful, they would be very welcome to join the Proper Australia team. In my view, homosexuals and non-binaries have every right to exist and to flourish -but not at the expense of the basics of a Sustainable Western-style Civil Order.
If you are not leftwing when you are young, you have no heart.
If you are not rightwing when you’re older, you have no brain.
Those who are young emote; those who are older think. Those who are young look to advantage themselves; those who are older look to benefit their children.
The woke – right-thinking divide in Australia runs from the trivial to the crucial. Renaming a cheese because it might offend someone who doesn’t understand the derivation of the name is stupid, but trivial. As those who promoted that decision, and the Canadians who agreed to it, strike me as morons I won’t ever buy a cheese called Cheer, but I don’t expect that to change my life, or that of anyone else.
In contrast, the most crucial threat to Australia as we know it, apart from those emanating from Emperor Jinping the Merciless, is that described by Keith Windschuttle in The Breakup of Australia. This is also the ultimate aim of the woke lies propagated in Dark Emu, systematically exposed in Bitter Harvest.
Many might think that such a catastrophe would never pass the test of a constitutional referendum and, given the dying remnants of a long tradition of egalitarianism in Australia, they would probably be correct. However, Mabo proves that a constitutional referendum may not figure at all in such a disaster.
The Mabo decision took a case from the Torres Strait Islands, where Melanesian peoples held rights over individual cultivated plots, and applied it to the Australian mainland, where Aboriginal hunter-gathers didn’t practice cultivation at all. Native Title was the result, all based on a false analogy. Note that this change to Australian land management did not involve any input at all from the broader Australian electorate, just a “woke” court decision to invent something new, followed up by a leftwing government to draft and pass the legislation. I suspect that a referendum on Mabo would not have got up, but ultimately it didn’t need to; the courts decided for us.
For those who couldn’t quite work out what was the point of a Dark Emu which wouldn’t stand up to any proper scrutiny at all, it is all about bypassing a decision by ordinary Australians via a constitutional referendum, and establishing “sovereignty” in the courts, beyond any input from the broader Australian electorate, same as Mabo.
The Australian electorate routinely elects right-of-centre governments, with occasional leftwing governments to alleviate the boredom, before quickly reverting to the norm once the inner-city idiots expose themselves to unavoidable scrutiny. Mabo however reveals that voting for a Coalition who thinks “At least we aren’t Labor”, isn’t enough. The Donald was right – the key battle in the Culture Wars that Dave Pellowe describes above is the appointment of black-letter judges. The Left always appoint leftwing activist judges. That the obviously corrupt Lionel Murphy didn’t even give them pause shows you the importance of the underlying agenda. LINOs, like Malcolm Turnbull, appoint the same. So called right-wingers appoint a mix of activist and black-letter judges, observing notions of merit that no one else is stupid enough to observe. The stakes are now too high. This cannot continue.
The contribution by Dave Pellowe above begs Lenin’s question, “what is to be done?”. The education system, especially in a state like Danistan, is irredeemable, much like the corrupt Victorian Justice and Health systems. If you can afford private education for your children, do so; otherwise flee Victoria (but from 2022 not for transgender reasons, as that would be illegal and could see you extradited back – “You can check-out any time you like, but you can never leave! “).
Support Quadrant. Very few others are exposing the woke agenda. The other two positive things that an ordinary voter can do is to advocate the appointment of black-letter judges, and of course defunding the toxic, woke, taxpayer’s burden, the ABC.
I suspect that Dark Emu is just a step on the long game that is “Reparation” a concept I support, reservedly. The Commonwealth of Australia should pay all descendants of pre 1770 Gondwana Land, say, $200 Trillion ( equal to 250 years of Australian GDP) in reparations. Of course, to be deducted from this bill would be the cost of improving the lives of all Gondwanalandians. Let’s say $200 Trillion. All square. Let’s move on.
Tried and true values that have stood the test of time can be summarised as, no need to reinvent the wheel.