April 20, 2021

RECAPTURING THE WORD NATIONALIST

With recent events involving the provocative National Socialist Network, we’ve noticed that the enablers of this anti-Nationalist movement have taken to applying a generality. To whit, they keep referring to ‘Nationalists’ when discussing neo-Nazis and ‘others’. They do it deliberately. Why bother, it’s just a term?

But that’s not the case, a Nationalist is distinctive and has a determined set of qualities.

The worst of these is the fake political site XYZ. Their idea of a Nationalist is anything from a National Socialist to a Christian Democrat. They’re unwilling to respect territory in this matter, and if that sounds petty, it’s not since Nationalists have long struggled for a precise definition of who we are and what we’re about. Nathan Sykes, a longterm Australian Nationalist and NAB contributor was so irritated by this he wrote a book defining Australian Nationalism. They won’t read it. They wouldn’t understand it. They would consider it irrelevant since it cancels them out as having any right to characterise themselves as Nationalists.

XYZ does not appear anywhere in acknowledged Nationalists circles. It is neither read (rather surveilled) by us, and it does not represent us, understand us, or in any way attempt to include us. Yet, it happily applies the word Nationalist to any group that has an interest in a pro-White position. It can only be doing this to appropriate the word to misconstrue what it represents. They are defiling it.

An Australian Nationalist is first-and-foremost Australian. An Australian is White, that much is true. From there, everything else follows. This means that we do not accept any foreign influence, we do not advocate for foreign persuasions, and we celebrate an identity that is distinctively Australian. We have a history and we’re proud of it. That forms the basis of our heritage and future direction, not the Third Reich.

Contrarily, these guys don’t discriminate. They will accept those who promote the idea that Australia is somehow British, that Lauren Southern speaks for Australians, that neo-Nazis fundamentally share the same principles with us. Their web crawler of issues includes any sort of conspiracy theory, any conservative prejudice, and without any discernment or effort made to ensure that views expressed accord with the Nationalist philosophy, which has a long heritage in this country.

We regard XYZ as the enemy for good reasons. Not too far back in our memory, one of their contributors referred to “nativist savages.” Seriously. That’s like a socialist writer arguing that socialists are all ‘Marxist scum.’ That’s the unbelievability of it.

When the news broke about Thomas Sewell and his alleged assault on a black security guard, they chose to go down the path of unconditional support, regardless of the damage that he has done all of us via both his youth group and his actions. He has a long history of queering the Nationalist brand.

They have, since 2019 (that we’ve been able to trace) given a platform to this renegade. Or state-shill, we can’t make up our minds which he is.

Now, they’re arguing his ‘innocence’ despite the fact of his footage of the event making that implausible. He is not potentially guilty, as far as a magistrate or jury will be concerned, but SO guilty. Not only did he do this stupid thing, but he then gave an interview to ACA which, again, he uploaded to his Telegram account, ranting and carrying on about how the NSN had been misrepresented as terrorists.

And, naturally, he began foaming at the mouth about the “Jew media”, which is the best way possible to negate your credibility. Newsflash, Thomas, the media has always been scum. Always been a tool for the elites and the forces hostile to Nationalism. Long before any Jewish influence was brought to sway in this country. It suffices to say “Media scum” and leave it that.

We like to keep a sense of objectivity to what we do, as much as we can be being, as we are, partisan. Nevertheless. If he was innocent, we’d say so, even though we are hypercritical of the path he’s taken, and dragged others along on. But they never actually called them terrorists, even though Monday’s report was misleading. However, it was misleading in other ways. It’s pretty hard to misrepresent the NSN when they’re chanting “KU KLUX KLAN” and “HEIL HITLER” and burning a cross in a supposedly “pagan” ritual.

None of the above has anything whatsoever to do with Australian Nationalism, Australian culture or Australian identity. None. Moreover, even if does view NSN as some kind of ‘youth wing’, then it is out there operating without the guidance of a parent political organisation.

The NSN members’ material is very loose on policy and solely preoccupied with activist advice, guides on propaganda, but nothing that offers anything but the most cliched White Nationalist kind of rhetoric, which fails any test of substance.

Yet, XYZ would rather champion this destructive force, uncritically, and with a dangerous toadying that almost supports the theory that they are a state operation.

Tom Sewell has never uttered the name of a single Australian Nationalist hero. Just Adolf-bloody-Hitler. Fuck Adolf Hitler, he was a Kraut, not an Aussie. He was pretty damned far from being a great man in any other sense than his genius at marketing himself to the German people. His actions caused the downfall of European civilisation. His preoccupation was not ‘the White race’ as has been misrepresented so often, but the German people. He killed Whites for crying out loud. And again, he had nothing whatsoever to do with Australia. He was happy to toss us to the Japanese.

There was a time when XYZ would never have published anything so unabashedly pro-White. They started as typical conservatives. Then, lo-and-behold, they grew ‘edgier’ as if trying to appeal rather than communicate. It’s always suspect when either a group or organisation does that.

The most frustrating thing about these galahs is that they’ll do everything but become Nationalists. They’d rather steal the name than submit themselves to its rules.

So, a challenge has been issued to Tom Sewell to debate Australia First President Jim Saleam. No reply. We expected none. He’d be out of his league. But so, now, we extend one to XYZ. If they wish to persist in misusing the word Nationalism, then let’s have a live-streamed discussion about the word’s meaning. Let’s rumble. Let’s go to the mat.

What do you say, Hiscox? Or won’t your handlers let you? Inbox us at Newaustralianbulletin@protonmail.com and we’ll tee it up. Let’s rock.

Click Link to purchase. And LEARN