A public statement by Dr. Jim Saleam
The nationalist without nationalism website XYZ is at it again, pretending to speak for Australian nationalism. And with a clever plan!
An article published today under the penname of ‘Golem’ has a lot to say that pretty much confirms for us the snaky and dangerous quality of a group of people who wouldn’t understand Australian Nationalism, even after and by a miracle of time travel if, John Curtin, Jack Lang and Henry Lawson materialized in their ‘office’ and patiently tried to explain it to them. Let alone beat it into them.
This time, XYZ is calling for present-day nationalist leaders to come forward and set about building a “united front” and then – becoming “politically organized”. Of course, united fronts are good things, when the elements composing them are positive forces.
XYZ Has Tailed After Non-Nationalists
This united front call has come from people who chased after the multiracialist and Ziopatriot Senator Anning, who have tailed after Liberal Party ‘patriot’ (sic) Andrew Hastie and Liberal Party satellite Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, who have muddled up nationalism with the Alt-Right and done worse besides. Have they changed?
Yes, the term nationalism itself has been hijacked over the last few years by people who wouldn’t understand it and perhaps can’t understand it.
We cannot stop that. Anyone can proclaim himself anything. Of course, at no point has the XYZ group ever attempted to inter-react with Australian nationalists. It has always been quite separate from them.
The Australian Council Of Nationalists
Last year, an Australian Council Of Nationalists came into being. Australia First Party is one of the affiliates. I cannot speak for all of them here. However, at no point did XYZ ever approach any of the affiliates – be it ourselves, or Love Australia Or Leave party, or New Australian Bulletin, or Australian Independent, or anyone else, and say they’d like to chat.
Ultimately, we would like to set down the real rules of what Australian Nationalism is and what it is not. For Australia First that means understanding that Australian Nationalism is a historical movement with roots in nativism, labourism and literary radical nationalism, that it belongs neither to the Left nor the Right and that it has particular icons and symbols and a long history of struggle from the time ‘White Australia’ was abandoned in 1966. No part of it is negotiable (sic). It is what it is.
So far, XYZ has said none of that.
Yet, nationalist politics must apply itself to contemporary politics and adopt the appropriate language and so forth (that is undeniable), but it is something that exists independently of any individual or group. It is a true cause. It compels only submission to its truth.
XYZ says “The Australian Nationalist Movement exists – but it is not organised – and it is high time we were.” Well, okay, we are getting organized, but it is ‘you’ who are not part of it.
XYZ said: “Australian Nationalism has been around for a long time .but the latest wave, if I can call it that, might arguably be traced from about 2015 to now, 2020.”
Really? And what nationalists are they? Anti Islamist actors? Reclaim Australia? Maybe, the United Patriots Front? Who?
Any number of groups from that period may have contained nationalists, but only later in the period when nativists and similar people emerged could we identify any new nationalist organisation at all. That is the harsh truth and we must also state openly, some ‘patriot’ players from that period sought to stymie nationalism instead of moving towards it.
XYX had better get its facts right. Essentially, that period was a mess and the true nationalists negotiated their way through it and came out the other end.
XYZ maintains: “The term most closely associated with this latest resurgence in nationalist sentiment is to be ‘red-pilled’.”
No. That phrase belongs to the mixed-up-muddled-up Alt-Right, which has run its course. From it, like with other persons from the patriot scene, come a couple of circles of people who are more ‘thinking’ and so on, but sub-cultural codes don’t cut it with political organizers. This is juvenile crap.
Political consciousness grows from distilling truths from facts. XYZ contends: “To be red-pilled was to become not woke, but awake. Awake to the stark reality and future that is hurtling towards us.” Then say so. Talking red pills to farmers or industrial workers would get you bashed for trying to peddle methamphetamine.
This is the language of subculture and is sectarian to the max.
Being authentic means to nationalists being based upon the nation’s history and the history of the real nationalist movement. But what do we get here?
XYZ reasons: “This new wave of nationalism has an authenticity about it that has never before been seen in this country, and it’s scaring the hell out of our opponents. This has mostly been the result of the Internet Generation calling out bullshit and fallacy where they recognise it, and largely because they are the first, and possibly the last, generation to have a free Internet available to facilitate that type of truth telling (sic).”
Mateys: get your bloody politics, if you really seek to be nationalists – off the Internet! Certainly, after the present health crisis passes! Politics is in the schools, unis, factories, farms and so forth. The Internet is at best an adjunct to organizing at the base level. And if as you say, you may be banned from the Internet, then it seems it’s all over? Remember too, that you have to talk Australian not yank waffle and have a programme of political relevance. That means nothing about pills, accelerating the revolution (sic) and universal whiteness, Oswald Mosley or Dia Beltram. Yes, we do read your site and those of your friends!
When some people think of unity with others, they often think of sitting down and reworking documents into nice formulae to get agreement. That is not what nationalists reason as effective.
XYZ claims: “..we have come far enough to be aware that most of us know and can agree upon a fairly broad set of maxims, principles and agreed facts about the reality that we find ourselves faced with.”
The idea of writing a programme or manifesto with XYZ makes this writer shudder with apprehension! There can never be any unity until there is a common spirit that compels it. A confused hive of opportunists, half baked conservatives, Yankee style;’white nationalists’, let alone fascist fetishists, ain’t going to produce any nationalist movement. The problem of authenticity is the problem!
Practicality Arises In Struggle
Struggle defines the truth. Every group likes to believe it possesses it and whatever we may say to the readers of XYZ or to anyone at all doesn’t count outside of the truth being demonstrated on the ground.
XYZ reminds us: “We have enough theory and ideology to fill a shelf full of books, what we need now is practicality and real action from within our movement towards political organisation into a united front.”
It’s a pity that they have never read the theory and ideology of Australian Nationalism. At least, given they never quote it, we can say they’ve never read it. It makes us wonder what they have been reading.
Telling Us What We Are Actually Doing
In these words at least, I found something of note:
“We need our leading public figures from the Australian nationalist movement to enter into both public and private dialogue about what Australian nationalism is, what its core values are, what it is not and what needs to be jettisoned or outright excluded as the first and preliminary step towards political unification and organisation.”
We are doing that and we are finding it rewarding. We were doing it before you said it was a good idea.
We do not really expect XYZ to take any real step towards Australian Nationalism. Rather, we expect them to redefine it and proclaim themselves its most ardent set of loyalists. Again, we cannot help that.
The future of Australian Nationalism belongs to those who understand it, who will compromise nothing and who will work in a real united front of nationalists to win a victory.