There’s something askew with tying nationalism to Libertarians, simply because they’re ‘men of The Right’.
These are people whose policy on mass immigration is that it’d be OK, if only migrants paid a bond of some kind. And who openly espouse the international trade of ‘goods, services and capital’ in an environment of free-trade on their website. See link.
‘International trade’ of capital means abolishing controls on foreign investment. Indeed, the Libertarians openly call for the abolition of controls on foreign investment. In practice, this means letting overseas speculators buy up Australian real estate, farms, mines and infrastructure. Is this really an Australia First position?
And what does free trade in services mean? Australian jobs offshored and outsourced to India. Is this an Australia First position?
Don’t be fooled into reflexively supporting big business conservatives just because they’re of the Right.
As Alain De Benoit said; ‘Left? Right? That’s over.’
Thanks for this post. In today's world "90% of the way" is a refreshing blast of hope. And Gerard Rennick has a consistently high energy, no BS, Australianist, courageous record as senator.
Donated last week - even though I'm in pinko/globalist/anti-White Canberra.
Nice shilling for conservative Nationals. Nice attempt to rewrite Australian Nationalism, but, we do, of course, know who’s behind it. And Graham Campbell was just a run-of-the-mill far-right populist of Hanson’s typology. This has NOTHING TO DO with Australia First as conceived by Percy Stephensen, or indeed the true Australian Nationalists who were not in the least bit conservative. So, expect some opposition, dickheads. Seriously, you couldn’t have gathered together a bigger Liberal party counter op if you tried.
Was pretty funny how you shut your blog down because of a lack of readership. I suppose my comment section is the only platform you have left for your bitter book-length screeds now :)
Nathan Sykes runs the Internet now, huh? If he lacked readership, how do you know about him? I think he's renting space in your head. But then, if he was, he'd have coached some sense into it by now. Shill.
Look at you wallies. You claim to know that the system is rigged, and what do you do, try to invest the morons who follow you in the system's games: parties, alliances ... and none of it's achievable because the one thing you don't attack is the parliamentary system itself. You do that because those behind you are pulling the strings. We know who they are. You know who they are. So, cop it sweet and admit you suck bulk dick.
But the WORST thing you do is group in a bunch of shifties who have NOTHING TO DO with supporting White Australia -- it's not even ON their agenda -- and while you acknowledge this you claim it as part of a 4-D chess strategy, which it isn't. It's just buying into the system and hoodwinking your idiot/politically dyslexic followers into swallowing the conjob that you have a 'cunning plan', as Baldrick would say. No you don't. You are PAWNS of a cunning plan, which is why your publication, your essays, your ideas, everything about you screams SHILL. Hell, Graham Campbell REFUSED to be identified with promoting 'white nationalism,' or White Australia. That's why he's gone and the party is now in proper hands. The Libertarians? Has anyone SEEN how many non-white candidates they're running. Trying to pull a MAGA isn't going to work in Australia because America is racially doomed and we're trying to pull ourselves back from the brink. They can't. You're dicks.
Do NOT believe for a second that John Lawson is a Nationalist. He is not. If he was, why does he bypass Australia's most persistent and consistent nationalists for those favoured by them who the nationalists oppose?
There’s something askew with tying nationalism to Libertarians, simply because they’re ‘men of The Right’.
These are people whose policy on mass immigration is that it’d be OK, if only migrants paid a bond of some kind. And who openly espouse the international trade of ‘goods, services and capital’ in an environment of free-trade on their website. See link.
‘International trade’ of capital means abolishing controls on foreign investment. Indeed, the Libertarians openly call for the abolition of controls on foreign investment. In practice, this means letting overseas speculators buy up Australian real estate, farms, mines and infrastructure. Is this really an Australia First position?
And what does free trade in services mean? Australian jobs offshored and outsourced to India. Is this an Australia First position?
Don’t be fooled into reflexively supporting big business conservatives just because they’re of the Right.
As Alain De Benoit said; ‘Left? Right? That’s over.’
https://www.libertarians.org.au/free-trade
Rennick's protectionism is far better
He fucks gooks.
Thanks for this post. In today's world "90% of the way" is a refreshing blast of hope. And Gerard Rennick has a consistently high energy, no BS, Australianist, courageous record as senator.
Donated last week - even though I'm in pinko/globalist/anti-White Canberra.
Nice shilling for conservative Nationals. Nice attempt to rewrite Australian Nationalism, but, we do, of course, know who’s behind it. And Graham Campbell was just a run-of-the-mill far-right populist of Hanson’s typology. This has NOTHING TO DO with Australia First as conceived by Percy Stephensen, or indeed the true Australian Nationalists who were not in the least bit conservative. So, expect some opposition, dickheads. Seriously, you couldn’t have gathered together a bigger Liberal party counter op if you tried.
Is this Nathan Sykes?
Is this Frank Salter's rent boy? The old Duntroon poofter.
Yeah thought so.
Was pretty funny how you shut your blog down because of a lack of readership. I suppose my comment section is the only platform you have left for your bitter book-length screeds now :)
Nathan Sykes runs the Internet now, huh? If he lacked readership, how do you know about him? I think he's renting space in your head. But then, if he was, he'd have coached some sense into it by now. Shill.
Weak.
Look at you wallies. You claim to know that the system is rigged, and what do you do, try to invest the morons who follow you in the system's games: parties, alliances ... and none of it's achievable because the one thing you don't attack is the parliamentary system itself. You do that because those behind you are pulling the strings. We know who they are. You know who they are. So, cop it sweet and admit you suck bulk dick.
But the WORST thing you do is group in a bunch of shifties who have NOTHING TO DO with supporting White Australia -- it's not even ON their agenda -- and while you acknowledge this you claim it as part of a 4-D chess strategy, which it isn't. It's just buying into the system and hoodwinking your idiot/politically dyslexic followers into swallowing the conjob that you have a 'cunning plan', as Baldrick would say. No you don't. You are PAWNS of a cunning plan, which is why your publication, your essays, your ideas, everything about you screams SHILL. Hell, Graham Campbell REFUSED to be identified with promoting 'white nationalism,' or White Australia. That's why he's gone and the party is now in proper hands. The Libertarians? Has anyone SEEN how many non-white candidates they're running. Trying to pull a MAGA isn't going to work in Australia because America is racially doomed and we're trying to pull ourselves back from the brink. They can't. You're dicks.
Do NOT believe for a second that John Lawson is a Nationalist. He is not. If he was, why does he bypass Australia's most persistent and consistent nationalists for those favoured by them who the nationalists oppose?