Adam Piggott

Gentleman adventurer

The false dawn of the Australian Conservatives

A favored ploy of globo-homos everywhere to defend any obvious inconsistencies with the righteousness of their grand plans is to compare themselves with an example that is far worse than their own. Perhaps we have a talking head being interviewed on some sclerotic talk-show on the subject of youth unemployment. The proffered “expert,” (which is now a profession in of itself), will defend the indefensible by comparing his nation’s poor record on this matter with somewhere like Greece.

The assumption is that everyone everywhere is suffering the same problem, in other words the circumstances are far beyond our control, but our shit is an order of magnitude lower than their shit, so we are actually doing really well indeed, under the circumstances of course.

The expert is indeed an expert in such misdirection. A novice might attempt to compare the nation’s youth employment woes with somewhere like Liberia, but this would instantly create an absurd false equivalency, both for the fact that comparing a nation like Australia to an African hellhole is ridiculous, as well as the likely scenario that a fair number of viewers couldn’t identify Liberia on a map for $100 on Who Wants to be a Millionaire?

But using Greece is a smart move as it is considered a Western nation with at least one foot in the First World. Of course, the reality is that he is trying to make shit appetizing by comparing it to even nastier shit.

Recently, Australian politician Cory Bernardi has been on a barnstorming tour of the country’s nominally conservative jurisdictions as he promotes his new political party, the Australian Conservatives. The events have been reported as being “sold out” which I suppose isn’t that difficult when you book venues that can only hold a few hundred people.

According to their adverts their membership list is now approaching the numbers of the Liberal Party itself. Once again, this sounds impressive until you realize that the sort of numbers we’re talking about here are in the low five figures. It doesn’t really matter how big a party’s membership is in Australia due to the fact that we have the anti-democratic reality of compulsory voting.

Bernardi’s big schtick that he is pushing is giving democracy back to the people. From his weekly email this week I received the following:

It seems an increasing number are waking up to the fact that government is no longer an ally of the people but an impediment to freedom and prosperity. Every government ‘fix’ creates more problems which entails a further ‘fix’ which only creates further problems… and on and on it goes.

Last week at a meeting in Sydney I asked a group of people if they trusted the government. Of the more than 450 in attendance, not one raised their hand.

That begs the question: if you don’t trust the government why do you want more of it?

Australian Conservatives know that the best form of government is self-government. We need to trust the people to make decisions for themselves and in return expect them to take personal responsibility for those decisions. That is a better way.

It sounds good, it even sounds great; only this message would have been much more relevant and effective ten years ago. But going by annual immigration figures, since that time the government has brought in over 2.5 million immigrants, plus around a quarter of a million refugees. And this to a country with a population that just squeaks over 20 million.

So the people that Bernardi is referring to aren’t the same people anymore. He’s offering a false hope. It might sound good, and it might fill the average despairing Australian with warm fuzzies, but at best he’s only going to kick the can down the road.

The only political subject that counts as of this moment in the Western world is demographics. That’s a fancy word for saying, how many of them there colored people have we got, why did we let so many in, why the hell aren’t they assimilating like they’re supposed to, why are they out-breeding us at an alarming rate, how many of their family members are they importing, why do they insist on spreading around barbaric religions that are incompatible with our culture, and what on earth are we going to do about this?

You’re not allowed to talk about this stuff in the mainstream political parties anymore. Hell, you haven’t been allowed to talk about this stuff for 30 years, and look where we are now. If you do talk about this stuff, even just by the simple act of pointing it out, then you are a ‘badperson’ guilty of ‘badthink’ which is a ‘badcrime’.

Just ask conservative opinion journalist Chris Kenny who objected to One Nation senator Brian Burston posting the following image on Facebook.

But what have they done to be singled out in such a post in such a way? Has any of them made a serious political point based upon their religion, proposed any law or policy related to their religion or sought even to make a significant issue of it? Burston did not criticise any aspect of their public statements, party affiliations or personal standing. He just branded them Muslim, against an Islamic backdrop, and suggested that perhaps life was better seven years ago when they weren’t in parliament.

I was so surprised by this ugly finger-pointing that I wondered if it might be fake. But when I rang Burston he confirmed immediately it was his post and when I asked what he was trying to say he merely insisted it was factual.

The comments following the article leave no doubt as to the general public’s views on this matter. As far as they’re concerned Senator Burston is right on the money.

Noticing this stuff has been taboo for a very long time. But smart people ask difficult questions, and if you drive them away they’re going to gravitate somewhere:

In the fullness of time, the smart kids get to be right. That’s the lesson of history. The people who rule over us are trapped in a frenzy of purging anyone who notices anything about the world. They are systematically and aggressively estupidizing themselves, by driving off anyone with the temerity to ask a question. By herding all of the smart white guys into the Dissident Right, they are not saving themselves. They are creating the army that will destroy the prevailing order.

To his credit Bernardi has been asking questions about Islam. He’s been asking them for as long as he’s been in parliament and he’s got into a lot of trouble for not toeing the accepted party line and keeping his mouth shut. If you watch this short video clip of an interview he did recently with Andrew Bolt you may be convinced that he’s on the money in this regard. I was, at least until I got to the part where he outlines his intended actions.

[wpvideo m10SpMf5]

His solution is to lower the immigration rate from over 200,000 per year to 100,000, and then to ask some ‘hard questions’. The only reasonable option that is left on the table is to shut the gates completely and work out what we’ve already brought in. Anything less than this is not just delusional, it risks moving towards the next inevitable stage which is to start getting rid of people, whatever form that may take.

Supporters of Bernardi will no doubt object at this point that at least he’s doing something, and why aren’t you supporting him instead of being such a mean nitpicker? But as I’ve already stated, just doing something isn’t what’s needed here. The required action is to do the unthinkable as far as mainstream politics is concerned. Half measures are simply a false mistress in the ugly demographic reality in which we find ourselves. How on earth can Bernardi justify continuing to support an annual immigration intake in the six figures? There is no such thing as a skills shortage mainly due to the fact that Australia is well down the road to being a low skill society, what is also known as the third world.

During the last federal election a prominent journalist accused conservatives of being delusional for wanting to hold onto conservative principles. This spawned the term ‘delcons’ which many on the right have since worn with pride, much like the deplorables moniker in the US. But perhaps it is indeed accurate in an unintended way. The actions of our politicians over the last two decades that have completely transformed Australian society, and with no consultation with the electorate as to whether this was warranted or desirable, have left us with a demographic reality that has eclipsed modern political thinking.

Bernardi and his ilk are akin to generals on the Western Front sending marching troops into machine gun fire, unaware that strategies and tactics have changed, and unable to adapt even if they recognized the grim reality. In attempting to continue to play the political game in a familiar manner they are indeed delusional. And what they are offering is merely a lighter shade and tone of political excrement.


Podcast #51 – The Holland episode.


Hawt chicks & links – The diversity points edition.


  1. Mr Black

    I cannot imagine that any person drawn into normal politics has the spine to articulate what has to be done. So either it will be a genuine revolutionary who calls for and gets, armed mobs murdering immigrants in the street until they all leave, or nothing will happen and Australia will become a 2nd world shithole with the wealthy living in gated communities while the rest fend for themselves against the various ethnic gangs that will try to carve out their territory.

    • Hans

      Hmmmm, I think Australia will take option 2: 2nd/3rd world shithole, over run by darkies and sandpeople.
      No offence, fellow Australians, but you are a bunch of apathetic sheep.
      The writing is on the wall.

  2. This nation-crushing ideology (and make no mistake; every Western nation has *completely* succumbed to it except for OZ and the USA) were forewarned by Enoch Powell in his “Rivers of Blood” speech in the 60’s.

    If the folks that frequent your site haven’t read or heard it the recording and transcript are freely available online.

    It ruined his career but he was right as fuckin’ rain.

    He tried to warn Britain. They failed to take him seriously and look where they (and most of Western Europe) are now with ass-lifting  goat-humpers everywhere.

    Culture suicide no matter where you look.

    The Brits should have never given up their guns. (Neither should’ve Oz, BTW.) They surrendered that right and now are in a world of hurt.

    Always remember our 2nd Amendment is there to protect our 1st. You lose your gun rights in short order you lose your right to free speech.

    • Phil B

      Even better is his book (published in 1969) called Freedom and Reality. if you are of a small government, Liberal (as in a 19th Century definition of Liberal) and a believer of economic freedom, it will be well worth your while acquiring a copy.

  3. Good article but please look a bit closer to warfare on the Western Front before resorting to the well-worn trope of disparaging the generals. They knew full well that the ¨strategies and tactics¨ had changed. That´s why they came up with a whole slew of new responses to these changes (airplanes, balloons, mining, tanks, chemical weapons, submarines, etc). Sadly, none of the technologies available were capable of defeating a well dug in enemy.

    BTW Since you now live so close to the battlefields of Belgium I highly recommend you visit a few. You will find it a very rewarding experience

    • Andy in FL

      R. Nichols: What you wrote does not comport with the overall picture of WWI. Many tried to get D.L. George to prevent Douglas Haig from his same-old-stupid frontal attacks, especially at Passchendaele (1917, three years into the war), but George, who knew the attack was a mistake, simply didn’t have the backbone. What about Robert Nivelle’s ill fated attack at Chemin Des Dames (1917)? Or Joffre’s initial offensive strategy during the Battle of the Frontiers (1914), which resulted in 300,000 French soldiers KIA’d, many of whom were wearing brightly colored uniforms left over from the 19th century? As for bringing in new technologies, the old guard, who stayed in charge throughout the war, mostly fought against these new-fangled things called tanks, and other such innovations, and only begrudgingly allowed new technical advances to play their part, but only after much unnecessary and horrendous failure and blood-letting. Early on mounted Calvary (1914, 1915) were attacking entrenched troops with high powered rifles, and the French and British were mostly incapable of indirect artillery fire. There are no better examples in all the history of military incompetence than in how most of the top WWI generals were slow to innovate and learn from repeated mistakes. Of course, there was innovation, new tactics, new weapons, brought about by the ideas of mostly younger military personnel, but again, look at how long it took to bring these into effect, mainly because the dinosaur generals were stuck in their old ways and initially resisted such new ideas and change. WWI is absolutely not a prime example of the leading generals being readily adaptable and eager to try new strategies and tactics (although it did occur, gradually and grudgingly). Even to this day, 112 years on, most idiot historians continue to blame Churchill for Gallipoli (an Army operation), and his (brilliant) idea of connecting the Entente with the Russians via the Dardanelles (and thus uniting the Balkans against the Germans), which would have took the pressure off the Western Front– this having failed not because of Churchill but because Kitchener was not competent or foresighted enough to provide adequate forces when and where needed.

      • Adam

        And let us not forget the entirely disastrous Italian general, Cardona. His name is still a byword in Italy for total incompetence laced with mind numbing levels of arrogance.

        But I do not want this thread to devolve into an argument on the histories of WWI. If you guys want that then I’ll open another thread.

      • Hans

        I have 2 WW 1 Great Uncles buried in France. Uncle Roy and Uncle Frank.
        One was blown to bits by a German artillery shell whilst having breakfast.
        We still have his shattered fob watch, stopped at the very moment of his death.

        The other Uncle was shot and died of his wounds in a Field Hospital.
        Both in their early twenties. Just country boys, really.
        My Grandfather was gassed in the trenches of the Somme, but survived.

        All those young men, slaughtered. Sad beyond belief.

  4. Chris

    You can’t get what you want in politics by being reasonable. You have to propose something a lot more extreme than what you actually want to in order to have a chance of a compromise that ends up being acceptable. So if you want to halve immigration, propose zero immigration.

    If you want zero immigration, propose a policy of zero immigration combined with zero temporary working visas plus a dramatic reduction in the number of student visas allowed and the deportation of anyone who isn’t already a citizen, with the goal of gradually reducing Australia’s population back to 20 million.

    Anyone who actually wants to halve immigration should be supporting One Nation as the extreme that widens the Overton Window, in the hope that the eventual compromise is 100,000 a year.

    Even though it is a waste of time, I occasionally mess with people by telling them that I liked Melbourne a lot better when I was a child and it was a city of 2 million, not 4m, and we’d all be better off we gradually reduced our population to 15 million, for the sake of the environment you see, and bulldozed some of the factory land on the fringes of Melbourne and returned it to orchards and parks and farmland.
    Of course this doesn’t achieve anything other than making people’s eyes glaze over.

Comments are closed.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

%d bloggers like this: