On August 30 patriots will once again March For Australia. Only this time, the focus is upon free speech instead of immigration.
If you fail to attend these marches, you are in effect submitting at the most critical moment in Australian history to a multigenerational communist plot to subvert Western countries into becoming police states where nationalist resistance is permanently and irreversibly outlawed.
Demographic replacement through mass immigration is the issue of our time. The emerging resistance to it now defines the democratic contest. And the response of the political establishment to this challenge, which they know they will lose out to otherwise, is the censorship and criminalisation of dissent.
This is why March For Australia has adopted free speech as its new focus, for without it, anti-immigration activists and organisations face the prospect of being policed out of the political process.
These “hate speech” and “hate group” laws which have been passed are not mere “anti-nazi” laws. The “nazis” might be the first group targeted with them, but they will not be the last. Once the nazis are dealt with, they will keep expanding the scope of “hate” until all forms of nationalist and anti-immigration advocacy are criminalised.
You might think the White Australia Party was too radical in its stances, but if the right-wing fails to defend its right to exist within the democratic process, this effectively hands the left the power to police the rest of the right out of existence. Only the most neutered elements of the “right” will be allowed to remain as controlled opposition to maintain the illusion of democracy.
The first laws against “hate speech” under the pretext of preserving “social cohesion” were legislated 100 years ago under Stalin in Soviet Russia. Article 59-7 of the Soviet Russian criminal code prohibited “propaganda or agitation, directed toward arousing national or religious enmity or discord” with a minimum penalty of two years’ imprisonment.
This was then formally adopted into Article 123 of the 1936 USSR Constitution, in which “any advocacy of racial or national exclusiveness or hatred and contempt” was rendered “punishable by law” – the “racial vilification” laws passed early last year in Victoria and New South Wales find their genealogical origin in Stalin’s Constitution.
After WW2, the victorious allies established the United Nations and began the draft process for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The most contentious debate between Soviet and American drafters was on whether to adopt a similar “protection” against the “incitement of hatred” on the basis of nationality and race.
The American drafters and their Western counterparts opposed this on the grounds of freedom of speech, enabling them to outvote the Soviet Union and the other non-Western states involved in the process.
By the 1960s, however, decolonisation efforts to break up the old empires of Europe had introduced so many new member states into the UN that Western states were no longer the majority. This enabled the Soviets to outvote their Western objectors during the drafting of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Article 4 of the ICERD obligates member states to not only prohibit “incitement to racial hatred” but also to prohibit “membership of groups which promote and incite racial discrimination”.
And it is precisely this clause, drafted by the Soviet Union, and the constitutional authority of the government to make international treaties, that the Commonwealth is relying upon in its High Court case against the White Australia Party.
Essentially, the government is making an appeal to communist globalism (literally a clause in a UN treaty drafted by the USSR), to authorise itself to overturn the right of Australians to choose their own representatives (as given in sections 7 and 24 of the Australian constitution) and ban a political party.
The legal concept of a “prohibited hate group” is a literal communist construct, designed to subvert Western democracies into banning the right-wing out of existence.
And the legal concept of “hate speech”, as I have already described, is itself a communist construct, first formulated in Stalin’s USSR and imported into the West through (the also Soviet drafted) Article 20 of the ICCPR with the intent of making nationalism globally illegal. The Australian delegation argued at the time of its drafting that “people could not be legislated into morality”, but the treaty was nevertheless ratified in 1980 under the Fraser-Liberal government.
Labor (and their always complicit uniparty colleagues in the “Liberals”) may have ratcheted up their anti-free speech agenda in recent years, but make no mistake – this was a long time coming, a multigenerational communist plot to make nationalism illegal.
But on August 30, the patriots of Australia will take to the streets and march for free speech while we still can, a week and a half before the High Court hears the arguments to decide whether communist globalism overrides our constitutional right to democracy.
We will call for the repeal of all “hate speech” laws, and a free speech referendum, a political objective of greater urgency than any other for the Australian right.
These policies remain on One Nation’s website, so they should back this and attend to prove this policy is not fraudulent. Which goes for every other politician, influencer or activist who calls themselves a patriot – if you don’t show up to this, if you don’t back this, you are a fraud.
March for Australia on August 30, or submit to communism, there is no third option. Be there. And make sure you bring everyone you can with you, while it’s still legal.
Header image: Far-left Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who is trying to ban rival political parties (PMO).
