An important and emotive doublethink trigger word is RACIST.
It is important because it is being used, not so much as a cover for stirring up discontent and division now, but to pave the way for later incitement of 'racial conflict to order'.
Government ministers admit racial friction is 'touchy' and violence easy to provoke. By admitting this they reveal that they know the danger but still they deliberately introduce multi-racialism into the country.
We need no evidence other than the evidence of world events to know that those who lead the so-called anti-racist movement are either the most ignorant of do-gooders or the most unfeeling users of racial sensitivity as a device for achieving political goals. They suppress freedom of opinion regarding racial questions either 'in ignorance or knowing well' that this will increase feelings of injustice. Why do they attempt, in every way possible, to set up conditions that will create racial tension? To do this, while claiming anti-racism, surely means either a criminal neglect of responsibility or treasonable conspiracy.
What does racist mean? It means such dislike of a race or people that the racist will take active steps to harm or destroy the disliked race or people.
It cannot be racist for the race or people attacked to defend themselves.
These statements may seem self-evident, but it is a sad fact that Australians are being made feel guilty of this manufactured crime of racism simply because we dare to defend ourselves against racial subversion by socialist stooges who call themselves anti-racist. It is known the socialists have a deliberately planned policy to use racism as a weapon; see, A Racial Programme for the Twentieth Century by communist Israel Cohen.
In doublethink, ANTI-RACIST means RACIST or vice Versa.
Ordinary European Australians are being made feel guilty. We are charged with murdering our black brothers and stealing their land, not only in the past but also in the present, and our leaders are not denying misleading stories printed in overseas publications such as Newsweek. By not denying vicious and ridiculous stories printed in well known publications our own leaders make us look guilty. Why?
We are, at the same time, being asked to donate large areas of land and to make huge royalty/compensation payments. Oddly, we are not asked to leave this land by those who are so abusive of whites, nor are they trying to stop immigration. On the contrary, they are urging in immigrants from other races as if to multiply the sin they claim the white race has committed.
If we really have committed a racial sin you might expect that the 'saintly' anti-racists would try to avoid compounding the evil. If we have in innocence committed a crime, then those who charge us with this crime are themselves knowingly guilty of it. Not only do they insist on bringing more racial groups into the country but they promote apartheid (separate development) for aborigines and a confused mixture of assimilation and multi-culturalism for other races!
They have no fixed racial policy; sometimes it is multicultural, sometimes apartheid and sometimes integration. Naturally so, as their goal is to create confusion and conflict.
Why is an arrogant clique so insistent that Europeans Australians are depriving other races of their rights and treating them in a despicable way? Is it not strange that those who invented this 'crime' are themselves almost exclusively and predominantly European?
To be confused by the behaviour of anti-racists is to assume they really have human concern for people and are not just intent on achieving some entirely different and political purpose. Is the white race guilty of inventing some original sin by settling in this land and developing it?
It can safely be said that every person living today descended from ancestors who killed and dispossessed others of their lands. This applies to every living person no matter what race, country, religion or belief. Aborigines can not claim to be free of this endeavour. If all are guilty through their ancestry why, you may ask, are European Australians the only people charged?
Our intrepid Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Bill Hayden, has told the people of Hong Kong that European Australians are an anomaly in Asia. He expects Europeans will disappear as mixed marriages between Europeans and Asians create a new race - Eurasians.
Bill supports Asian immigration as a way to destroy the white race; does he hate and despise his own people so much? If we study the words of the egocentrics who want to run our lives we might think that they wanted to make Australia an Asian country, but there are strange contradictions in this:
One: Australia has never been an Asian country; if we make Australia an Asian country what is to happen to the aborigines? How does this give them greater justice?
The aborigines are not Asians so why is it right to make Australia Asian and wrong to allow it to remain European? Certainly there is no chance that the Asians would give the country back to the aborigines.
Two: if we did merge to become Eurasian we would certainly not be accepted as an Asian race; Asians have as much racial pride as other races. Nor would we be European or aboriginal. We would be despised by every race.
Three: are the aborigines to share in this racial assimilation experiment? If not, why not? And if so, why are our leaders and the publicized activists at present promoting apartheid for aborigines?
No multi-racial country has ever been at peace for long, so what is supposed to be achieved by this massive cultural destruction? If they know what they are doing then they are obviously not trying to redeem the sins of their fathers. Why are our leaders insisting on a pre-doomed racist experiment?
Don't ask! The leaders of our nation are certainly not going to give a credible answer. They dare not admit the credible answer.
Hayden will deny being a racist and will not be branded racist. But YOU, if you try to defend your race and culture, WILL be branded by the politicians and the media, as racist. They vilify you for defending your race.
It is not a very clever piece of double talk, or should we call it 'trouble talk'. It is not a very subtle piece of manoeuvring, but by massive and one-sided media persuasion it is made to stick. Millions of European Australians are going around feeling shame and despondency because massive media-brain washing (and European bashing) has forced the innocent to accept that they are criminals, while the guilty are praised for their sweet insincerity.
Double-talk does not come about by chance and we would not be fooled had we not been drugged by false teaching, and had the disintegration of the family not undermined our confidence and taken from us the things worth striving for.
So who is racist and who is anti-racist? Our enemies, who made up the meaning, give the clear impression that people who do not accept genocide, are racist.
They claim it racist for a white to say that all should be equal under law. It is racist for South Africa to promote separate development (apartheid) and is the claimed reason for the violent hate campaign against South Africa. In Australia, so long as it suits the political purpose of the socialists, separate development is not racist. Those who oppose apartheid in Africa reveal their nature by promoting it in Australia.
Note: although the administration of apartheid in South Africa differs from that in Australia the principle is the same.
Now what is happening may seem unfair or even illogical, but is it?
Unfair it is, but illogical no! It only seems illogical because our enemies do not explain what they are up to. We can work out the answers for ourselves.
It is quite logical to abuse South Africa as racist for promoting apartheid if that suits your political planning in Africa. And, believing there is no social truth, it is equally logical to promote apartheid in Australia where you want to create a racist situation to suit your Australian political plans.
So long as those doing the promotion have no respect for humanity, (or truth), and believe that humans are only animals to be manipulated, then it is logical to misrepresent truth, vilify people, and change position to suit the situation (your children are taught situation ethics).
The doublethink, doubledealing people manipulate the innocent and ignorant. It may be nice to be innocent but it's very dangerous to be ignorant.
How Was It Possible Our Political System Let Us Down So Badly
The party system is a system introduced in more honest times. It is a system we were deceived to accept and then took over modern democracy. It is a system wide open for abuse. It is a system that is ideal for manipulation by the unscrupulous powerful.
The party political system is also a sacred cow. You will be aware that there is much public criticism of politics, incessant criticism of politicians, but how much criticism of the party political system have you noticed?
Party politics is a sacred cow, but not because it has a sacred nature, it is a sacred cow because it is made so by those who use it for their own ends.
All is visible if you look carefully and with a persistent desire to know.
What Must be the Objective of Any Powerful Organization?
As the government of the nation is the most influential institution to be reckoned with, then the first intelligent objective of any powerful group is to gain influence within the political system.
This is simple; hirelings are trained for service within the political parties. Any bright person, if groomed for the job and given the logistic support money can buy, will progress in the party much faster than a self supporting member.
Once in a position of influence, the implant can assist others of his kind and, perhaps even more important, will be able to assist genuine people who, by their own philosophy, (or gullibility) are useful to the cuckoo. It is these innocents who make the system of subversion almost foolproof. It is the innocent, chosen for their gullibility, who give government an image of sincere stupidity.
The real weakness of the party system is that most elected members can be entirely innocent while the PRE-selection is entirely manipulated.
The party political system offers no protection for democracy and a party system will not remain democratic.
If a foreign ideology gets effective control of a party political system then the only limit to the speed at which it can confuse, divide and intellectually impoverish, is the limits of gullibility of people. If they are not gullible enough then they have to be DE-educated. Do not forget that the Fabian philosophy, that many of our politicians openly support, advocates the gradual accumulation of power by the use of lies deception and trickery.
Subversion is a much safer form of warfare than near weapons and nerve gases. It produces a better 'kill' and is not destructive of property.
Although it takes time to create such confusion, division and ignorance, that people become incapable of self defence, once helpless they can be eliminated (by use of biological or chemical agents) without retaliation.
Those last words should make your hair stand on end; if not, then think about it as long as it takes. avoid9.htm
.../Back to Contents Page