The Coming Struggle: Tasks for Australian Nationalists
The road to power - Against erroneous ideas
True nationalists have turned their backs on bourgeois politics. The salvation of the Australian People and Nation is not a matter of "influencing" politicians and serving crumbling "institutions" (monarchy, constitution, etc.), but is a matter of winning state power. Only with power exercised by the Australian People can the Nation be secure. In politics, power is a function of force. Australia is being Asianised, multiculturalised, and internationalised because power (political, physical, psychological) is exercised by the Establishment through various means which exclude the people from decision making. Force (and the violence is latent) dictates that choice is eliminated in these areas of the national destiny.
Force is only ever defeated by equal or greater force. The task of the nationalist party is to assemble that force, and finally, and if necessary, answer the violence of the cosmopolitan-internationalist Establishment with national-revolutionary violence. Force is both physical and psychological. It is the latter form of force which would primarily concern the party in its early stages of development, though physical force (from the Establishment or its "left-wing" storm-troopers) would never be absent. The bourgeois patriots fear not only the force of opposition, but the also the concept of force itself.(7) Nationalists repudiate such nonsense.
Nonetheless, erroneous ideas can arise in any discussion of the means by which the nationalist struggle can be prosecuted. We can catalogue three basic errors: Infiltrationism, Electoralism, and Terrorism. Each can be discussed in turn.
This idea is a simple one: Rather than found a party of nationalists, nationalists join other, established parties, infiltrate the party organisations and somehow "take over". With a "respectable" and "established" party machine, parliamentary power can be achieved. While of course this theory intrigues mainly the conservative middle class patriot, it can also be put before the nationalist. It is another area where the conservative calls upon the nationalist to return to "the swamp".
Infiltration destroys the need for systematic nationalist ideology, politics and organisation. It reduces the nationalist to a secret conspirator whose connections with his fellows are such that the public could fail to recognise any new movement in national politics. Infiltration demands that the conspirators divorce themselves from the Australian People and subordinate their activities to manipulating their way into a party which, while it may appear suitable to takeover, is in reality an arm - and a valued arm - of the Establishment. The cosmopolitan-internationalists have innumerable mechanisms for the control of their parties. The "conspirators" have to overcome these obstacles, tailor themselves to the logic of the targeted party, and work for it to establish their credentials. We are supposed to believe that one day these plotters will control the party branches, and the party conference, and impose their policies. Assuming the party doesn't split on the spot, leaving the conspirators with a "rump"-party, they have then to win 51% popular support to "form a government".
And if the public find the "sudden changes" "unusual" or they are suspicious of the conspiracy - despite its size and strength - the "new" party would be rejected. And then it's back to square one! Would these knights of the inkpot, conference-heroes, and chameleon parliamentary aspirants have the courage to resort to the politics of activist struggle? Not likely. They would have spent 10 years proving their "respectability" and would by then probably believe in it implicitly.
The fact is that "infiltration" has nothing at all to do with Nationalist politics. It is bourgeois conservative politics. A living example of this tactic was the conspiracy of certain conservative monarchist Menzies-style "Liberals" to take charge of the N.S.W. state Liberal Party in the 1970s and early 1980s. As summed up by one of their leaders, the policies of the faction were: "God, the Queen, the Judiciary and the Services". These persons styled themselves as 1950s Liberals, anti-communist, and totally "free enterprise" in character. They had no popular support - and would never have earned it. They were not preparing for the politics of activism, but for a Parliamentary "takeover". Even if they were successful, the Nationalists would still be in the field - and ready to fight even these Liberals - for the cause of the Australian Nation, and true National Independence.
There may be other attempts at infiltrationism - but the point has been sufficiently illustrated.
It is a common myth of the politically naive that Nationalists will simply be elected to power. It is argued that the party must be based on electorate-organisation and that its primary aim (after its basic propaganda-organising work) is the contesting of elections. It is held that elections give people "their chance" "where it counts".
Unfortunately for such pseudo-nationalist daydreamers, it doesn't count. Elections do not alter the fundamental elements of state power in Australia. Any Nationalist party which won an election would not be permitted to govern.(8) But what is even more important to us, at this stage of our development, is what sort of party we wish to build: do we want to construct an electoralist party? If we choose to build such a party we must subordinate that party to vote-getting; its programme must be "modified" for "popularity". The party would be a machine for competition with parties attuned to their ground. Is it correct to fight on the enemy's ground?
Nationalists may sometimes contest elections. It is necessary to establish some "legitimacy" in this area. Elections provide an opportunity for public propaganda. Some indications of support can be found when the votes come in. Elections will, therefore, always be a part of the nationalist struggle. But since state power does not entirely lie in Parliaments or in votes, Electoralism will have to be reduced to an aspect of a general assault on the Establishment. It is as simple as that.
Given the state of our forces, and the rudimentary nature of our ideology and organisation, it is far wiser to enter into political struggle against the Establishment directly, through our propaganda and public "actions". This may not necessarily help our "reputation" amongst suburban bourgeois at election time, or endear us to the political police. Yet these tactics match our level of development. The daydreamer with his plans of parliamentary power would only sidetrack us into meaningless electioneering.(9) We are warned in advance to avoid this pitfall.
To even discuss this subject in respect of the nationalist struggle pays the matter more credence than it deserves. Nonetheless a few words may be of some use.
Nationalists have no use for terrorism. The examples of terrorism waged by ostensibly nationalist organisations in Europe - such as the Armed Revolutionary Nuclei (N.A.R.) in Italy; the Commandoes of Charles Martel in France; and others in Germany; etc. - have been not only failures, but have proved of more value to the Establishment in its propaganda war against Nationalist ideals. European Nationalist parties, such as the Front National (FN) in France, the National Democratic Party (NPD) in Germany, and the Front National (FN) in Belgium, have all condemned terrorism as counterproductive and nonsensical. Australian Nationalists can only concur.
There is no doubt that, at a later date, some sort of "terrorist" group espousing some nationalistic ideas will emerge. According to some 1980s sources, A.S.I.O. believed such "racist terrorism" may have arisen from certain men in the armed services and the police. But such an event would have little impact on the general course of Nationalist activism, but would most certainly demand a clear response in the public media.
Indeed, we only need to look at the activities of the Perth-based Australian Nationalists Movement in 1988-89 as an example of Nationalist "terrorism" (if the ANM could really be called true "terrorists", let alone if they could be called true "Nationalists"?). While carrying out propaganda campaigns, the ANM (inspired by the U.S. novel, The Turner Diaries) commenced a campaign of bombing Chinese restaurants (and simultaneously committing warehouse robberies to fund its activities) intending to scare the Asian population out of Western Australia. Due to the police frightening one member into becoming a police informer (after catching him "red-handed" with some of the ANM's stolen goods), the police were able to gather enough evidence to relatively quickly jail most of the ANM's leading members, thereby ensuring the organisation's quick demise. The ANM's plan was devoid of real possibilities and could never have been realised. The personal tragedy associated with the imprisonment of some otherwise basically decent Australian men is well known.
(4) POLITICAL STRUGGLE: The proper path to follow.
Far better than Infiltration, Electoralism, and Terrorism, remains what we shall call Political Struggle: We must understand that we are at war with the Establishment, the anti-Australian state which is pushing our country to disaster. Our objective must be to disrupt the existing System while promulgating a new ideology and developing a new organisation. Political Struggle means some electoral work, demonstrations, strike actions, propaganda. It means the primacy of forging a party that is ready - organisationally, ideologically, politically - for a collapse in the existing structure. Our party must become adept at the public rally; become a power in the street, in the school, in some unions, in the university; organised to win publicity, and to make our issues living questions.
It has been said that political power is a function of force. In the final analysis we will need to make a show of force. Though what form that may take is speculative. But power must be achieved; "Whatever is necessary to secure the freedom of our nation" must be our slogan!
We have looked at three broad political "errors" which could conflict with the unfolding of correct Nationalist tactics. But before we fully discuss the correct tactics to be employed at this juncture, we should ask what the historical tasks of Australian Nationalism actually are.
7. Some conservatives maintain that force is somehow "leftist" and that he who understands the role of force and is prepared to meet it is somehow as bad as the "left". In place of force such conservatives, supposedly pro-White Australia, have "spiritual weapons". The results of such an attitude are now obvious.
8. The core elements of state power (which are: corrupt sectors of the police; those troops under the control of Establishment generals; the Establishment-dominated legal system; etc.) would obstruct any such "Government". See the publication The Nature of State Power: The Farce of Democracy in Australia for a wider discussion of such matters.
9. An example of such "mindlessness" was provided by the British National Front which spent approximately £46 000 in lost election deposits in 1979. The clamour to contest 306 seats out of 635 was too great. All that money would have been better spent in developing the structure etc. of the Front. The loss (in vote terms) shattered NF morale. These facts are now recognised.
The Coming Struggle: Tasks for Australian Nationalists
Australian Nationalism Information Database - www.ausnatinfo.angelfire.com