The Nature of State Power

The Farce of Democracy in Australia

(A summary)

This document is a summary of a larger document of the same title



Beginning in the 1980s and 1990s, with the Establishment's energetic push for Asianisation and an "Asian Destiny", and following the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, the Australian Establishment (the State) now sees its main "enemy" as being those who threaten the existence of the planned "Asian destiny for Australia". On many occasions the political police have already acted against Australian patriots and so-called "racists" (by both "open" and "legal", as well as devious, underhand, and "illegal", means).

The Establishment is not democratic by nature; but, like a cornered rat, will use all types of dirty tricks to ensure its survival. These include laws to be used to jail and oppress patriots (such as the various Racial Vilification laws) and the use of political police to harass patriots whenever they deem it to be appropriate.

The true nature of State Power in Australia is that of a traitor Establishment, which has always been anti-Australian (in various guises - whether subordinating Australia's culture, independence, and destiny to that of Britain, the USA, or Asia). It pretends to be democratic but is actually concerned merely with its own survival - whenever the principles of democracy clash with the survival of the Establishment's cosmopolitan-internationalist ideology, the State acts in an authoritarian, anti-democratic manner to protect itself. This anti-Australian State deserves only our contempt. Our duty is clear: Smash the Traitor State, and proclaim a patriotic Australian republic.



Many people believe that the right to vote "representatives" into parliament somehow guarantees popular sovereignty; that such politicians will represent the wishes of the people - the "popular will" of the voters. This is not true:

1) Political Parties. Supposedly, people get a "choice" of candidates. In reality, there are two large party blocs : the Labor Party (ALP) and the Liberal-National Coalition. These parties are multi-million dollar machines. The policies may "differ", but none of these policies go outside of the accepted cosmopolitan-internationalist Establishment norms. Thus, the voter has no real choice at all.

Politicians do not represent the voters, but instead represent their chosen Party, if not actually a particular Party faction (not to mention the interests of certain Party benefactors).

2) Voting Behaviour. The media prevents a free choice of ideas by the mass of the people, as it normally only promotes the personalities, ideas, activities, and policies of the major parties. Further, the heavy weight of "tradition", bolstered by years of subtle media propaganda, usually keeps most voters in the camp of "their" party.

3) Elections. The very process of our elections is designed to make the contest for government essentially into a "battle" only between the two party blocs. Elections for the House of Representatives (control of which determines who holds the power of Government) are based upon a system of preferential voting for single-member electorates, which almost but guarantees victory for one of the major Establishment parties (i.e. those with multi-million dollar budgets, provided by big sponsors, to cover newspaper, radio, TV, and other advertising; and who receive media attention, glorification, and validation).

4) Parliament. The very essence of this institution is meant to perpetuate the domination of politics by the two party blocs. Supposedly, one party bloc "balances" the other; however, in actual fact, both sides "debate" issues only within a framework of loyalty to the broad cosmopolitan-internationalist ideology.

Conclusion. If both parties have a "bi-partisan" agreement on an issue (as in the case of immigration, tariffs, the U.S. alliance, multiculturalism, our "Asian Destiny", etc.) then there is very little the ordinary citizen can do (within the State's current System) to change things.

The form of the Establishment is "open and democratic", but the content is "closed and dictatorial".

The Establishment comprises various sectors and "institutions", but these are not staffed by neutral "angels", but by mere humans who are often willing to misuse their positions of power and influence to ensure the survival of their cosmopolitan-internationalist view of Australia.



We should recognise that the State is always ready to bring in repressive laws when it feels that the Establishment, or its ideology, is under threat. We can look at several instances:

* 1900. The NSW Crimes Act made it a criminal offence to promote republicanism.

* 1917. The Unlawful Associations Act was used to combat the Industrial Workers of the World (which opposed conscription and Australia's part in the First World War), the I.W.W. was declared illegal, and it became a criminal offence to be a member.

* 1941-42. The National Security Act was used to declare the Communist Party of Australia an illegal organisation (this ban was revoked when the ALP came into government).

* 1942. The National Security Act was used to arrest - and jail in concentration camps (termed "internment camps") - various members of the nationalistic Australia First Movement.

* 1950. The Communist Party Dissolution Act banned the Communist Party. However, financial resources were made available to them to have the matter taken to the High Court, which then disallowed the law by declaring it unconstitutional.

* 1989. The NSW state parliament passed Australia's first Racial Vilification Act, and other state parliaments followed suit, as did the Commonwealth government in 1995. These laws, while supposedly aimed at stopping acts of "racial hatred" were actually specifically designed to suppress nationalist groups, and any other organisations opposing the Asianisation of Australia, as well as to scare ordinary Australians into silence.

It is a fact that anti-Australian policies enforced by the State cannot be altered except by means of attaining State Power. And that implies getting rid of the present "State" which preserves the power of the established social order.



Secret police have a function: To preserve the political status quo through illegal means. ASIO, ASIS, etc., often carry out illegal phone taps, break-ins, harassments, infiltrations, etc. In other words, the Establishment uses criminal action in its own interest. Does that fact not help tear away from our eyes any illusions we may have regarding the nature of State Power?

There are many other instances where the political police have made illegal use of their powers and resources to harass and/or damage political opponents of the Establishment; but whereas this used to be mainly targeted at the Communists, such repression is now aimed at Nationalists.



The public mind is psychologically coerced by the media (as it is a powerful agency of social control and mobilisation). There is "linkage" between the government, the great corporations, and the "free" media to build A SYSTEM OF ECONOMIC-POLITICAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTROL.

For instance, in 1980, one newspaper editor, P.P. McGuinness, indicated that a "conspiracy of silence" existed on the issue of Australia's Asianisation. Only "information" conducive to brainwashing the public was acceptable through all media outlets. We should continually bear in mind that the media acts as a propaganda organ of the State.

But if we take "media" in its widest definition to cover information "dissemination" in the community, then the education system can also be considered as a part of the Establishment's propaganda apparatus. It teaches the related ideas of cosmopolitanism, internationalism, and multiculturalism. Cosmopolitan academics, internationalists, multiculturalists, etc., write the textbooks which are forced onto our nation's youth to "de-nationalise" them; and render them either helpless against, or in support of, the Establishment's cosmopolitan-internationalist ideology.

It should be recognised that patriotic Australians are not just up against some mistaken ideas of government, but are fighting an ideology that is being pushed by the entire apparatus of the "machine" of the anti-Australian State.



The cosmopolitan-internationalist Establishment, that is running Australia, does not take kindly to opposition. Can Nationalists win power through normal democratic means? Or would the Establishment use its armed forces to stop such a development? Would the System have long since resorted to its police, suppressive legislation, and courts to harass a patriotic party?

There is simply NO WAY that the ruling "criminal gang" (comprising the current leaders of the major political parties, and their associated friends in big business and the media) will give up freely their "right" to rob the Nation and oppress the People.

In other words - bearing in mind that the Establishment will ACT to stop the possibility of Nationalists becoming dominant in parliament, and realising that State Power does NOT entirely reside in parliament - an effective "normal", "legal", "electoral" response to the tyranny of the Australian State may be IMPOSSIBLE in practise.

If a response to this System could be expressed in a verse, it would be:

"And no man single handed,
can hope to break the bars
It's a thousand like Ned Kelly
who'll hoist the Flag of Stars."

(From "The Death of Ned Kelly", John Manifold, 1948)



A break from democratic illusions is necessary in the fight for Australia's freedom.

Australia must become a Nation renewed, returned to its basic national principles - the principles of the first great Nationalist movement (of the 1880s and 1890s). And on the basis of new problems and dangers pushed forwards into a new century. In that sense we speak openly of a NATIONAL REVOLUTION (i.e. a social, psychological, and ideological revolution in the attitudes and outlook of the Australian People, with a consequent change in our political institutions, etc.). And can a revolution really proceed as a meek transfer of authority to a new party, without a collapse in the old order?

The rules for this new form of politics will be set by changes in the mode of struggle set by the Establishment. As the Establishment's "leaders" resort to oppressive measures, are we to be held to account for forging a "subversive" nationalism, for embracing those forms of political struggle which have brought down the strongest of States?



Australia's political evolution clearly shows the essentially alien (or anti-Australian) nature of the State machine; and its repressive, deceptive, and psychologically coercive nature. To rescue the Nation, it is necessary to smash this "State" and build a new State which is based upon strong nationalist principles and ethics.

In the meantime, we offer two pertinent quotes:


(Napoleon Bonaparte)


(Ned Kelly)

11 November 1996

Australian Nationalism Information Database