Rape-Gangs Revisited: Third-World Pathology Triggers First World Pathology, as British Authorities Ignore Asian Sex Trafficking of Children for Fear of Racial Unrest

Rape-Gangs Revisited: Third-World Pathology Triggers First World Pathology, as British Authorities Ignore Asian Sex Trafficking of Children for Fear of Racial Unrest

January 18, 2020/30 Comments/in Featured Articles /by Tobias Langdon

 

 

When I was a leftist, I used to sneer at Christianity for being irrational and mandating belief in impossible things. Well, let’s compare the cults. Christianity mandates belief in a single miraculous birth 2000 years ago in Palestine. Leftism — the religion of the well-educated, morally superior elites who run the West — mandates belief in billions of miraculous births over many millennia and much of the earth’s surface. Clearly, leftism is by far the more irrational cult.

One human race, one human brain

But why does leftism believe in billions of miraculous births? Because it insists that human beings didn’t evolve different brains and psychologies as they migrated into different environments, stopped inter-breeding, and differentially acquired new genes from separate human species like Neanderthals, Denisovans, and ghost populations in Africa. According to leftism, there is only one human race and only one human brain. Swedes and Somalis, Tibetans and Tongans, Moldovans and Māori – they’re the same under the skull. They’re all capable of exactly the same high performance in all fields of intellectual endeavour.

The reality of race vs the lies of leftism

Or so leftism claims. This makes it by far the more irrational cult. Christianity has a mechanism for the miraculous virgin birth of Jesus Christ, namely, divine intervention. Leftism has no mechanism for its billions of miraculous births, because it doesn’t believe in the supernatural. Instead of supplying a mechanism, it simply insists that we’re all the same under the skull. And when Somalis and other Blacks don’t match Swedes and other Whites in intellectual endeavours, leftism dishonestly updates concepts from Christianity. Why do Blacks fail? Because Whites wilfully and wickedly prevent them from realizing their sky-high potential. In short, Whites are guilty of the sin of racism. And some Whites are also guilty of blasphemy, in that they deny leftist dogma and attribute Black failure to Black genetics. Here at the Occidental Observer, for example, we blasphemously believe in racial differences and claim that different races are genetically adapted to different environments and cultures.

Insist on the biologically impossible

But that doesn’t plumb the full depths of leftist irrationality and belief in biological impossibilities. Leftism doesn’t only insist that brain-evolution was miraculously prevented among human beings. It also insists that brain-evolution was miraculously reversed. Somehow human beings have abolished the neurological and psychological differences that had previously existed between the males and females of our ape-like ancestors. And so leftism proclaims that women are capable of exactly the same high performance as men in all fields of intellectual endeavour. When women fail to match men, leftism again attributes this to sin and blasphemy. Men are guilty of sexism and some men blasphemously believe that women’s brains are different for genetic reasons.
Yes, the cult of leftism has a two-step recipe for creating a better world. First, insist on the biologically impossible. Second, bash the unbelievers. If it weren’t for racism and sexism, non-Whites and women would be performing at exactly the same high level as Whites and men. But as I’ve often pointed out, leftists are not genuinely interested in creating a better world and improving the lives of non-Whites and women. Leftists are interested in power and privilege for themselves, which is why they abandon their own principles whenever reality contradicts leftism. For example, the small Yorkshire town of Rotherham is a stronghold of leftism. It is also a stronghold of rape-culture, where the Labour council and the very pro-Jewish Labour MP, Denis MacShane, ignored the organized rape and sexual trafficking of working-class girls by grossly sexist men who embodied the very worst aspects of misogynistic patriarchy.

A simple choice: admit the truth or censor it

How could this happen? It happened because the girls were White and their abusers were brown-skinned Pakistani Muslims. This contradicted leftist ideology, which pretends that women and non-Whites are all victims of brutal White men and their hate. Leftists in Rotherham had a simple choice: they could either admit the truth and help the victims or deny the truth and help the cause of leftism. They didn’t hesitate: they denied the truth and allowed the Muslim rape-gangs to flourish. But Rotherham is, as I’ve said, a small Yorkshire town. In my article “Rape-Gangs Unlimited,” I predicted “that much bigger scandals remain uncovered in cities like London, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield and Bradford.”
Sure enough, in 2020 there’s a reluctant report in the Guardian about a small part of the non-White rape-culture that flourished in the northern city of Manchester, another stronghold of leftism:

Victoria Agoglia, killed by leftism and Islam

Up to 52 children may have been victims of a sex abuse scandal in Greater Manchester, with most offenders getting away with their crimes because of errors by police and children’s services, the Guardian has learned.
Some of the police officers involved in the 2004 case are still serving and the police watchdog has been called in to re-examine if there was any wrongdoing. The revelations came as an independent report found that the police investigation into child sexual exploitation failed vulnerable girls in care after being shut down prematurely — partly because senior officers prioritised solving burglaries and car crime.
Operation Augusta was launched in 2004 by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) following the death of 15-year-old Victoria Agoglia, who died of an overdose in 2003 after being injected with heroin by a 50-year-old man. …
The report found that although Augusta identified 16 child victims and 97 potential perpetrators — mostly men working in the restaurant trade — only three were convicted at court. The operation was shut down prematurely in July 2005, with the force blaming a lack of resources. As a result, most of the affected children — white girls aged 12 to 16 in care in Manchester — were “failed” by police and children’s services, the authors concluded.
[Greater Manchester police assistant chief constable Mabs Hussain] denied any suggestion that the original inquiry was inadequate because offenders were mostly from an Asian background: “There was no suggestion that there was any fear, from the evidence I have seen.” [This is false; see below]
The report suggested GMP failed to learn lessons from the curtailed operation, noting that nine years after Victoria’s death, nine Asian men in Rochdale were found guilty of sexually exploiting vulnerable young white girls. Burnham commissioned the research after Margaret Oliver, a detective on the Augusta team, went public criticising GMP in the aftermath of the Rochdale case.
“Don’t believe any of this rubbish that police have learned from their mistakes. I worked on an almost identical operation in 2004, Operation Augusta, which had identified dozens of young victims and dozens of suspects,” she said in a media interview in 2017. …
Operation Augusta identified various restaurants and takeaways in south Manchester where suspects were employed. Intelligence suggested that offenders were targeting care homes within the city of Manchester area, particularly one home used as an emergency placement unit for children entering the care system, which the report authors said “maintained a steady supply of victims” for the perpetrators, who befriended the girls as soon as they arrived. …
Joanne Roney, chief executive of Manchester city council, said: “This report makes for painful reading. We recognise that some of the social work practice and management oversight around 15 years ago fell far below the high standards we now expect. We are deeply sorry that not enough was done to protect our children at the time. While we cannot change the past we have learned from it and will continue to do so to ensure that no stone is left unturned in tackling this abhorrent crime.” (Police errors may have let abusers of up to 52 children escape justice, The Guardian, 14th January 2020)

In fact, a senior police officer from Rotherham has said that “With it being Asians, we can’t afford for this to be coming out,” admitting that the force ignored sex abuse by grooming gangs for 30 years for fear of stoking racial tensions — glaring testimony to the complicity of British elites in the immigration catastrophe.
And who can believe that their leftist enablers are sincere in their sorrow over what happened? Joanne Roney and her fellow leftists aren’t “deeply sorry” about the consequences of their own ideology. Nor was the leftist Joanna Simons, “the chief executive of Oxfordshire county council,” after a very similar scandal in the southern city of Oxford back in 2013. Simons said: “We are incredibly sorry we were not able to stop it any sooner. We were up against a gang of devious criminals. The girls thought they were their friends. … These are devious crimes that are very complicated.”

 

One of the victims told a trial how she was made to have sex with ‘at least 100 Asian men’. Asif Ali and Tanweer Ali (right) got terms of terms of 10 years and 14 years respectively. (Daily Mail caption)

“B” is for Brazen

In Oxford, one of the devious criminals, Mohammad Karrar, covered his tracks by ringing social workers and threatening violence against his victim, his victim’s family and the social workers themselves if he was prevented from seeing her and carrying on his abuse. An official report said that Karrar was “brazen in his exploitation of Girl D and acted in the belief that the authorities would never challenge him.” The b-word also appears in the Manchester scandal, where the death of Victoria Agoglia “exposed a network of paedophiles brazenly abusing young people in care… [who] should have been brought to justice but, appallingly, most [of them] escaped and some were left to reoffend.”
Of course the rape-gangs were – and are – “brazen.” There is a lot of inbreeding in Britain’s vibrant Muslim communities, which reduces their average IQ even further, but non-White rapists don’t have to be intelligent to understand how leftism works. If you’re non-White, you’re a victim and leftists will allow you to express your vibrant culture as you please. Then the leftists will pretend that they’re “deeply sorry” and “incredibly sorry” about allowing you to rape, torture and run child-prostitution rings.

No martyr-cult for White girls

But leftists are not sorry and have not abandoned the lies and irrationality that allow rape-gangs to flourish. As you can see above, the leftist Guardian is still weaselling about the crimes in Manchester. It says “Up to 52 children” when it should say “100s or 1000s of White girls.” It says that the authorities made “errors” when it should say that the authorities made deliberate, Guardian-approved choices to ignore crimes of which they were fully aware. It uses the generic term “man” and “men” to conceal the full truth. Who was responsible for the sexual abuse? Why, it was “men working in the restaurant trade.” And who injected 15-year-old Victoria Agoglia with a fatal overdose of heroin in 2003? Why, it was “a 50-year-old man.” The Guardian is happy to reveal the sex of the criminals, because that assists the leftist lie that women are the helpless victims of brutal sexist men. But it conceals the race and religious background of the criminals, because that contradicts the leftist demonization of White men and White Christianity.
But it wasn’t Christianity that killed Victoria Agoglia: it was an alliance between leftism and Islam. She was fatally injected with heroin by a non-White Pakistani Muslim even as the leftist authorities in Manchester were fully aware that she was “being repeatedly abused, raped and plied with drugs by predatory paedophiles.” The leftist authorities – police and social services – did nothing to help her. That is far worse than the murder of Stephen Lawrence, the Black teenager who was stabbed to death by a White gang in London in 1993. The police in London allegedly failed Stephen Lawrence after his death. The police in Manchester indisputably failed Victoria Agoglia for many months before her death. But only Stephen Lawrence has become the centre of a leftist cult that incessantly bewails the racism of the White British and the “institutional racism” of the British police.

Laura Wilson, killed by leftism and Islam

Laura Wilson was also ignored. She was the 17-year-old White girl stabbed to death in Rotherham in 2010 by two Pakistani Muslims whose activities, once again, were fully known to the leftists responsible for what they would laughably call Laura’s “welfare.” And there have been many other White women and girls in many other British towns and cities who have died at the hands of non-Whites even as the leftist authorities knew that they were being harmed and were at risk of murder. But none of those White victims have leftist martyr-cults because their deaths don’t assist the cause of leftism and the leftist pursuit of power
.

The life-cult and the suicide-cult

On the contrary, their deaths flatly contradict leftism. We are not all the same under the skin and non-White failure is not caused by White racism. Mass immigration from the corrupt, tribalist and highly illiberal Third World causes huge and growing harm to Britain and all other White nations that are subject to it. Christianity believes that “the truth shall make you free.” Leftism believes in lies, censorship and enslavement.
When the Western world was Christian, it achieved astonishing things in art, literature, music and science. When the Western world turned leftist, it began to die. Leftism is a suicide-cult that has to be destroyed. And it will be destroyed, because the truth about racial and sexual differences won’t be suppressed for very much longer. An ideology built on fantasies and lies is like a house built on sand. When floods sweep away the sand, the house will fall. When science sweeps away the fantasies and lies, the ideology will fall.

The War on White Australia: Cheap Labor Importation Schemes

 

The War on White Australia: Cheap Labor Importation Schemes

 

February 23, 2020/38 Comments/in Featured Articles /by Brenton Sanderson

 

I have written extensively about the pivotal role played by Jewish intellectuals and activists as ideological and political handmaidens of the demographic transformation of Australia over the last fifty years (see here, here, here, here and here). In this essay I want to explore another key driver of this transformation: business interests fixated on suppressing wages and boosting profits through the expedient of mass immigration and cheap labor importation schemes.

 

The White Australia policy (1901–1973) was, while it lasted, a hugely successful attempt to preserve the genetic and cultural legacy of the founding racial stock of the nation. It was also an industrial relations policy designed to prevent the capitalist class from flooding the Australian economy with cheap labor. This was a key part of the original rationale for the policy as articulated by Alfred Deakin, Australia’s first Attorney-General, who argued that:

a white Australia does not by any means just mean the preservation of the complexion of the people of this country. It means the multiplying of homes, so that we may be able to defend every part of our continent; it means the maintenance of conditions of life fit for white men and white women; it means equal laws and opportunities for all; it means protection against underpaid labour of other lands, it means the payment of fair wages. A white Australia means a civilisation whose foundations are built on healthy lives, lived in honest toil, under circumstances which imply no degradation; a white Australia means protection.”[i]  

 

An analogous view had been expressed as early as 1841 by James Stephen, the head of the British colonial office in London, who warned that large-scale non-White immigration to Australia would inevitably “beat down the wages of poor labouring Europeans … [and] cut off the resource for many of our own distressed people.”[ii] In the four decades before the enactment of the White Australia policy in 1901, some 60,000 South Sea Islanders (called “Kanakas”) were imported and indentured to Queensland sugar plantation owners who built a business model on this ultra-cheap imported labour and who regarded themselves as a “plantocracy” in the manner of the American south. This practice alarmed Australian scholar Charles Pearson who observed in 1893 that: “We know that coloured and white labour cannot exist side by side; we are well aware that China can swamp us with a single year’s surplus of population; and we know that if national existence is sacrificed to the working of a few mines and sugar plantations, it is not the Englishman and Australian alone, but the whole civilized world, that will be the losers.”[iii]

 

The closing down of this and other cheap labour importation schemes with the enactment of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1901 hugely benefited White Australian workers. Wages paid by business rose to secure labour. The sugar industry continued to thrive, but without cheap imported labour the plantation model struggled against the family farm model, and the industry came to comprise many smaller-scale enterprises. The White Australia policy was thus a policy of economic protectionism designed to benefit the entire racial group by preventing capitalists from importing cheap labour to undercut the living standards of White Australians. The policy reflected the desire of Australians to build a strong and prosperous society founded upon the principles of racial and cultural homogeneity. Reflecting this view, one commentator noted in 1939 that: “The Australian prides himself on his high standard of living; he wishes to do nothing that will endanger it. Neither does he wish to bring into being a colour problem such as he sees in South Africa.”[iv]

 

 

Advertisement for Australian-made furniture from the early twentieth century

 

 

Since the Jewish-led overthrow of the White Australia policy in the 1960s and 1970s, Australian policymakers have progressively embraced not only the Jewish diasporic strategic imperatives of increased racial diversity and multiculturalism, but also the cheap labor importation schemes prohibited under the White Australia policy. A dramatic increase in cheap labor importation into Australia took place after 1996 when the “conservative” government of Prime Minister John Howard created the Section 457 Visa for temporary workers—a visa program designed to be uncapped and totally driven by the putative needs of the Australian labor market.

 

The 457 Visa led to a massive increase in cheap non-White labor brought into the country, including in industries experiencing flat or no growth, such as cooks in the hotels/restaurant industry and shop assistants in the retail sector. One union noted how there was a 53% increase in the number of 457 Visa holders over a period when total employment in relevant industries fell by six per cent. Many businesses used 457 Visas to replace their existing workforces with cheaper migrant workers. Australia’s peak union body, the ACTU, noted how the proliferation of 457 temporary work visas meant that young people and graduates who previously would have been offered an apprenticeship or other entry-level opportunity have been effectively shut out of a number of industries.

 

Amid growing community anger and a Senate Inquiry into the scheme, the 457 Visa was replaced in 2018 with the Temporary Skill Shortage (TSS) Visa, which, while ostensibly including more rigorous labor market testing and salary assessment requirements, has had minimal effect in limiting temporary migrant numbers. There are currently about 2.2 million temporary visa holders in an Australian workforce of 12.9 million—or about 17 per cent of the total (not including illegal workers). This is a massive 54 per cent increase from a decade earlier. Almost a fifth of the nation’s cleaners, store packers, and food and hospitality workers are on temporary migrant visas—at a time when nearly two million Australians are either unemployed or underemployed.

 

International Student Explosion

 

In addition to creating the 457 temporary work visa, it was the Howard government that, from the early 2000s, encouraged overseas students to apply for permanent residence after completing their courses in Australia. This was partly in response to lobbying from the universities who sought to promote overseas student enrolments as another revenue source. The inevitable result was an explosion in overseas student enrolments, and by 2017–18 overseas students had become the largest contributor to Australia’s very high level of Net Overseas Migration (NOM) which numbered 271,700 people in 2019. According to Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) estimates, overseas students comprise around 44 per cent of total NOM. Between 2012 and 2017, the share of commencing overseas students of all commencing students in Australian universities grew from 21.8 per cent to 28.9 per cent and to around 40 per cent in Group of Eight (Go8) leading universities. The majority of these students were from China and India.

 

The head of The Australian Population Research Institute, Dr. Bob Birrell, estimates that around one in five overseas students is granted Permanent Residency each year, noting that “Most of these students had been in Australia for years. They had managed to stay here by transferring from one temporary visa to another before eventually finding a PR pathway, mainly by finding an employer to sponsor them or a resident to sponsor them as a partner.” An overseas student studying for a bachelor’s degree typically extends their stay to pursue a post-graduate qualification and then moves on to a 485 visa to work for up to 18 months. Overseas students (especially those from India) show a high propensity to seek and obtain another temporary visa each year, and an equally high propensity to appeal any decision to deny them an additional visa. This enables them to stay in Australia while their appeal is heard by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

 

Overseas students are by far the largest contributors to population growth in inner Sydney and Melbourne. As well as contributing to a collapse in academic standards at Australian universities (who have a vested financial interest in setting low English language standards for their courses), their presence in the labor market actively harms Australian workers:

 

Many thousands of overseas students are being enrolled who do not hold the funds needed to finance their stay in Australia for more than a short period. They have to rely on obtaining employment here. They have created an underclass of workers with little choice but to accept whatever terms employers are prepared to offer. Most of those holding an overseas student visa do not possess professional or trade qualifications accepted in Australia. And, because they hold temporary visas, employers are usually only willing to recruit them on a casual or part-time basis. They enter low-skilled labour markets (notably in hospitality, retail and other service industries). The costs are borne by the many young domestic workers who do not possess post-school qualifications and who are also seeking work in these occupations. These domestic job seekers face ferocious competition from overseas students and other temporary migrants. This has eroded wages and conditions.

 

While this labor supply abundance persists, employers don’t have to raise wages or invest in labor saving capital equipment. Real incomes have, consequently, stagnated in Australia for a decade and in 2018 the labor productivity growth rate fell to zero. Between 2008 and 2016 Australia’s labor market created an extra 474,000 full time jobs but only 74,000 went to people born in Australia. The bulk (400,000) went to migrants (both permanent and temporary)—the vast majority of whom arrived in the country after 2001. Close to 30 per cent of Australian residents are now born overseas.

 

The Scale of Recent Australian Immigration

 

In 2000, the Australian Bureau of Statistics forecast that Australia’s population wouldn’t reach 25.4 million until 2051. As a result of mass immigration and a population growth rate much faster than other developed countries, Australia got there in 2019. Jewish Monash University professor and leading immigration and diversity propagandist, Dr. Andrew Markus, recently enthused: “You have to pinch yourself. In 2006 our population was under 20 million, and now it’s over 25 million. I can’t think of a developed Western country that’s experienced a change of that magnitude.” The Chinese-born population of Australia grew by half to 650,000 in the five years to 2018 (more than eight times faster than the overall population), and by 2023 is on track to surpass the English-born. The Indian-born population grew even faster to 590,000. In 2019 more people from Nepal settled in Australia than from the United Kingdom, mainly due to the high number of students who come here and remain after graduation, and who then use chain migration to bring in their relatives.

 

Australia’s Nepal-born population is now about 95,000, compared with only 1,410 in 1996. Tara Gaire arrived from Nepal as a student in 2008, and now works as a trainer in the vocational education sector. Living with his family in the northern suburbs, Mr Gaire said he felt very at home in Melbourne’s multicultural environment. “We catch up with community members, we go to the temple, it doesn’t feel like overseas,” he said. … Dr Bob Birrell, from the Australian Population Research Institute, said Nepalese students had created a bridgehead in Australia from which the community grew rapidly. “We have former students who got permanent residency through skilled entry and marrying locals, and then inviting relatives from the homeland to join them,” he said.     

 

Pro-immigration political commentator George Megalogenis recently noted that demographic trends in the city of Melbourne point “to a future in which Australia is no longer a majority white nation.” Melbourne is the first Australian city in which the largest ethnic community are migrants born in India, followed by those born in China. “Melbourne’s ethnic face, with the Indians first, the Chinese second and the English [born] third, is” he observes, “expected to become the nation’s before the end of the 2020s, as cities and regions increasingly rely on migration for population growth.” Megalogenis, a leftist with a longstanding animus to Anglo Australia, celebrates the fact “history will be made at the core of our identity. Indigenous Australians will outnumber the English-born for the first time since the 1820s. At that point we can stop pretending we are just a white nation.” While this is obviously a change Jewish intellectuals and activists will be cheering, it’s something unlikely to alarm White Australian business leaders devoid of any racial or national feeling.

 

Scene from Boxing Day sales in Melbourne 2019

 

Despite growing community unease, successive governments have steadfastly refused to reduce Australia’s high immigration intake due to the pleadings of ethnic lobbies, universities, and a business sector that finds it far easier to recruit cheap migrant workers than train locals. A report by the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia recently advocated totally unrestricted inflows of temporary migrants and the abolition of any labor-market testing for positions filled by migrants. Noting that Net Overseas Migration now accounts for about 60 per cent of Australia’s population growth, David Alexander, writing in The Australian, observes that:

Many of the policy themes of recent years echo those of earlier eras. Labour importing businesses argue that they shouldn’t be expected to pay market rates for labour, and on this basis deem there to be labour shortages that government must assist with. These businesses have increased competitiveness against those that do not use cheaper imported labour, and this is contributing to the structure of industries reverting to a more manorial model. Looking across historical episodes, we can identify the economic principles at work; high differentials between wealthy-country wages and poorer-country wages will always create incentives for some businesses to arbitrage away the difference through labour mobility schemes. And, correspondingly, the pressure for wage convergence with poor countries can be expected to elicit opposition from domestic workers.

 

Clearly racial and cultural imperatives would, in a sane country, override government support for large-scale cheap labor importation schemes. It is disingenuous to declare labor shortages on the basis that businesses decline to pay the market rate, and it is also unfair to give structural advantage to labor-importing firms over local-employing firms. The Indian government recently cited spurious “labor shortages” in Australia (i.e. the unwillingness of businesses to pay market wage rates) to argue for even greater access for Indian workers to “fill the gaps” in the Australian economy, proposing that Indian health workers, infrastructure specialists and security guards be given enhanced access to the labor market. The Indian population of Australia has, as mentioned, exploded in the last two decades: Melbourne and Sydney have been the destination of choice for more than 60 per cent of the 500,000 Indians and more than 70 per cent of the 500,000 Chinese who have migrated here since 2001. The Australian Chamber of Commerce has welcomed this unprecedented surge in permanent and temporary migration, noting “The biggest reason for the growth in our NOM (net overseas migration) is international students [with the right to work], something to be celebrated.”

 

Increased Scope for Worker Exploitation

 

Australia’s extremely high per capita level of immigration, fueled by uncapped temporary work and overseas student visas—where over two million workers in Australia are currently on visas—creates tremendous scope for worker exploitation. In 2015 it was revealed that thousands of workers, generally Indian students on visas, were paid as little as $5 an hour by 7-Eleven and were blackmailed, or threatened with deportation if they spoke up. The company apologized and paid back more than $160 million to thousands of workers in back pay. A long list of companies have since been caught underpaying staff or using fake traineeships to avoid paying workers their entitlements. A recent study found underpayment of wages to temporary workers is rife, with as many as a third being paid less than half the legal minimum wage. The underpayment of workers in the hospitality industry is so widespread as to be standard practice. Most recently, a restaurant fronted by Jewish celebrity chef Heston Blumenthal was found to owe employees at least $4.5 million “in what appears to be the worst case of underpayment yet in the high-end restaurant sector.”

 

Such practices inevitably have a flow on effect throughout the entire economy where high school and university students are widely underpaid and overworked. Business journalist Adele Ferguson noted how “These companies have come to symbolize what is wrong in a number of sectors of the economy, where underpayment or wage suppression is part and parcel of doing business and vulnerable workers are like lambs to the slaughter in this insidious practice. It isn’t an overstatement to say that worker exploitation is widespread and have become entrenched over time.” A lawyer leading a class action of former employees subjected to such practices observes how employers “have been allowed to build empires and expand their business portfolios on the backs of employees being paid less than their minimum award [legal] entitlements.”

 

Stagnant Wages in Australia

 

It is little wonder, in such an environment, that real wages in Australia have stagnated. Wage underpayment fueled by mass immigration (temporary and permanent) has seen Australian wage growth fall off a cliff since 2013 and remain at low levels. Economics professor Roger Wilkins notes over the last decade “the almost complete absence of any growth in household incomes. After tax, the typical Australian household earned $80,600 in 2009. In 2017 the same household earned $80,100. Meanwhile, ultra-low interest rate policies by Australia’s central bank has inflated asset prices, fanning inequality, and supercharged an already high debt burden without much increase in genuine economic activity.” Since 2000 the volume of loans outstanding in Australia—to households, businesses and governments—has soared from $740 billion to 2.9 trillion. The average mortgage on an existing dwelling in New South Wales recently hit an all-time high of $621,500.

 

Australian politicians are fond of boasting that, during a period of time when other major developed economies experienced several recessions, the Australian economy has experienced almost three decades of uninterrupted economic growth. This disguises the fact that, due to record high immigration, Australia’s annual growth in Gross Domestic Product per capita has, in the last decade, averaged less than one per cent, lower than America, Japan, and even the Eurozone. Per capita incomes have gone backwards during 18 quarters of the past 28 years (including two technical recessions). In per capita terms, both the Victorian and Melbourne economies have gone backwards four times in the past ten years. On that measure, it is the worst performing state and city in Australia—despite being the favored destination of new Chinese and Indian migrants. “The population growth has disguised the fact that Victoria has become a poor state,” notes economist Saul Eslake. “Let me put it this way, economic growth that’s only driven by population growth is not really worth having, as it is not improving people’s living conditions.”

 

Mass immigration has so transformed the demographics of Melbourne that more than 40 per cent of residents are now migrants. And this is only the start: if current trends continue a city the size of Brisbane will be piled on top of Melbourne in the next two decades. A consequence has been that house prices have risen to among the most expensive in the world as house size and quality have declined. A 2017 survey of 406 cities ranked Sydney the world’s second most expensive (housing costs against inflation) only behind Hong Kong (which it increasingly resembles). Melbourne came in sixth, more expensive that London, Tokyo and New York. Wage stagnation amid soaring house prices has made shelter a luxury, and priced a generation out of the property market. The amenity of local suburbs is declining, congestion is worse, there are fewer parks and “green spaces” and most modern apartment blocks are cheap eyesores. Meanwhile, Australia’s annual intake of around 20,000 mainly African and Middle-Eastern refugees has fueled a surge in violent crime.

 

Australia’s New Economic Strategy

 

Population growth fueled by mass immigration and the servicing of it with cheaply-built houses, apartments, and supermarkets has essentially become Australia’s economic strategy. Former Australian Foreign Minister, Bob Carr, pointed out that “Australia digs up and sells raw materials. In the cities the economy is based on building apartment blocks and shopping malls. The idea of Australia as a clever country is a myth, it’s an illusion.”

 

Unsurprisingly, surveys have found a steep fall in public support for immigration over the last decade. A 2018 survey found that more than 69 per cent of respondents felt the country didn’t need more people. Community concerns about the deleterious effects of mass immigration are not, however, represented by Australia’s political class. At the 2019 federal election, despite some clear differences between the two major political parties in a range of policy areas, they effectively ran a joint ticket on immigration. Economics journalist Judith Sloan notes that immigration is “a no go subject for many in the political class,” who are “in heated agreement in their support for high migrant intakes, both permanent and temporary, and the associated high population growth.”

 

Conscious of the public’s growing hostility to mass immigration, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced a small cut in Australia’s permanent migrant intake (from 190,000 to 160,000) in 2019—while failing to mention the nation’s massive temporary migrant intake wouldn’t be constrained. According to the 2019-20 federal budget, Net Overseas Migration is expected to average 268,600 annually for the next four years—an increase on the 228,700 estimate from the previous budget. A former Department of Immigration bureaucrat notes that “If [Morrison] sticks to that plan [to lower permanent migration to 160,000], then Treasury’s rise in net migration inevitably means a huge surge in long-term temporary migration to more than offset the reduction in permanent migration.” Moreover, the 160,000 permanent immigration figure also does not include the 20,000 people granted permanent residence each year through Australia’s refugee program.

 

The Labor Party opposition in Australia, like its counterpart in the UK and the Democratic Party in the US, has essentially abandoned any pretense of representing the interests of the White working class. Most of the “creative destruction” that followed the economic globalization of the post-Cold War era has been in jobs lost by blue-collar White men. White manual workers across the West now face fewer jobs and, spurred by mass immigration (both legal and illegal) falling real wages and unaffordable housing. Rather than representing these people (their traditional constituency) by supporting immigration restriction, the Australian Labor Party panders to ethnic communities. In the wake of its shock 2019 election loss, the party is “prioritizing engagement with migrant communities” and will focus on “reviewing legislation from a multicultural perspective.”

 

Australia’s Plutocratic Elite and Mass Immigration

 

Noting the reasons for the major parties’ flagrant disregard for wishes of the electorate, Judith Sloan notes that “The lobbying behind immigration is so strong that both parties have concluded the views of ordinary folk can be ignored. These forces include the bureaucracy—check out the Treasury’s reports—big business, property developers, the universities, and various interest groups, some ethnically based.” These business and ethnic groups lobbying for unrelenting waves of mass immigration often overlap. Australia’s largest property developer, the Jewish tycoon Harry Triguboff (known as “high-rise Harry”) is a pro-immigration zealot for ethnic and business reasons. Born to Russian-Jewish parents who fled to China, Triguboff, who came to Australia as a young boy in 1948, pioneered selling apartments to the Chinese, and hopes mass immigration will see Australia’s population soar to 55 million by 2050 and 100 million by the end of the century.

 

 

High-rise Harry Triguboff

 

Fellow Jewish plutocrat, Frank Lowy, is also “an advocate for an ambitious immigration program.” In response to talk of a small cut to the permanent immigration intake in 2018, Lowy, claiming to be “disturbed by the negative tone of the debate over immigration,” protested that “we are moving in the wrong direction. We should bend that curve back upwards. We should be talking about targets, not caps.” Mass immigration proponents like Triguboff, Lowy, and fellow Jewish property tycoon John Gandel, were leading donors to both major political parties in the lead up to the 2019 election. All three, meanwhile, strongly support Israel’s ethnically-restrictive immigration policies, with Lowy recently moving to Israel after retiring from active involvement in his business affairs.

 

Downward Social Mobility of White Australians

 

Pivotal to the growing backlash against neo-liberal economics in the West has been the downward social mobility that has resulted from decades of the kind of plutocratic rentier capitalism championed by Triguboff, Lowy, Gandel and other pillars of Australia’s corporate elite. Analysis by a Harvard economist in 2016 found that just half of children born in the 1980s were better off than their parents, compared with 90 per cent of baby boomers. The downward social mobility of younger generations of White Australians is especially acute because of the crushing rise in house prices and the incredible corruption of the banking and financial systems that has accompanied it. Plutocratic rentier capitalism is an economic system where certain players are able to extract a “rent” from everybody else because they have an excess of economic and/or political power.

 

While these and other business interests are undoubtedly made better off as a result of mass immigration, its negative effects are mainly borne by White working people and taxpayers. Taking just public infrastructure—covering roads, public transport, hospitals, schools, electricity, water and sewage, policing, law and justice, parks and open space and much more—Sustainable Population Australia estimates every extra migrant requires well over $100,000 of infrastructure spending. A failure to make this kind of investment in infrastructure results in growing congestion on roads and public transport. Infrastructure Australia forecast that the annual cost of road congestion will increase from $19 billion in 2016 to $39 billion in 2031. Exacerbating this is the fact two-thirds of migrants settle in the already crowded cities of Sydney and Melbourne—each of whose populations are projected to reach 10 million in the next fifty years. The only way this doubling of the populations of Melbourne and Sydney can be occur so rapidly is by moving to a lot more high-rise living—a fundamental and profoundly negative change to the Australian way of life.

 

It is little wonder that, when asked, Australians feel their living standards are declining, especially those struggling to squeeze into an overheated housing market. Asked how they felt about the level of change during the past decade, more Australians opted for “concerned,” “overwhelmed,” and “fatigued” than “positive,” “empowered” and “energized,” according to research published late last year. These results reflect growing sentiment throughout the West where growing numbers of White working people are becoming heartily sick of plutocratic rentier capitalism fueled by unrelenting waves of permanent and temporary immigration.

 

---

[i] Ian Cook, Liberalism in Australia (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1999), 179.

[ii] Eric Richards, “Migrations: The Career of British White Australia,” In: Australia’s Empire, Ed. Deryck Schreuder & Stuart Ward, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 163-185; 167-168.

[iii] Charles Pearson, National Life and Character: A Forecast, (London: MacMillan & Co., 1893), 16.

[iv] Richards, “Migrations: The Career of British White Australia,” 173.

The Elephant in the Living Room: The Communist Origins of Modern Antifa

 

The Elephant in the Living Room: The Communist Origins of Modern Antifa

 

February 26, 2020/31 Comments/in Featured Articles /by General Nick Zeljko Glasnovic

 

The following text is the translation of two speeches given by General  Nick Z. Glasnovic in January 2020 in the Parliament of Croatia. Transl. by T. Sunic. General Glasnovic is an MP in the Croatian Parliament

 

Starting from the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917, all the way to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1988, communist regimes all over the world killed tens of millions of people. Those mass killings were carried out in the name of equality, democracy and tolerance. Most of those killed were victims of “self-genocide” given that they were mostly victims of their own countrymen. Such criminal communist insanity had been planned to the last detail. Wherever the communist cabal had come into power, i.e., from Mongolia to the Adriatic coast, the most vital part of the population had to be beheaded first.

 

 

In an effort to destroy the Christian tradition, communists had to remove the Church and the clergy. During the early communist revolutionary post-World War II fervor, religious leaders were often burned alive, or buried alive, or crucified alive. The Bolsheviks, in 1918, buried alive the Russian Christian Orthodox  Bishop Andronicus. In 1937, the  Russian theologian, mathematician and inventor, Pavel Florensky, after being subjected to torture, was executed by the Communist authorities. He was one of nameless 750,000 victims of the NKVD (Soviet secret police). He was shot in the neck at the height of the communist repression, later to be known as Stalin’s “Great Purge.” In addition to killing millions of people of various religious denominations (mostly Christians), more than 110,000 clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church were executed. Even the Red Army needed to be partially beheaded. Stalin executed several Soviet marshals, generals and tens of thousands of lower rank officers during the 1936–1937 purges. In 1931, the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, which could accommodate up to 10,000 believers, was blown up by Stalin’s thugs. Books by foreign authors were burned or banned. In 1940, after Stalin had dismembered the Baltic states, literature in vernacular languages in those countries ​​was also banned.

 

Brainwashing was an integral part of all communist regimes, with psychiatric experiments on prisoners becoming a daily routine. Politically incorrect thinkers were confined to psychiatric wards where they were drugged, tortured and questioned. The Soviet NKVD and, later on, their smaller post-World War II copycat East European outlets shortly after they were established began to experiment with nerve poison, a method used later to “neutralize” political opponents, both at home and abroad. Prisoners were killed by mustard gas, ricin and digitoxin. After years of imprisonment, the Archbishop of the Ukrainian Church Theodore George Romzha was killed by a curare injection.

 

Nor did communism spare scientists, especially those who had obtained some prominence in the fields of genetics and forensics. The biologist Nikolai Koltsov, a Russian pioneer of modern genetics, became a victim of communist poisoning in 1940. On the same day, his wife committed suicide. Many Soviet pseudo-scientists, including a famed hoaxer Trofim Lysenko, who had rejected Mendel’s laws of heredity, succeeded in setting back for decades all efforts in genetic research in Russia.  Some modalities of the Lysenko’s quackery can be observed today among many Antifa and LGTB outlets who claim that gender and race are a matter of free choice and are not influenced by heredity.

 

In the early days of the communist experiment, the method of weaponizing food against their own people was also widespread, as was observed on the massive scale during the great famine in Ukraine in the 1930s. The mandatory communist slogan in the early 1950s, enforced all over communized Eastern Europe, went something like this:  “We shall grow wheat from the heavens so that hungry America and England can see it.” In order to suppress the revolt in May 1950 in the Cazin region of what is today a small slice of northwestern  Bosnia, the Yugoslav communist strongman Josip B. Tito, sent units of the Yugoslav National Army to quell the rebellion of starved peasants.

 

The Memory Hole

 

Victims of the Communist mass terror don’t seem to be a favored theme of Hollywood movies, docudrama, and TV series. These horrors are presented as little more than a minor footnote in history textbooks.

  

What do graduate students in the West know about Vasily Blokhin, the NKVD executive responsible for the execution of more than 7,000 Polish officers in the spring of 1940? What do Western students  know about  the fate of Ljudevit Jurak (1881–1945) and Eduard Miloslavic (1884–1952), two Croatian forensic experts who studied the mass graves at Katyn and Vinnitsa, hired in 1943 by the German Wehrmacht to examine the bodies of Poles massacred in 1940 by the Soviet commissars?   

 

What do Chinese students, or for that matter Western students, know today about the “Great leap forward” and the “Cultural Revolution” (1966–1976) of Chairman Mao Zedong which nearly destroyed 3,000 years of Chinese history? 

 

The dead hand of Marxism and Leninism still extends over the European continent, albeit under the new label of “antifascism.”  

 

Former communist affiliates and their latter-day antifa progeny have now rebaptized themselves into Social Democrats and Liberals. Former Yugoslav Titoists and their descendants in Croatia haven’t disappeared; they operate now under different party names, using more digestible parliamentary paraphernalia such as the “HNS” (Croatian People’s Party) the “IDS” (Istria’s Democratic Assembly), and the “HSS” (Croatian Peasant Party).  The much vaunted Council of Europe resolution 1481, adopted in 2006 and condemning communist crimes, remains a dead letter, good enough to assuage the guilty consciences of Brussels bureaucrats.

The communist regimes left not only human, economic and ecological devastation. 

Communist anthropology has distorted the mental makeup of generations to come. 

Communism had given birth to a species deprived of any moral values, of any sense of personal responsibility, and of any sense of striving for common good. 

 

The Russian writer Alexander Zinoviev called this species an “honest liar.” In November 2019, the Belgrade historian Srdjan Cvetkovic visited Zagreb. At a scientific meeting, sponsored by the Croatian Institute of History he confirmed the long-held public secret that 56,000 Serbs had been killed from 1944 to 1946 in Serbia by the victorious Yugoslav Communists. More than 20% of those killed were under the age of 18. The conference, as was to be expected, was ignored by the mainstream media in Croatia, thus reminding us that the authorities in Croatia and her EU watchdog, are the only ones who decide on the political narrative in the mainstream media. What do children learn now in Croatia about the history of the communist crimes against the Croatian people? Nor do they know anything about the largest ethnic cleansing campaign in European history and the destruction of the German minority in the former Yugoslavia during and after World War II.  

 

One must not forget that lies and deception were imprinted in the Bolshevik genetic code. 

 

Henceforth their offspring consider themselves as the only genuine interpreters of modern history.

 

The history of Eastern Europe has been mapped out by countless “Naked Islands,” big or small Gulag archipelagos, foibes, and unexplored mass graves. Almost daily the Croat media report on the newly found mass graves  dating back to 1945–46. 

 

To this day the ruling class in the West has shown a total lack of personal and legal conscience towards victims of communism. 

 

If we give up the search for the truth, we also sign our moral capitulation and we decide to participate in the erasure of our collective memory. It looks, however, that we will have to put up for a much longer time with the communist elephants in our living rooms.