Tag Archives: Separatism

Reconciliation Australia’s Two-Faced Activism

Joe Stella, Quadrant, 27 May 2024

Every year, Reconciliation Australia Limited (RAL) marks the period between the anniversaries of the 1967 referendum (May 217) and the Mabo judgment (June 3) as National Reconciliation Week. Last year, the theme was “Be a Voice for generations”, a reference to the looming referendum. This year’s theme, “Now more than ever”, reflects the organisation’s unprocessed shock and denial at the result. According to RAL, “as a nation we stumbled” but “the fight” must continue.

Really? RAL has now been operating for 23 years, more than twice as long as the statutory Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation that preceded it. As I have argued in a new paper for Close the Gap Research, “surely so emphatic a defeat of what advocates called ‘an act of reconciliation’ demands an objective assessment of the continued viability of that process.”

That assessment must begin with a difficult and still largely unexplored question: Is reconciliation what Aborigines actually want? In an address delivered during the last Reconciliation Week, ‘Yes’ campaigner Megan Davis cast serious doubt on this. During consultations in the lead-up to the 2017 Uluru Statement, she told a Townsville audience, “our old people kept saying, unsolicited and organically, that reconciliation was the wrong process, that reconciliation was the wrong word.”

We do not know how many of these “old people” there were, much less whether they represent a significant body of opinion among Aborigines. However, Davis’ comments are helpful because they at least acknowledge the diprotodon in the room. Reconciliation has always been promoted as a means to cement national unity. As such, it is inimical to a radical Aboriginal rights agenda centred on the indicia of a separate race-based nationhood: sovereignty, self-determination, international recognition, treaties, embassies and so on.

The Uluru Statement endorses the Aboriginal nationalist program first developed by the National Aboriginal Conference between 1979 and 1981. This includes Aboriginal sovereignty, a treaty (makarrata), reparations and recognition of customary law. The Voice to Parliament, the brainchild of non-Aboriginal academic Shireen Morris, was a novel addition. As later accounts of the convention that produced the Uluru Statement demonstrate, a treaty was the top priority for many delegates. They needed to be persuaded that the Voice was a necessary preliminary measure. This tension is reflected in the final text of the Statement, which characterises a treaty as “the culmination of our agenda”.

Read the rest here . . .

The (deceptive) Voice

The deceit is being slowly laid bare. The Voice is the biggest con in Australia’s history. The small clique of Aboriginal elites have only ever wanted to grab land and wealth from 95 percent of the population to create a separate country. If they succeed, it will be the biggest shakedown in history.


Final Report of Referendum Council: Voice to Parliament will lead to Treaty, Reparations

David Hiscox, XYZ, 20 April 2023

A Freedom of Information Request has resulted in the publication of the Final Report of the Referendum Council, which you can read in full here.

Unsurprisingly, it reveals the intention of aboriginal activists for the so-called “voice to parliament” to lead to a so-called “treaty” which could in turn lead to “reparations”. An excellent summary has been provided by Aboriginal Voice Exposed:

Secret government documents the National Indigenous Australians Agency was forced to release under freedom of information laws say that “any Voice to Parliament should be designed so that it could support and promote a treaty-making process”.

And what’s in the treaty?

According to these secret documents, it must include a “fixed percentage of Gross National Product. Rates/land tax/royalties”.

The documents explain:

… a Treaty could include a proper say in decision-making, the establishment of a truth commission, reparations, a financial settlement (such as seeking a percentage of GDP), the resolution of land, water and resources issues, recognition of authority and customary law …

This a direct quote from the secret Voice documents:

“Australia got a whole country for nothing, they haven’t even begun to pay for it.”

Doesn’t that just tell you everything you need to know?

But it gets worse.

According to these documents, they want to abolish the Australian flag, because “the Australian flag symbolised the injustices of colonisation”.

What’s modest about forcing you to change your flag or pay a percentage of the entire economy as reparations?

Again, you can read the entire document here. It makes for startling reading. We can make a few brief observations.

Note that the document was published on 30 June, 2017. The process leading to this year’s referendum has been long and bipartisan:

In 2010 Prime Minister the Hon Julia Gillard established the Expert Panel on the Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution, co-chaired by Patrick Dodson and Mark Leibler, which reported in 2012. Prime Minister the Hon Tony Abbott established a Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, co-chaired by Senator Ken Wyatt and Senator Nova Peris, which reported in June 2015. Prime Minister the Hon Malcolm Turnbull and Opposition Leader the Hon Bill Shorten then established this Referendum Council in December 2015.

We should take the Coalition’s appearance of opposition to the “model” being proposed for the “voice” with a big grain of salt.

Read the rest here …

Edmund Burke on what it means to be people

Gerard Charles Wilson

This essay should be read with the post, Australia did not exist before 26 January 1788, to appreciate the full argument.

When Edmund Burke claimed in An Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs that the French Revolution ‘was a wild attempt to methodise anarchy; to perpetuate and fix disorder … that it was a foul, impious, monstrous thing, wholly out of the course of moral nature,’[1] he was targeting a particular theory of political organisation now known as ‘social contract theory’. It is essential to understand that in Burke’s understanding, social contract theory not only determines the form of political organisation of a particular people but the accompanying social organisation as well.[2]

The early theorists of social contract were Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). Hobbes is considered the first to introduce the idea. Burke was clearly familiar with the writings of these political philosophers. There are recognisable references to Hobbes (Leviathan) and Locke (The Second Treatise of Government) in his speeches and writings, although he does not name them. He was scathing about Rousseau, reducing his entire philosophy (including the Social Contract) to one of vanity, claiming that ‘with this vice he was possessed to a degree little short of madness,’ and that ‘it is plain that the present rebellion [in France] was its legitimate offspring.’ [3] In other words, he attributed the ‘wild attempt to methodise anarchy [and] to perpetuate and fix disorder’ in France to Rousseau as a major influence.

In his writings on the influence of social contract theory in Britain, however, he had several contemporaries foremost in mind, notably Joseph Priestly (1733-1804),[4] Dr Richard Price (1723-1791)[5] and Thomas Paine (1737-1809).[6] He did not name Priestley or Paine but openly attacked Price in the Reflections on the Revolution in France, precisely on his understanding of the social contract.

Continue reading Edmund Burke on what it means to be people

The ALP going whole hog on separatism

There can be no longer any doubt about the Labor Government’s policy on what one calls ‘First Nations’ people. The policy is one of separatism, the establishment of a nation over and above the rest of the Australians. The denomination ‘First Nations’ indicates the superior status of this separate nation whose mostly mixed-race people are not only separate and superior. Their reinvented culture is to imbue, permeate, and eclipse the culture below it, namely Anglo culture. There are signs of this cultural eclipse everywhere you look.

One can’t miss the blazing symbol of betrayal flying over the Habour and Westgate bridges.

Labor’s decades long betrayal is reaching its apotheosis. The reason-defying Penny Wong announced the policy in faraway New York, as reported in today’s Australian with the call for ‘an expression of interest for the role of Ambassador for First Nations People.’

* * * * *

Wong announces role for First Nations Ambassador

SAM KING, The Australian, 21 September 2022

The Albanese government has announced an expression of interest for the role of Ambassador for First Nations People, rolling out an election commitment for a wider First Nations Foreign Policy.

Speaking from New York, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said the role was part of “the government’s determination to include First Nations people at the heart of our foreign policy”.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said the position will “lead the government’s efforts to embed Indigenous perspectives, experiences and interests across the Department”.

“The ambassador will head an office of First Nations engagement within the DFAT, and work in partnership across government agencies and departments.”

The department said its ideal candidate would bring “extensive networks across First Nations communities” to the role, and had experience in driving government policy and working with international institutions.

What a vote for the Labor Party or lunatic Greens means

If you vote for the Labor Party or the lunatic Greens you’ll be voting for a policy of separatism, the formal establishment of a superior class, cultural reinvention, myth-making, the surrender of vast tracts of land, wholesale changing of names, and the rewriting of Australian history.

Setting fire to Old Parliament House (1)

Setting fire to Old Parliament House (2)

What white aboriginals are seeking

The claims

From the first chapter of my unfinished manuscript, ‘Nation: A Burkean Perspective’

On 3 June 1992, the High court of Australia decided (in common terms) that Mer (Murray Island) belonged to a group of Torres Strait Islanders who had inhabited that Island since time out of mind. It cannot be disputed that the occupation of that island by that particular group of islanders had not been disturbed by British settlement, or later when the nation of Australia had passed its infancy.

Murray Island is about 150 kms, northeast from the tip of Queensland, 100 kms directly south from the closest point of Papua New Guinea, and about 350 kilometres west of Port Moresby. It is 2,169 kms from Brisbane, capital of the state of Queensland of which Murray Island is considered to be a part. At present, around 450 people live on Mer Island, and around 4,500 people on the group of 274 Torres Strait Islands scattered over an area of 48,000 kms, covering an area of 566 kms. Torres Strait Islanders, being Melanesian, are ethnically different from Aboriginals on the Australian mainland. The many differences justify the technical separation of the two races. It would be an offence to Torres Strait Islanders to lump them together with mainland Aboriginals. It would indeed be stupid because the differences between pure-bred Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are evident on sight.

When the High Court of Australia announced its judgment 6-1, Australia, the nation that grew from the planting of the British flag in Sydney Cove on 26 January 1788, was 204 years old, its population 17.5 million. It was in the forefront of developed nations with its democratic system of government, its vast legal structure that had served the country outstandingly until then, its system of education, its welfare system, and its vibrant economy outperforming most countries in the region. In the 1880s, the Australian colonies were said to enjoy the highest standard of living in the world. The speed with which the descendants of those first settlers built the nation of Australia was unparalleled.

Continue reading What white aboriginals are seeking

Flagging separatism

White Aboriginals’ political flag

Today, The Australian has a report under the headline, $20m copyright deal frees Aboriginal flag for all. The government has paid 20 million dollars for the so-called Aboriginal flag created by a graphic artist. In the comments section I wrote:

I do not recognise the so-called Aboriginal flag, designed in 1971 to support a separatist political movement. It is a measure of the success of the separatist/insurrectionists that the flags flies over so many public buildings. It’s a manifestation of the determination of Australia’s dominant political class to commit cultural suicide. My culture is in the nation that arose out of the people of the First Fleet. Nation is a moral incorporation, according to Edmund Burke, and secondarily a mass of land between geographical coordinates.

As is usual, the censoring comments editor deleted my post. It was out of the range of allowable political comment in Australia’s only national newspaper.

The so-called Aboriginal flag is far from a flag ‘for all’, as the Australian likes to imagine. It is a flag for a narrow group of feverish political activists, some of whom pretend they are black.

Forwarding the separatists’ agenda

The Violent Politics of Australia Day

Keith Windschuttle

Editor, Quadrant Magazine, 9 January 2022

The group of Aboriginal activists and their white supporters who set fire to Old Parliament House on December 30 were marking what will soon be the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in the parliament’s grounds. They were emulating the degree of violence that took place at the same location on Australia Day in 2012 when demonstrators marked the fortieth anniversary of the Tent Embassy’s existence.

This is a point that none of our mainstream news media have so far chosen to make in their plainly subdued reports of this willful assault on such an important symbol of Australian democracy. Indeed, even The Australian let down its readers, claiming “The Tent Embassy was getting ready to celebrate 50 years of peaceful occupation of the site.” Its journalists said the incendiaries were motley outsiders, many of them white. The newspaper said there was “rising tension” between the long-time occupants of the tent embassy and “the new arrivals, many of them anti-vaxxers and ‘sovereign citizens’ who believe laws don’t apply to them”. However, let me remind Quadrant readers what happened on the fortieth anniversary and what the Tent Embassy occupants regard as acceptable political behaviour.

At 2pm on January 26 2012 Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott went to the Lobby Restaurant on King George Terrace, Canberra, just down the road from Old Parliament House, to present the National Emergency Medals. These awards are part of the Australian honours system and only given for exceptional action in protecting lives and property in direct response to events like the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria in 2009 and the Queensland floods and cyclones in 2010–2011. The ceremony is usually a dignified affair that the recipients of the medal and their families are proud to remember. On Australia Day 2012, however, the ceremony was anything but.

Soon after it began, an angry mob of 200 Aborigines and their white supporters marched up to the front door of the restaurant and loudly interrupted proceedings. When security would not let them inside, they surrounded the building and, banging hard on its glass walls, shouted “shame” and “racist” and chanted: “Always was, always will be, Aboriginal land”.

Read the rest here …

Reconciliation is giving in to the separatists

We have known it for years. When the Marxists say they are all for peace and reconciliation, they mean peace and reconciliation on their terms. No compromise. Those who reject the Marxist agenda are subject to the usual abuse, slander, and disqualification. Prime Minister Morrison should have known that changing one word in the anthem would make no difference to those separatists who look on themselves as a superior caste.

Anthem change opens floodgates for activists.

Advance, January 11, 2021

As Advance has said for years, if you give the left an inch, they’ll take a mile.

When the clock struck midnight on New Year’s eve, Prime Minister Scott Morrison made the executive decision to change our national anthem.

In an attempt to appease the left and their Indigenous allies, ScoMo changed the line “for we are young and free” to “for we are one and free”.

Although this gesture aims to recognise that Australian Aboriginals lived here for thousands of years, it fails to address the suffering endured by many in our rural Indigenous communities and has done the very opposite of appeasing the activists.

Instead, the anthem change has empowered those who hate our anthem and opened the floodgates for those who wish to change it more.

The most vocal of these is Indigenous boxing great Anthony Mundine, who blasted the lyric change, claiming it “ain’t good enough”.

He argues “one word ain’t gonna change the core meaning of a song” and that “it’s always gonna be a white supremacy song until the whole song is rewritten.”

Mundine isn’t alone.

Read the rest here…


The Catholic Church in Australia has brought pantheism and animism into their rituals. What next? Life Site News reports.

WATCH: Half-naked indigenous man invokes pagan spirits during dance at Australian deacon’s ordination

By Dorothy Cummings McLean

Tue Sep 8, 2020 – 6:00 pm EST

MILTON, New South Wales, Australia, September 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Pagan spirits were invoked via drumming, chanting, and a ritual dance by a man dressed savage-like prior to the ordination Mass of a married deacon in Australia. 

Philip and Bee Butler sang, and Philip danced, a ritual they called a “Welcome to Country” before the August 28 evening Mass in St. Mary Star of the Sea Catholic Parish in Milton, NSW, Australia. 

Beforehand Philip Butler stated that he and his wife are members of the Budawang people of the Yuin nation. 

In an introduction to the aborigional ritual, Philip Butler said that he and his family were proud to welcome Justin Stanwix, the ordinand, into their community. He said that their songs and his dance would ask a number of spirit birds and animals to “look after us all and keep us safe while we’re in country.

After the first song, Butler danced before the altar, singing and banging sticks or rattles together. 

“I asked for protection from the air, the earth, and then the ocean,” he explained when he returned to the ambo. 

Read the rest here…