About Me

My photo
Erik is a public policy professional and owner of the online training course in democracy and civic action: www.3ptraining.com.au The Blog …explores ways to create a sustainable and just community. Explores how that community can be best protected at all levels including social policy/economics/ military. The Book Erik’s autobiography is a humorous read about serious things. It concerns living in the bush, wilderness, home education, spirituality, and activism. Finding Home is available from Amazon, Barnes&Noble and all good e-book sellers.

Tuesday, 17 December 2019

BREXIT Explained for Australians

Henry VIII was Britain's First Brexiteer

For people in Australia the whole EU Brexit thing can be very weird. That’s because we don’t teach European history in schools. So for those interesting in such things let me explain….

Europe was first integrated by the Romans who established the first centralised EU bureaucracy. Eventually the Roman Catholic Church replaced the Roman Empire. Once the Vatican got Western Europe established they decided to expand into Russia with the fourth crusade in 1201. It took the Russians a while but they won back their lost lands in 1261. The Russian Orthodox Church got a bit miffed about it all and didn’t talk to the Vatican for over eight centuries. They have been a bit suspicious of Western intentions ever since.

In 1531 the English king Henry VIII got a bit miffed with EU regulations, specifically the one about not chopping your wife’s head off and marrying someone else, and took Britain out of Europe. In doing so he inadvertently helped the Reformation along which led to the industrial revolution which made Britain a world power and established global European supremacy in the 19th Century.

The next major attempt at European unity was secular and led by the French dictator Napoleon. Napoleon thought that invading Russia would be a good idea, assembled a coalition of European nations, and marched on Moscow. The Russians slaughtered them, and the Prussians and the British BREXITed Napoleon at the battle of Waterloo.

Sometime later the Prussians, the Brits and the French decided to have another go at Russia and invaded Crimea. The Russians slaughtered them and the Brits went home and built the British Empire instead. (Prussians are Germans BTW).

Then in the early 20th Century the British establishment became concerned at the rise of Germany and their military and industrial potential, so they allied with France over a relatively trivial border dispute and imposed a naval blockade on Germany. This precipitated a war which got rid of a lot of unnecessary working class people (around 15 million of them) who were getting a bit uppity about their rights, and put Germany back in its box. This is called ‘World War One’. Just to be sure, the treaty of Versailles was designed to destroy the German economy.

After this Germany developed a more muscular policy towards European integration and integrated the whole of Western and Eastern Europe suppressing popular nationalist movements. Hitler thought that invading Russia would be a good idea, assembled a coalition of European nations, and marched on Moscow. The Russians slaughtered them.

The British establishment was favourable towards European integration but were thwarted by the British secret service, the working class, and a maverick Tory named Winston Churchill (not to mention the RAF).

In the 1970s Thatcher led Britain into the Common Market - a Northern European customs and currency union. However, this became a mechanism whereby the Germans and French re-integrated the whole of Europe including the Eastern States suppressing popular nationalist movements. Once they got Europe established they decided to expand into Russia. So they and the USA sponsored a coupe in Ukraine which aimed to capture …. Crimea. Russia held a free and fair referendum in Crimea and the majority voted to stay with Russia, which they did. So after three hundred years of Europe trying to annex Crimea, the Western media now accuse Russians of Annexing their own country. It’s really quite funny.

The British establishment remained favourable towards European integration but some idiot named David Cameron forgot that the British are British and allowed a popular vote on staying in the EU which the EU lost. The establishment pulled out all stops but still it may now have been thwarted by the working class telling Jeremy Corbyn to get stuffed, and a maverick Tory named Boris Johnson (not to mention an annoying nationalist called Nigel Farage).

Not discussed in this article is Islam’s thousand year attempt to colonise and occupy Europe. Facilitating that is now the policy of Germany, the EU, and all the leftist/progressive parties of Europe, and around 200 NGOs funded by an ex-Nazi collaborator called George Soros. This is of course an underlying reason for BREXIT.

So there you have it. It’s all about chlorinated chicken, silly internet memes, and a man with a bad haircut.

Personally, now that the people have spoken through two elections and a referendum this is the message I would like Boris to take to the EU.













Tuesday, 8 October 2019

Religious Freedom in Australia - Review

Dear Mr Porter MP

I recently signed a petition regarding the current review into religious freedom (Religious Discrimination Bill 2019 (Exposure Draft). I regret that I was not able to write a detailed submission before the cut-off date. However I still wish to forward some broader concerns to you regarding freedom that are relevant to this process.

I am a State Servant of 20 years standing and a professional policy analyst. I have worked as a policy adviser for Premier and Cabinet (2005), the Commonwealth Department of Environment (DSEWPAC), and currently work as the rescuer of crisis projects/processes within the Department of Justice in my State. I am also the author of an on-line training course in civics (www.3ptraining.com.au ) and maintain an active interest in a number of policy areas including defence. I am a former left wing activist now conservative writer, and have studied the ‘progressive’ movement for some years. I am also studying for ordination.

Thank you for conducting this review and giving the ‘quiet Australians’ a chance to be heard. You will recall that the Coalition Government allowed the plebiscite on redefining marriage on condition that this review would take place, and that it would adequately protect those who hold to the traditional view of marriage and sexuality. More broadly the success of the ‘yes’ vote was based on the public reassurance that no one would be made worse off if this country changed its official view on human sexuality and relationships. It follows that, if this review does not adequately protect those who hold to the traditional view of marriage and sexuality then:

  • the redefinition of marriage has no legitimacy and should be reconsidered; and
  • the Coalition Government lacks legitimacy.

In that context, the problem requiring resolution is that ‘anti-discrimination law’ so called, is now used as a one sided weapon by the Left to impose cultural Marxism on society, (including with respect to human sexuality). It is a consequence of the ‘long march through the institutions’ and is a form of ‘repressive tolerance’ by the Left. See further my paper on Defeating Cultural Marxism that I attach for reference. I could cite many examples but I am sure the Australian Christian Lobby and others have already supplied them in submissions.

In addressing that problem your government has two options. The first option is to try to make anti-discrimination law fair by granting broad exemptions. In my view that cannot work in practice because:

  1. the relevant tribunals are controlled by cultural Marxists who will ensure that any such attempt fails; and
  2. one should not have to be a member of a recognised religious group to avoid punishment for expressing an opinion; and
  3. creating two classes of citizens – religious people who can avoid punishment for their beliefs and non-religious citizens who can be punished for the same beliefs – is inherently unfair; and
  4. any proposal broad enough to allow genuine freedom of belief would so fundamentally undermine the existing law as to call into question the purpose of that law.

In that context I note that the current proposal in manifestly inadequate and will fail. For example:

Clause 41 (1) of the Bill does provide that statements of religious belief will not contravene Section 17 of the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Act. This is welcome and would have avoided Archbishop Porteous being dragged through mediation. However, Clause 41 (2) provides that any statement of belief that is likely to “vilify” another person or group of persons will not be protected by Clause 41 (1). What does “vilify” mean? Is a statement which someone feels insults or criticises (these are synonyms of vilify) them, enough to render a statement of belief discriminatory? This is a term that has caused widespread criticism of Section 17 and of Section 18C of the federal Racial Discrimination Act as being too low a threshold for a claim of discrimination.

If the government wishes to continue with the bill then at an absolute minimum the bill must:

  • allow employers to select staff whose views align with the stated mission of their organisation, whether that organisation is religious or secular
  • protect members of professional associations from discrimination on the basis of their professional and/or scientific opinions and personal values (including for example refusal to refer children to gender re-assignment surgery or referring/not referring a person to an abortion provider)
  • protect employees from compelled speech (e.g. gender pronouns)
  • Protect employees from discrimination for expressing opinions that are not directly relevant to their employment
  • protect the right of parents to choose the educational method and moral instruction of their children e.g. the right to be prior informed about sexual content in school curriculum and the right to remove their child

The second option is to largely abolish existing anti-discrimination law by means of a Federal bill of rights. This approach is not about ‘religious freedom’ but freedom.

It is about the freedom to:

  • rent your property to whomever you want based on whatever criteria you choose
  • employ whomever you want based on whatever criteria you choose (subject to safety and licensing requirements, and professional qualifications)
  • choose the educational method and moral instruction of your children
  • hold to traditional religious and cultural beliefs (including indigenous beliefs) or not
  • express your beliefs and opinions without fear of lawfare by radical activists, physical intimidation, de-registration from professional bodies, retaliation by employers, and persecution by quasi-judicial tribunals, professional associations, and non-judicial boards

Essentially it is about the right and duty of adult citizens/residents to behave like responsible adults who can ‘live and let live’. In that context it is about freedom not to:

  • have your children psycho-sexually abused by schools
  • be punished by your employer for expressing opinions they don’t like
  • be professionally de-registered for expressing scientifically accurate/professional opinions that don’t align with specific social agendas
  • be punished by quasi-judicial bodies for expressing opinions that other people don’t happen to agree with; or find offensive
  • be compelled to use certain loaded words and phrases (such as gender pronouns) which compel agreement with highly contested and improbable ideologies
  • be compelled to agree with highly contested claims and improbable ideologies by your employer (e.g. mandatory gender quotas, ‘misgendering’ in the workplace) unless that has a direct connection with your employment

This is a very different approach to that sought by the religious lobby and will in some instances leave religious people open to discrimination by employers. It will also remove the fear and the veil and make public all the prejudices and hatreds that we as a community hold. Would that be a bad thing? Should government act like a controlling parent and make us all be nice to each-other? Should Muslims have to rent to Jews? Should Christians have to employ transgender wierdo’s in their schools? Could we actually tell the truth about one-another? Must we be compelled to pay homage to the secular gods of multiculturalism, feminism, transgenderism, Marxism, consumerism, environmentalism, nationalism, globalism, or any other ism? Should the market place of ideas not be free?

As a Christian I am used to having my views ridiculed and I am not afraid to have them challenged, or to compete in the market place of ideas, or to be wrong. I am afraid of the creeping censorship and repression currently masquerading as tolerance, and the consequential loss of our national character. This review represents a generational opportunity to turn that around.

Of the two approaches outlined I commend the latter approach. In support of this, allow me one example. Suppose the law were evenly applied. Professor Dawkins has published a book currently for sale in Australia titled “The God Delusion”. By this title he states that anyone who believes in divinity is delusional and by implication suffering from a mental condition. This insults at least four fifths of humanity including me.  For reference, in the USSR Christians were sent to mental institutions for ‘treatment’ for their delusional beliefs. It is a statement at least comparable to arguing that transgenderism is a mental illness or that homosexuality can be cured. It arguably meets the current bar for hate speech. How should Dawkins be censored? Should his books be banned in Australia? Should he be denied a visa like Milo Yiannopoulos was? Should the British government compel an apology? Should he be thrown out of his university? Should all publishers be forced to submit their titles for approval by a government board? The Left support the current regime because it supports their purposes but if the law were evenly applied they would be the first to scream about censorship and big government, and I would agree with them.

If your government lacks the moral courage to adopt the latter option and allow us to be Australians again, please consider my points on the former option.

Respectfully yours

Thursday, 23 May 2019

Game of Thrones - Why the Left Keep Losing Elections

So the Australian Labor Party just lost the unlosable election. Like Hillary Clinton wasn’t supposed to lose and like Brexit wasn’t supposed to happen, and like people really need to be helped to see just how wonderful progressive politics really is.

Oh, and here I need to Segway with an update - Labor UK just suffered their worst defeat in 85 years at the hands of working class Britons. If politics was war, their defeat over Brexit would be called ethnic cleansing.

In Australia, just like in the US, the progressives are blaming the working class for being “dumb greedy and mean” and blaming the loss on insufficient progressive media bias, a fictional ‘right’ that somehow stole the election (at least they didn’t blame Russia this time), and pretty much everything except themselves. As far as belief in one’s own rightness and infallibility go, these guys make the papacy look amateurish. For just one example of determined un-learning and un-listening and unbelievable arrogance, see here.

Australia's Prime Minister Elect Celebrates

So, what can be learned?

I grew up and live in a white working class/welfare class suburb. I am grateful to the ALP for having the opportunity to go to University, my life was saved in a public hospital, I have been unfortunate enough to be on welfare on two occasions, and I am happy to pay taxes for all these things. But what we are seeing now is a seismic shift from policies to create opportunities for working class people, to an assault on society itself.

Its a matter of both message and substance.

This is the social justice warrior message to the people I live around:

You suck. Your values suck. Your culture sucks. Your civilisation sucks. The country your grandparents fought for is evil and does not deserve to exist. Every other race, culture, creed and sexual orientation is better than yours so hand over your country now! Oh, and by the way, we don’t trust you to manage your money so you had best hand it over for re-distribution. Oh, and those kids of yours; yeah we’re gonna force you to hand them over to us to use for our sick social experiments into genderless/fatherless ideology and sexual deviance… and if you’re not happy about that, well fuck you bigot you are an example of everything that’s wrong with the world. Oh, and you’re destroying the planet too.


The Trump/Morrison message to the people I live around:

You’re awesome. I love what you do for a living. What a great country you built. Hey let’s make it even better. I like your values. You can have your faith based schools and chaplins. We’re not going to sack you for your opinion. We’ll make sure you don’t get paid much but hey, here’s a tax break. Now let’s all get back to work.


I mean gosh, what is wrong with working people?

What is ‘wrong’ with them, is that they have a fundamental grasp of reality. Behind the various policies (actual and publicly acknowledged) of the progressive left are the following core beliefs.

People are inherently good

The locus of evil therefore lies not in the human heart, but in forms of social organisation – capitalism, patriarchy, nationalism, heteronormativity, - in other words, normal society

Therefore normal/Western society must be overthrown

This must be accomplished by mass immigration, the destruction of the family unit, public control of the means of production, state control of reproduction and children, mass social indoctrination, re-writing history, and cutting people off from their family, sexual, ethnic, religious, national, and cultural identity

All cultures and races are equal (not withstanding the above)

It follows that equal numbers of every race and culture can live harmoniously in the same polity

Therefore white people should accept their role as a minority group in their own countries and stop reproducing

When all this is accomplished a just and good society will rise phoenix like from the ashes of the West

In time all societies will join to form a single world government that ends war, saves the planet, and propels humanity to the next stage of evolution

The short hand term for this belief system is ‘cultural Marxism’. Essentially this is the belief system of a dangerous secular cult. Working people understand intuitively that this system is aimed at them and all they hold dear. They also understand that none of these beliefs is true, and that if put into public policy, would result not in a new utopia, but a hellish dystopia. Absent the West and the alternative is Islam, Chinese communism, or chaos.

As society increasingly rejects this lunacy at the ballot and in public life, the secular cult is becoming increasingly angry, desperate and controlling. Hence the commentary.

Am I exaggerating? For pointing out on facebook that Islamic immigration is a problem and Senator Anning had a point, I was told that I was an example of ‘everything that is wrong with the world’ by someone I have never met. During the gay marriage campaign one commentator tweeted that he wanted to “hate fuck the homophobia” out of politicians who didn’t support redefining marriage. That wouldn’t matter except that he had just published an article with a leading progressive on-line magazine, plus no one on the social left publicly criticised him, and he kept his 70 thousand followers on twitter…and he was promoting violent rape. There are hundreds of other examples but it would be depressing to start listing them.
Note however that Australian Labor Party policy includes criminalising paediatricians for referring young children to counselling for gender dysphoria and forcing them to refer the child for irreversible hormone blocking drugs that cause permanent brain damage and developmental abnormalities. That’s just one part of the ALPs toxic cocktail of mandatory child abuse. It didn’t sway the election because the media mostly refused to talk about it, but people are sensing that, as much as we wanted to do something good for the gay community in voting for same sex marriage, de-gendering society and trying to turn kids into trans/queers through the public school system is a bridge too far. Oh, and didn’t some footballer just lose a $4million contract simply for stating Christian beliefs in public? I don’t happen to agree with what he said BTW but could I be sacked for this blog? There are certainly people who would like to see that happen.

I once spent some time in a strict religious group. I have also spent 15 years in progressive politics. I can honestly say that the religious group was more accepting and broader minded than the SJW crowd.

Which brings us to Game of Thrones.

I hereby dedicate this dialogue to Penny Wong:


Jon confronts Daenerys in the following scene, angrily demanding to know why she would order the execution of prisoners of war after the war had been won.

“It was necessary,” Daenerys quietly replies. Jon continues to plead on behalf of the men, women, and children burned alive by Daenerys’ attack.

“[Cersei, the queen of King’s Landing and Daenerys’ enemy] tried to use their innocence against me. She thought it would cripple me,” Daenerys rationalizes.

Jon continues to plea on behalf of Tyrion, who faces execution for treason.

“We can’t hide behind small mercies,” Daenerys resolves. “The world we need won’t be built by men loyal to the world we have... It’s not easy to see something that’s never been before. A good world.”

“How do you know it’ll be good?”

“Because I know what is good,” Daenerys affirms.

“What about everyone else?” questions Jon earnestly. “All the other people who think they know what’s good?”

“They don’t get to choose,” states Daenerys flatly.

Sunday, 3 March 2019

Pell Conviction - where to from here?


I want to say a couple of words about Pell as gently as I can.
I know nothing about Pell but I have spent 20 years in the Justice system, I had the great misfortune to have to read (as a senior policy officer) the Commonwealth Government report into abuse of children in institutions, I was privy to the confidential report of a Royal Commission, I watched closely how the Anglican Community grasped the nettle on these issues, and some other bits and pieces some of which are not appropriate for social media. Paedophilia is a belief system - after all child/adult relationships were celebrated in Greco Roman culture and only became unacceptable because of Judeo/Christianity. Many Pedo's believe sincerely that it is loving and right and they look forward to the day when society will become enlightened again and celebrate their 'special love'. Sound familiar? In the mind of a Pedo' their sexual outlet is a legitimate reward for all the good they do in the church and in the community. That is why they can be exemplary churchmen (at least externally) and exemplary community members, police officers, judges, and movie stars, and loving husbands, and still abuse children. It is also why they strategically promote one another to positions of power. It is also why they are nearly always unrepentant when caught.

The Roman Catholic Church has for 40 years systemically and with malice protected pedo' clergy and bullied victims into silence. That is no reflection on Catholic people or the overwhelming majority of clergy. Nevertheless it was and is sustained institutional behaviour over multiple contents, numerous countries, done over decades. This involved seeking to frustrate police investigations by moving offending clergy between countries, and failing to keep, or destroying records.

Our Lord is gracious and long suffering but ultimately not mocked. The church has had 50 years to repent and not done so. Now judgement begins with the house of God. This is a great opportunity for reform which if missed will have terrible consequences. Yes, the secular anti-church will use this to destroy the church and then turn around and seek to legalise adult/child relationships themselves, but we need to look beyond that. How many 'good men' beat their wives, use pornography, and have extra-marital affairs? Accountability is the only cure. It is time forthose who love the church to hold it to account. There is just no other way.





Monday, 28 January 2019

Australia Day Invasions

As the war on Western Civilisation grinds on, it is inevitable that Australia Day will bring talk of invasion. As far as I understand the argument is that White people invaded Australia, it is wrong to invade and colonise, so this was bad. Therefore either modern Australia should not exist or someone somewhere should levy a guilt tax on 'White Australia' and pay the proceeds to someone somewhere, based on a criteria invented by someone somewhere, and if you don't agree with this you are a bad person. Hhmmm....interesting.
Actually Australia Day is a good time to remember four invasions of this content. The first was by Aboriginal people who came from the North, burned the continent from top to bottom, fundamentally changed the ecology, contributed to the extinction of the mega fauna, fought each other over territory, and adapted their environment in ways we are only just beginning to comprehend.
The second invasion was by Great Britain who famously beat the French, Belgians, Spanish, and Dutch in the race to colonise Australia.
The third invasion was by Imperial Japanese forces who were stopped by three crucial battles off-shore. Let's for a moment reflect on how they would have treated white, black and yellow once they conquered and colonised the continent....
The fourth invasion is the strategic and targeted acquisition of key water, food, transport, and infrastructure assets by the Communist Government of the Peoples Republic of China. This is invasion by stealth, corrupting our universities, our politics, and our policies with big money via front companies, while buying the land from under our feet. Rather than squabble over what did or did not happen in 1788 we need to fight foreign ownership and unfair trade because the Sino invasion of Australia is happening right now.

Both major parties are clearly complicit in this invasion, the Left is actively supportive or indifferent, and the Greens, once a patriotic party (I know, I was there) are now globalist following their take-down by the radical Marxist Left.

There are only two parties worthy of mention that oppose the foreign take-down/take-over of Australia. On the Left they are Dick Smith's 'Sustainable Australia' party, and on the right the 'Australian Conservatives'. Having read the policies of both parties, and joined one, I encourage readers to consider voting for either next time around. Happy Australia Day.

Tuesday, 8 January 2019

The Empire is Over. Now get Serious

As a policy I don't repost stuff because basically I think its lame. On this occasion I am going to make an exception because you can't buy and can rarely find this kind of analysis. The author is a defence analyst, Russian patriot, and self described Putin fan boy, is Russian Orthodox and anti- Zionist (not the same thing as anti-Jewish btw). You may or may not share his politics, but the analysis in this article is factual and essential to understanding world events at present.

Just as the Britain had its moment of realisation that the British Empire was finally over when Nasser captured the Suez canal, so the US will realise within this decade that their empire is basically over - or lash out in suicidal nuclear hubris. That means all the little countries that are now part of the US Empire, like Britain and Australia, need to look realistically to their own defence now.


Unless the USA changes political course and gives up on the suicidal russophobia of Obama and Trump, a military confrontation between Russia and the USA is inevitable


The year 2018 will go down in history as a turning point in the evolution of the geostrategic environment of our planet.  There are many reasons for that and I won’t list them all, but here are some of the ones which I personally consider the most important ones:

The Empire blinked.  Several times.

This is probably the single most important development of the year: the AngloZionist Empire issued all sorts of scary threats, and took some even scarier actual steps, but eventually it had to back down.  In fact, the Empire is in retreat on many fronts, but I will only list a few crucial ones:
  1. The DPRK: remember all the grandiose threats made by Trump and his Neocon handlers?  The Administration went as far as announcing that it would send as many as THREE(!) nuclear aircraft carrier strike groups to the waters off the DRPK while Trump threatened to “totally destroy” North Korea.  Eventually, the South Koreans decided to take matters in their own hands, they opened a direct channel of communications with the North, and all the US sabre-rattling turned into nothing more than hot air.
  2. Syria in April: that was the time when the US, France and the UK decided to attack Syria with cruise missiles to “punish” the Syrians for allegedly using chemical weapons (a theory too stupid to be even worth discussing).  Of 103 detected missiles, 71 were shot down by the Syrians.  The White House and the Pentagon, along with their trusted Ziomedia, declared the strike a great success, but then, they also did that during the invasion of Grenada (one of the worst assault operation in military history) or after the humiliating defeat of Israel by Hezbollah in 2006, so this really means very little.  The truth is that this operation was a total military failure and that it has not been followed up by anything (at least for now).
  3. The Ukraine: we spend almost all of 2018 waiting for an Ukronazi attack on the Donbass which never happened.  Now, I am quite sure that some will argue that the Nazi junta in Kiev never had any such intentions, but anybody with even a basic knowledge of what took place in the Ukraine this year knows that this is pure bull: the junta did pretty much everything to execute an attack except the very last step: to actually order it.  Putin’s open threat that any such attack would have “grave consequences for Ukraine’s statehood as such” probably played a key role in deterring the Empire.  Oh sure, the Ukronazis might well attack in January or any time after that, but the fact is that in 2018 they did not dare do so.  Yet again, the Empire (and its minions) had to back down.
  4. Syria in September: this time, it was the Israeli hypostasis of the Empire which triggered a massive crisis when the Israelis hid their strike aircraft behind a Russian Il-20 large turboprop airliner resulting in the loss of the aircraft and crew.  After giving the Israelis a chance to come clean (which, predictably, they didn’t – they are, after all, Israelis), the Russians got fed up and delivered advanced air defense, electronic warfare and battle management systems to the Syrians.  In response the Israelis (who had issued many threats about immediately destroying any S-300 delivered to the Syrians) had to basically stop their air strikes against Syria (well, not quite, they did execute two such strikes: one totally ineffective one and one in which the Zionist crazies again hid behind an aircraft, but in this case, no one but TWO civilian aircraft (more about this latest ziocrazy stunt further below).  The Empire backed down again.
  5. Syria in December: apparently fed up with all the infighting amongst his advisors, Trump eventually ordered a full US withdrawal from Syria.  Now, of course, since this is the USA, we have to wait and see what actually happens.  There is also a very complex kabuki dance being executed by Russia, Turkey, the US, Israel, Iran, the Kurds and the Syrians to stabilize the situation following a full US withdrawal.  After all the years of huffing and puffing about how “Assad The Monster must go” it is quite amusing to see how the western powers are throwing in towels one after the other.  This also begs the obvious question: if “The City On The Hill And Sole Superpower On The Planet, The Leader Of The Free World and the Indispensable Nation” can’t even deal with a weakened Syrian government and military, what can this military successfully do (besides provide Hollywood blockbusters to a gullible US public)?
  6. Various smaller defeats: too many to count, but they include the Khashoggi fiasco, the failure of the war in Yemen, the failure of the war in Afghanistan, the failure of the war in Iraq, the failure to remove Maduro from power in Venezuela, and the gradual loss of control over an increasing number of EU countries (Italy), Nikki Haley’s ridiculous antics at the UNSC, the inability to gather up the intellectual resources needed to have a real, productive, meeting with Vladimir Putin, the disastrous commercial war with China, etc.  What all these events have in common is that they are a result of the inability of the US to get anything done, truly done.  Far from being a real superpower, the USA is in a full-spectrum decline and the main thing which still gives it its superpower status are its nuclear weapons, just like Russia in the 1990s.
All the internal problems resulting from the infighting of the US elites (roughly: the Clinton gang vs Trump and his Deplorables) only make things worse.  Just the apparently never ending sequence of resignations and/or firing from the Trump Administration is a very important sign of the advanced state of collapse of the US polity.  Elites don’t fight each other when all goes well, they do so when everything goes south.  The saying “victory has many fathers but defeat is an orphan” reminds us that when a gang of thugs begins to lose control of a situation, it rapidly turns into an “every man for himself”, everybody blames everybody for the problems and nobody wants to stay anywhere near those who will go down in history as the pathetic losers who screwed everything up.

As for the US armed forces, they have been tremendously successful in killing a very large amount of people, as always, mostly civilians, but they failed to get anything actually done, at least not if one understands that the purpose of war is not just to kill people, but is the “continuation of politics by other means“.  Let’s compare and contrast what Russia and the US did in Syria.
On October 11th, Putin declared the following in an interview with Vladimir Soloviev on the TV channel Russia 1: “Our objective is to stabilize the legitimate authority and create conditions for a political compromise“.  That’s it. He did not say that Russia would single-handedly change the course of the war, much less so win the war.  The (very small!) Russian task force in Syria achieved these original objectives in just a few months, something which the Axis-of-Kindness could not achieve in years (and the Russians did that with a small fraction of the military capabilities available to the US/NATO/EU/CENTCOM/Israel in the region.  In fact, the Russians even had to quickly create a resupply system which they did not have because of the purely defensive Russian military posture (Russian power projection is mostly limited under 500-1000km from the Russian border).

In comparison, the USA has been fighting a so-called GWOT (Global War on Terror) since 2001 and all it can show is that the terrorists (of various demonstrations) only got stronger, took control of more land, murdered more people, and generally seemed to show a remarkable ability to survive and even grow in spite of (or thanks to) the GWOT.  As Putin would say, what would you expect from “people who don’t know the difference between Austria and Australia“?

Personally, I would expect them to take full credit for the victory and leave.
Which is exactly what the USA has done.
At least that is what they are saying now.  This could change 180 degree again.

As for Afghanistan, the USA spent more time there than the Soviets did.  Does that no strongly suggest that the US leaders are *even more* incompetent than the “stagnation” era Soviet gerontocrats?

The failure to subdue or even contain Russia

Putin’s speech on March 1st to the Russian Federal Assembly was truly a historical moment: for the first time since the Empire decided to wage war on Russia (a war which is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and only 5% kinetic but which can turn 95% kinetic in one hour or so!) the Russians decided to openly warn the USA that their strategy has been comprehensively defeated.  You think that this is hyperbole?  Think again.  What is US military power based on?  What are it’s main components?
  • Airpower (air supremacy)
  • Long-range standoff weapons (ballistic and air-breathing)
  • Aircraft carriers
  • Anti-missile defense (at least in theory!)
  • 800-1000 (depends on how you count) bases worldwide
The deployment of what are without any doubt the most sophisticated air-defense systems in the world supported what are also probably the most formidable electronic warfare (EW) capabilities currently in existence have now have now created what the US/NATO commanders refer to as a “Russia’s anti-access/area denial (A2/AD)” capability which, so do these US/NATO commanders say, can pop-up over the Baltic Sea, over the Eastern Mediterranean, the Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere (might show up on the La Orchila island in Venezuela in 2019).  Furthermore, in qualitative terms Russian tactical airpower is newer and at least equal, if not superior, to anything in US or NATO tactical aircraft holdings.  While the West in general, and especially the USA, have a much larger number of aircraft, they are mostly of the older generations, and various encounters between Russian and US multirole aircraft in the Syrian skies have shown that US pilots prefer to leave when Russian Su-35S show up.

The deployment (already in 2018!) of the Kinzhal hypersonic missile has basically made the entire US surface fleet useless for an attack against Russia.  Be it the aircraft carriers or even various destroyers, cruisers, amphibious assault ships, (mostly ill-fated) littoral combat ships, transport ships, etc. – they now are all sitting ducks which the Russians can blow out of the water irrespective of any air-defenses these ships, o or their escorts, might have.

Likewise, the deployment of the super-heavy thermonuclear armed intercontinental ballistic like the Sarmat and the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle have made all of the US anti-ballistic missile efforts completely useless.  Let me repeat this: ALL of the US ABM efforts, including the billions spent on research and development, have now been rendered completely useless.
[Sidebar: it is important to clarify something here: none of the new Russian weapon systems provide any means to protect Russian from a US nuclear (or conventional) strike.   “All” they do is to make darn sure that the US leaders are never under the illusion they have been pursuing since Reagan’s “Star Wars”, i.e. that they could somehow escape a Russian 2nd-strike (counter-strike) retaliatory capability if it decided to strike Russia.  In truth, even without the Sarmat or the Avanguard, Russia already had more than enough missiles (land, air and sea based) to  wipe-out the USA in case of a retaliatory counter-strike, but the US politicians and force planners began pursuing this pipe-dream of anti-ballistic missile defense in spite of the fact that it was rather clear that such a system could not work (a few “leakers” might be acceptable with conventional weapons, but a few “nuclear leakers” are more than enough to extract a terrible price from any attacker delusional enough to think that a 90% or even 98% effective “shield” is enough of a protection to risk attacking a nuclear superpower).  So you could say that these new Russian capabilities (including the short(er) range Iskander tactical missiles) are a type of “delusion destroyer” or a “reality reminder” who will burst the bubble of US illusions about the risks of a war against Russia.  Hopefully, they will never have any other use.]
Finally, the deployment of a new generation of advanced and very long range standoff missiles by Russia has given Russia the huge “reach” advantage of being able to strike any US target (be it a military force or a base) worldwide, including in the United States (which now is almost never mentioned in the western media).

Now take a look at the list of key components of US military power above and see that it has all been transformed into, basically, junk.

What we have here is a classical situation in which, on one side, one country’s force planners made fundamental, strategic miscalculations which directly defined what kind of military force the country would have for at least two, possibly three, decades, while, on the other side, the force planners made the correct decisions which allowed them to defeat a military force whose military budget is roughly ten times bigger.  The most severe consequence of this state of affairs for the USA is that it will now take at the very least a decade (or more!) to reformulate a new force planning strategy (modern weapons systems sometimes take decades to design, develop and deploy).  The ill-fated Zumwalt, the F-35, the Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) aircraft carrier – these are all obscene examples on how to spend billions of dollars and be left with major weapon systems disasters which only further weaken the US armed forces.

There is a simple reason why the USA became a superpower in the 20th century: not only was the US mainland protected by huge oceans, all of WWI and WWII were fought far away from the USA: all the potential competitors of the USA had their national economies completely destroyed while the USA did not even lose a single factory or research/design bureau.  Then the USA could use its immense industrial powerbase to basically provide a world-wide market with goods which only the USA could built and deliver.  And yet, in spite of such huge advantages, the US spend almost all its history beating up one defenseless country after another to ensure full submission and compliance with the demands of Uncle Shmuel (the AngloZionist variant of Uncle Sam).  So much for being “indispensable” I suppose…

Thanks to the globalists, the US industrial base is gone.  Thanks to the Neocons and their arrogance, the US is in one form of conflict or another with most of the key countries on the planet (especially if we ignore the existence of US-supported and run comprador elites).  The infinitely dumb and self-defeating submission of the US to Israel has now resulted in a situation where the USA is losing control of the oil-rich Middle-East it used to run for decades.  Finally, by choosing to try to submit both Russia and China to the will of the Empire, the Neocons have succeeded in pushing these two countries into a de-facto alliance (really a symbiotic relationship) which, far from isolating them, isolates the USA from “where it is happening” in terms of economic, social and political developments (first and foremost, the Eurasian landmass and the OBOR project).

2019 prospects for the Empire: problems, problems and even more problems

Well, 2018 was an exceptionally nasty and dangerous year, but 2019 could prove even more dangerous for the following reasons:
  • Unless the USA changes political course and gives up on the suicidal russophobia of Obama and Trump, a military confrontation between Russia and the USA is inevitable.  Russia has retreated as far as she possibly can, there is nowhere else to retreat and she therefore won’t.  There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that if the US had actually targeted Russian units in Syria (which, apparently, Bolton wanted but Mattis, apparently, categorically rejected), the Russians would have counter-attacked not only against the US missiles, but also against their carriers (especially ships).  I have it from a trusted source that on the night of the attack, the Russian MiG-31K with the Kinzhal missile were in the air ready to strike.  Thank God (and, possibly, thank Mattis) this did not happen.  But as I said in my article “Every click brings us closer to a bang!” each time WWIII does not happen following a US strike on Syria this emboldens the Neocons to try yet once more, especially since “Assad The Monster Must Go” remains in power in Damascus while one after the one each western politician which decreed that Assad must go, goes himself.

  • It is pretty obvious that Israel has gone absolutely, terminally and, possibly, suicidally insane.  Their little stunt with the Russian Il-20 was already a disaster of immense proportions which, in a normal country, would have resulted in the immediate resignation of the entire Cabinet.  But not in Israel.  After hiding behind a Russian military turboprop, they now decided to hide from the Syrian S-300 by hiding behind two civilian aircraft!    See for yourself:

  • I don’t think that it is worth pondering here that Israel is the last openly racist state on the planet, or that the Israeli leaders are evil, immoral, insane and generally batshit crazy maniacs.  That you either understood for yourself or you are hopeless.  What is important here is not how evil the Israelis are, but how stupid and totally reckless they are.  Simply put, this is how this works: the Israelis are evil, stupid and completely delusional, but they own every single US politician which means that no matter how insane and egregious the actions of the Israelis might be, the “indispensable nation” will *always* cover them and, when needed, cover-up for them (cf. USS Liberty or, for that matter, 9/11).  Right now there is nobody in the US political class with any chance of being elected who would dare to do anything other that automatically worship anything Israeli (or Jewish, for that matter).  The real motto of the USA is not “In God we trust“, but “there is no light between the U.S. and Israel” (yet another reason why the USA is not a real superpower: it is not even really sovereign!).

  • The Empire has some major problems in Europe.  First, should the Ukronazi protégés of the USA ever find the courage (or despair) to attack the Donbass or Russia, the resulting chaos will flood the EU with even more refugees, many of whom will be most unsavory and outright dangerous characters.  Furthermore, the anti-EU feelings are becoming very strong in Italy, Hungary and, for different reasons, even Poland.  France is on the edge of a civil war (not this time around; my feeling is that the Gilets Jaunes will eventually run out of steam; but the next time around, which will happen sooner rather than later, the explosion will probably result in the overthrow of the French CRIF-run regime and a massive anti-US backlash.

  • In Latin America, the Empire has been massively successful in overthrowing a series of patriotic, independent, leaders.  But what is missing now is the ability to make these pro-US regimes successful by being economically or politically viable.  Amazingly, and in spite of both a massive subversion campaign by the USA and major political mistakes, the Maduro Administration has remained in power in Venezuela and is slowly but very resolutely trying to change course and keep Venezuela sovereign and independent from the USA.  The key problem of the USA in Latin American is that the USA has always ruled by using a local comprador elite.  The USA has been very successful in this effort.  But the USA has never succeeded in convincing the Latin American masses of people of its benevolence and this is why the word “Yankee” remains a slur in every Latin American country.

  • In Asia, China is offering every US colony an alternative civilizational model which is becoming increasingly attractive as the PRC is becoming more economically powerful and economically successful.  It turns out that the usual mix or arrogance, hubris and ignorance which allowed the Anglo countries to dominate Asia is now losing its power and that the people of Asia are looking for alternatives.  Truth be told – the USA has absolutely nothing to offer.
The bottom line is this: not only is the USA unable to impose its will on countries which are considered “US allies” (if the NorthStream ever happens – and I think that it will – then this will mark the first time that EU leaders told the US President to get lost, if not in so many words), but the USA obviously lacks any kind of project to offer to other countries.  Yes, “MAGA” is all fine and dandy, but it does not have much traction with other countries who really don’t care about MAGA…

Conclusion in the form of a Russian saying

There is a saying in Russian “better to have an horrible end (than to have to live through) a horror with no end” (лучше ужасный конец чем ужас без конца).  There is very little doubt that the decline of the AngloZionist Empire will continue in 2019.  What will not change, however, is the ability of the USA to destroy Russia in a nuclear attack.  Because, make no mistake, all that the new fancy Russian weapons provide is the capability to punish (retaliate against) the USA for an attack on Russia, but not the capability to deny (prevent) such an attack.  If the Neocons decide that a nuclear holocaust is preferable to a loss of power in the USA, then there is nothing anybody can do to prevent them from playing out their own, sordid, version of Götterdämmerung.  I have recently had to spend a few days in Boca Raton, were a lot of that new US “aristocracy” likes to spend time and I can tell you two things: life is good for them, and they sure ain’t giving up their privileged status as “leaders of the planet”.  And if somebody tries to take it away, there is no doubt in my mind that these people will react with a vicious outburst of Samson-like despair-filled rage.  So the only question remains this: will we (mankind) be able to take away the nuclear button from this class of parasites without giving them the chance to press it or not?

I don’t know.
So, will it be a horrible end or a horror with no end?
I don’t know either.
But what I know is that the Empire is cracking at all its seams and that its decline will only accelerate in 2019.

Sunday, 25 November 2018

Genderless Birth Certificates - Letter to Parliamentarians

Dear Legislative Council Member

I am writing a heartfelt request that you do all that is necessary to ensure that Tasmanian births must be registered according to their biological gender.

I am a parent of three, a former Greens supporter, and a public servant with over 20 years experience in public policy development and administration. I am well acquainted with the personal and policy issues around non-heterosexuality and sexual dysphoria.

The removal of biological gender from birth certificates should be opposed for the following reasons:

It is Unnecessary

A simple provision allowing persons who have attained the age of majority to alter their birth certificate to a third option is all that is required to cater to the needs of a very small number of people who experience genuine and abiding conflict between their biological gender and their sense of self. Removing gender entirely has clearly nothing to do with transgender people, but is part of a political agenda as explained below. It should also be noted that ‘transgenderism’ is currently a parenting fad that is being pushed by the radical Left via the ‘Safe Schools (sic) Program’ that encourages confused teenagers to make permanent life choices which many will regret in later life, and to do so without the knowledge or consent of their parents. For that reason any change relating to gender should not be legal until the person reaches adulthood.

It is Unpopular

Most people identify with and by their biological gender. There has been no plebiscite to suggest otherwise. The fact that the radical Left have strategically and successfully captured key positions of influence and power does not alter the good sense of ordinary people. This scenario has already played out in Ontario Canada where the radical Left and the LGBT took power and imposed their anti-gender ideology. That government was recently thrown out because the public rejected those policies. As a politician take note!

It is Unfair

A birth certificate is the foundational document that established identity in this country. Gender identity is an important component of establishing identity. There is an international push to abolish gender on birth certificates. If adopted in this country, nearly 25 million people would be disadvantaged to supposedly benefit a handful of individuals of suffer gender identity confusion. That is abusive of the population – let’s not start it in Tassie.

It Encourages Mental Illness

The suicide rate for transgender individuals is approximately 60 per cent not because of any fault in the ‘straight’ community, but because it is a mental illness. Removing gender from birth certificates will not help anyone but it will communicate to all future generations that there is no such thing as gender. This encourages gender confusion and identity malaise, which in turn leads to depression and anxiety and harms relationships.

It is unwise to make the whole of society unwell so that a handful of unwell people feel that they fit. By the reasoning recently displayed by the House of Assembly, we should encourage schizophrenia, paranoia and depression among the population so that those suffering from these illnesses feel normal.


It is Part of a Bigger Plan

These amendments are part of a sustained and systemic attack on human identity and a functioning society. The program is as follows:

  • Destroy gender identity
    • Homosexual marriage undermines the concept of motherhood and fatherhood as relevant and necessary to identity formation in children
    • Removing gender from birth certificates suggests that gender is not real
    • Teaching in schools that gender is a social construct – promoting ‘transgenderism’
    • Punishing people who believe in male and female as distinct and complimentary e.g. jail terms for using a non-preferred gender pronoun (California)
    • Allowing men to compete in womens sports supposedly as transgender athletes
    • Removing performance benchmarks to allow women to underperform in traditionally male roles e.g. emergency services and military
  • Undermine Fatherhood and Motherhood
    • Change ‘mothers day’ and ‘fathers day’ to ‘persons day’ or similar
    • Denigrate motherhood as inferior to paid employment
    • Pretend that there are no negative consequences to promiscuity
    • Do not hold men accountable to provide for their offspring
  • Destroy National Identity
    • Abolish or undermine national holidays – Australia Day, Easter, Christmas etc
    • Dilute the culture through mass immigration from non-Western countries
    • Outsource the national economy
    • Sell off national assets including land
    • Paint as racist any person/view that holds a positive view of Western Civilisation
    • Do not teach the history of Western Civilisation or portray it only from a radical Marxist perspective
    • Do not acknowledge the genuine achievements and positive benefits of Western Civilisation but focus only on its failings
    • Teach that every other culture on earth in inherently superior to ours, or at least equal, regardless of real world outcomes
    • Re-interpret history (e.g. Islam as a religion of peace not of war and slavery)
  • Destroy Racial Identity
    • Generate feelings of guilt and inferiority for being white
    • Teach that white people are responsible for everything that is wrong with the world
    • Teach that there is no such thing as race but exult every other race and culture
    • Teach that the West was never really white, or that there is something inherently wrong with a nation having a majority ethnic group or being ethnically homogenous
  • Undermine Belief in Truth and Reason
    • Teach that objective facts (such as gender and the need for women to reproduce) are less important than subjective feelings
    • Teach that reason is violence if it hurts someone’s feelings
    • Teach that truth becomes untruth if it contradicts progressive ideology
    • Suppress intellectual enquiry and debate in favour of vapid slogans and ideological statements across all policy domains
  • Abolish Organised Religion
    • Make the above program law
    • Punish anyone who dissents
    • Force closure of churches, religious schools and institutions of higher learning, and church based charities – find an excuse. Current excuses are policies around hiring people with compatible values and lifestyles which ipso facto discriminates against sexual perverts and radical Marxists

It is non-controversial that identity is foundational to mental health. If therefore we are concerned with mental health we must also be concerned with pushing back on the above agenda.

Short of war, there is no better or more certain way to increase mental illness, social breakdown, and human misery than to co-operate with the radical Left in rolling out this program…but then it is a war isn’t it? It’s a culture war and the casualties are real. These amendments are not progressive change, they are clinical calculated cultural vandalism.

The rest is up to you


Kind regards