If Australian National Socialism is to develop from the personal belief of a few scattered adherents into a true political force, then we will need to introduce our ideas to broader society. How this is to be done is not an easy question, and goes beyond surface questions of aesthetics and presentation style. We provide here a theoretical framework for comprehending the nature of our task, which must ultimately be orientated towards bringing about a total revolution in Australian politics and society. This task is of the utmost importance for the future of our people.
What is metapolitics?
The basic concept underlying our strategy is metapolitics. Metapolitics has been given many definitions by thinkers of the left and right. The problem with many of these definitions is that they are overly abstract, treating culture as something which happens in a void, disconnected from its social and historical context.
Our definition is therefore as follows:
Metapolitics is the concept that revolutions in politics are always preceded by significant changes in a society’s culture, philosophy, identity and values. These latter changes are caused when the culture-bearing stratum of society, and eventually the masses, become disillusioned with a dominant worldview which has deviated from reality to the point where it is actively hindering the survival and growth of the society from which it emerged. They begin to seek out new alternatives, ignoring the limits on thought and action set out by the old order. These changes inevitably emerge into the realm of politics, as they modify perceptions of what is politically desirable and possible, and what constitutes legitimate authority.
The role of National Socialist practitioners of metapolitics is to attack the old liberal culture, philosophy, identity and values which are slowly suffocating White Australia, and replace them with our own. This will erode the legitimacy of the ruling system, and open up space for National Socialism to emerge as a serious political alternative for the increasing number of Australians disillusioned with the status quo.
The cultural aspect of metapolitics
To understand its impact on our strategy we must go deeper than this brief definition, and break metapolitics down into its cultural and political aspects. In cultural terms, metapolitics can be used as a direct attack on the root cause of our problems, both in Australia and in wider Western civilisation. The root cause of the sickness of the West is not primarily a racial one, but a cultural one. The present culture of the West has been thoroughly rotted by the soul-sicknesses of liberalism, universalism, egalitarianism, progressivism and rationalist philosophy. It is this internal weakness that has caused the external signs of civilisational suicide.
While those factors have been around since the 18th century, they are only today reaching their logical conclusion. What kept this sickness at bay in the past was the exposure of the average person to the harshness of life, which ensured that they maintained their instincts and did not give themselves over completely to the worship of abstract concepts. Today, a large section of the population has become so denatured that they believe that these concepts are more important than reality itself—that reality must be bent to comply with their gods of equality, freedom and progress. Progressivism tells its followers that they can create an external heaven on earth right now, and that the only thing standing in its way is humanity as it is. Reality, however, will never resemble this abstract fantasy, and so the enraged mob lashes out at anything that is seen to oppose their values. Anything that smacks of hierarchy, strength, discipline, distinctiveness and tradition is violently assaulted, scapegoated for mankind’s failure to actualise this utopia. This is the reason for the hysterical reaction of liberals and their ilk to National Socialism and Fascism.
To put this on a more practical level, the many signs of civilisational suicide that we see in Australia today would not have happened in a society that was culturally healthy. The racial aliens did not overturn the White Australia policy by force, as they tried and failed to do in World War II. They were let in voluntarily by White traitors, motivated by delusions of a universal humanity and the materialist obsession with economic development. Likewise, abortion, homosexuality, drug use and other vices were almost unheard of in this country back when the majority of people had healthy instincts. It is possible to construct a case for nearly anything using rationalistic argument disconnected from the realities of nature and the lessons of history, and the denatured population of modern Australia was easy prey.
To free our people, we must smash the idols of liberty, equality and fraternity in an all-out cultural struggle. National Socialists should work to end the consensus that these values are the foundation of Western society, and that the only remaining argument is how to implement them best. In fighting this war against the dying ideologies of previous centuries, we are greatly assisted in the fact that it is our values that correspond to reality, and not theirs.
At the same time, we must also seek to promote the cultural ideals that we are for, such as hierarchy, order and distinctiveness. Criticism can only do so much, and the only way to defeat a worldview is with a stronger and more cohesive one. We must give White Australia its first chance to see our values as we understand them, and not through the distorting prism of liberal academics and small-minded journalists. For example, we can dispel the implication that by being against equality, that we are for the tyranny of money, or wish to see society atomised in a Social Darwinist libertarianism.
The political aspect of metapolitics
This brings us to the question of what our metapolitical campaign should look like on a political level. In political terms, metapolitics is the shaping of the terms of debate, and assumptions about what is politically possible and desirable. It deals with the underlying causes and conditions of political change, and not the surface level rise and fall of political parties, street movements and individuals. No lasting political change can be achieved if the politically active, decision-making element in society has not first been influenced to see that change as necessary.
Distinctiveness and identity
The primary problem facing us in our quest to enact political change is that the government has papered over the majority of Australia’s social divisions with money. In government language, this is known as “social cohesion”. The result is that racial aliens rarely riot because they have been bought off with affirmative action, welfare and community grants. Meanwhile, Whites cling to the system and rarely demand change because of high employment levels and continually rising asset prices. While this cozy situation seems to be changing thanks to the recent pandemic and political hostilities with China, we should never surrender the initiative by thinking that Whites will only join us when “things get bad enough”.
Firstly, we must raise the consciousness of White Australians as being a distinct group in society, with separate and incompatible interests to those of racial aliens and the government. In other words, before Whites can separate themselves physically, they must be induced to do so mentally. The instincts of White Australia have been dulled by separation from nature, therefore the normally self-evident concept that one should act in the interests of one’s people must be explained to them on an intellectual level. We are actually assisted in this by multiculturalism, as the surest way for a people to develop a distinct identity is to make them directly aware of their differences with rival cultures. It only highlights to them the vast gulf that exists between the culture and mindset of White Australia, and the Asiatic and African.
Ultimately, we must work to reduce domestic politics to the friend/enemy dynamic, in which all becomes a zero-sum game. Whites must be made to understand that every advance that racial aliens make in multiculturalism is ultimately at our expense. For example, the protection of racial aliens from “hate speech” results in repression of free expression for Whites, “affirmative action” and “diversity” policies mean jobs are taken from Whites, while state-funding of ethnic community groups is the theft of money from White taxpayers. Multiculturalism inevitability ends in a mad scramble to capture the state and use it to provide resources for one’s tribe, so our messaging will merely be amplifying the existing reality.
Myth and utopia
Secondly, we must create an idea that will motivate White men into action, by providing them with a vision to fight for. For practical purposes, this requires us to distinguish between the concepts of myth and utopia.
A utopia is a vision in which all of the tenets of one’s political ideology have been implemented to create a perfect world, and as such is an abstraction fundamentally disconnected from reality. As countless would-be builders of utopias have discovered, history and human nature have a way of defying the expectations of political theorisers. Utopias provide no inspiration to action, as they are merely a theoretical end result of an undefined process. The only action they are capable of encouraging is Fabian-style reformism, as utopianism reduces the parent ideology to a list of policies to be implemented.
Today’s reactionary nationalism is the best example of this current, as its motivating force is the imagined utopia of late 19th and early 20th century Australia. It is unable to inspire its followers to serious political action, as it offers no way of making this vision a reality other than attempting to recreate it piecemeal via policies like immigration restriction, economic protectionism, etc. As a result, reactionary nationalists either attempt to pointlessly reform the existing system via the democratic process, or vacate the field of politics entirely for the merely personal.
The opposite of utopia is myth—a symbolic action, concept or vision which serves as an expression for the entire worldview of a group of people, and inspires them to take action themselves. Whereas utopia can be said to represent being, myth represents becoming—the struggle itself, and not the theoretical victory. It is based on the heroic conception of man reaching his highest potential during war, rather than the rationalist demand for political cause and effect, or the parliamentarian’s love of compromises. Examples of myth include the concept of martyrdom for the early Christians, and the general strike for the early 20th century syndicalist movement.
The myth that we must offer in our metapolitical campaign is that of the reconquest of this continent, and the re-establishment of White Australia. If we consider the word destiny to mean the greatest extent of the potential of a people, then it is the destiny of White Australians to conquer this continent as their homeland, and form a new Europe in the Antipodes. This was the motivating myth for countless generations past, and gripped the entirety of White Australia as an organic whole. From the sub-literate miners clubbing down Chinese coolies at Lambing Flat in 1860, to the patrician parliamentarians who brought about the White Australia Policy in 1901, and the diggers fighting in New Guinea in 1942, all felt its call to action. For White Australia was not a utopian vision of what could be, but a demand for the individual to safeguard Australia from the black and yellow hordes today. It is a vision in which no degree of compromise is possible, for you can either have a White Australia or a mongrel one. Australia for the White man must become for us more than a slogan, for it is the basic idea of our metapolitical struggle.
What victory looks like
Therefore, to engage in a metapolitical struggle against the system and its values is to both lay the groundwork for future political action, and directly erode the source of what is destroying our people. It also reveals the uselessness of other potential approaches. To attempt to engage with the democratic process without shaping the cultural conditions first would simply relegate us to being one minor party among many, sitting on the fringe with the libertarians, evangelical Christians and reactionaries. Likewise, trying to remove the racial aliens by force or assassinating the system’s leaders would achieve no lasting impact, as they would simply be replaced, with the underlying dynamic utterly unchanged.
Australian National Socialism will be the movement that lays the groundwork for the eventual capture of power, whether it be next year or a hundred years hence. The success or failure of our venture politically will not be measured by the number of times we get mentioned in the media, but in the establishment of Australian National Socialism as a serious political current in Australia. This means ultimately becoming the default ideology of resistance for White Australia, absorbing the political energies that had previously been squandered in class war movements, crude libertarianism or reactionary patriotism. This will come almost naturally if our metapolitical actions succeed in raising White racial consciousness.
Culturally, success would mean that previously sacrosanct ideas such as human equality and negative freedom come under regular attack in public debate, and lose their status as unquestionable foundations of society. Once the system-enforced consensus on these values collapses then discussion of many topics previously deemed heretical, such as the race question, will become widespread. Mainstream politics will be forced to react to this development, or face irrelevancy.
It is impossible to give a precise outline of events in the future, but by shaping the political battlefield now via metapolitics, we can give our people the best possible chance of survival when the hour of decision arrives.