One of the defining features of our major cities is real or perceived ‘cultural capital’. As an increasing majority of Australia’s population lives in large population centres, the influence of left-wing politics through popular culture continues to grow. This process is multifaceted, beginning as early as pre-school (television that normalises homosexuality and minority characters) and as late as old age (Radio National and the ABC).
What makes urbanites especially susceptible to ‘poz’ (a useful shorthand for HIV positive, referring to the cultural and spiritual infection of leftist ideology), is that their environment is more entertainment-rich, and is largely devoid of the traditionally Australian activities such as farming, hunting, entertaining neighbours and other communal activities that serve to reinforce the patriarchal and frontier values that previously defined the nation.
It’s harder to pledge allegiance and resources to an abstract notion of humanity when you have much closer and tangible ties to your immediate family, or have a sense of solidarity with your community through experiences of hardship such as drought, bushfires, bankruptcy or tragedy from work-related injury.
In contrast, the city dweller is more likely to be reliant on large and enduring institutions that are ideological. These could include government and corporate employers, social media networks, bar and restaurant chains, gossip circles and the (((media))) which all combine to push a multiculti and socially permissive agenda.
One of the major selling points of the left is identity. Eerily similar to the carefully crafted Neocon Midwestern package of guns, flags, apple pies, bibles, and Israeli wars ‘fighting them (Arabs) over there so we don’t have to fight them over here’, the cool left-wing identity combines moralism (uplifting women, gays and minorities), historical revisionism (post-colonialism and critical theory) and open-borders socialism with a pastiche of stylistic influences in language (AAVE, Valley-Girl, Yiddish words), fashion (Arab kerchiefs, Negro ghetto gymwear, 1950’s tattoos, excess adipose tissue), largely informed by (((Hollywood))) and its celebrities (Lena Dunham, Sarah Silverman, Amy Schumer to name a few).
Entertainment has never been value-neutral and this has never been more evident than today. Both state-owned broadcasters (ABC, Triple J, Radio National) and its minority ethnic arm, SBS are dedicated to promoting all manner of ethnic food, music, personalities and radical left-wing politics. As understood by Gramsci and other early left-wing radicals, politics is a long game. By capturing the imagination of a nation’s youth, the stage is set for political disruption in the future, and undermining the moral consensus of traditional Australian society appears to be the game being played.
The various forms of African music, from hip-hop to rap to Grime, hitherto referred to as ‘jungle beats’ that dominate the airwaves have fit into the false notion of anti-establishment rebellion in large part due to the fact that they are permissive of the kinds of thoughts, feelings and behaviours that are suppressed in traditional Australian and European culture.
These include but are not limited to promiscuity and adolescent sexualisation, bragging about sexual conquest, threats of physical violence towards one's peers, exaltation of drug and alcohol binges, and boasting about one's level of material wealth. The myriad of narrative conflicts involved in this intersectional gang-bang, from Islamic and African misogyny and feminism, to anti-capitalism and ‘thug-life’ Instagram accounts is simply ignored. “It’s just music maaan”.
The standard media response to objections raised to the promotion of this degenerate ‘art-form’ is a form of the tu quoque fallacy – that the rock 'n roll of the 60's and 70's was just as subversive and that all that hysteria of the censors was shown to be impotent and wrong. Quite. The first part of this claim is that rock 'n roll promoted these themes in the same way. A cursory glance at the content of the lyrics of The Rolling Stones or The Beatles can quickly prove this to be false. To be sure, there are subversive and degenerate aspects to much of this music, however even the less edifying music from this era is presented with a degree of self-awareness and artistic depth that places it in an entirely different category to the ‘f**k bitches, get drunk, kill niggers’ fare that has become acceptable.
The second part of this claim, that "we all turned out OK" is contradicted by available evidence. The post-war generation has been devastated by its own spiritual poverty and moral failure. The short-sightedness and selfishness of the Eternal Boomer can be observed in his pitiful reproductive rate, high divorce rate and legacy of environmental destruction, casino capitalism and third world colonisation. Three decades of government has sold Australia’s inheritance for pathetic comforts and years of life-support.
Never has our population been exposed to such cultural garbage. Since Australians are so urbanised and deracinated, that there is increasingly little to distinguish him from the intended consumers of the global culture. Sensing this opening and constantly probing deeper, SBS, Australia’s state-owned ‘global culture’ media arm has recently partnered with Vice TV to dedicate a full-time TV SBS 2 channel to play the series Viceland. The trailer is below.
[To the audience:] You've been fantastic, and I hope you enjoyed it. There is a point [to my act]. Is there a point to all of this? Let's find a point.
Is there a point to my act? I would say there is. I have to.
The world is like a ride, in an amusement park. And when you choose to go on it, you think it's real, because that's how powerful our minds are. And the ride goes up and down, and round and round. It has thrills and chills, and it's very brightly colored, and it's very loud and it's fun. For a while.
Some people have been on the ride for a long time, and they begin to question: "Is this real, or is this just a ride?"
And other people have remembered, and they come back to us, and they say, "Hey, don't worry. Don't be afraid, ever. Because this is just a ride."
And we . . . kill those people. Ha-ha!
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride! Shut him up! Look at my furrows of worry. Look at my big bank account, and my family. This has to be real."
It's just a ride. But we always kill those good guys who try and tell us that, you ever notice that? And we let the demons run amok.
But it doesn't matter, because it's just a ride, and we can change it any time we want. It's only a choice. No effort. No worry. No job. No savings and money.
[It's] a choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your door, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love, instead, see all of us as one.
End of trailer. The below is the omitted final paragraph of the speech given by Bill Hicks in a comedy show.
Here's what we can do to change the world, right now, into a better ride: Take all that money that we spend on weapons and defense each year and, instead, spend it feeding, clothing, and educating the poor of the world – which it would do many times over, not one human being excluded. And we can explore space together, both inner and outer, forever. In peace.
Thank you very much, you've been great. I've hoped you enjoyed it. You're fantastic! Thank you! Thank you very much. [Hicks then falls to the ground, as if he were dead.]
The choice of Bill Hicks' screed from a 1992 performance is not at all surprising. The same tired Kumbaya one-worldism continues to animate the brainwashed urbanite. Twenty-five years later, a montage of colourful images of oven-worthy subjects posing in a series of vibrant and exciting third-world locations is added to Hicks' oh-so-clever and hilarious take-down of the powers that be.
A quarter of a century has passed since Hicks' It's just a ride was recorded, and somehow, magically, the people who pointed out that 'it's just a ride' didn't get killed. They had their way, and development and aid has produced a very different world to the one he lived in.
Note in the video the fat, white and bearded hipster-cum-rapper. His Viceland show That’s F*ing Delicious catalogues his culinary escapades with his similarly-obese negro comrade. The intention of the show is twofold. Firstly to demonstrate the affable nature and rebellious spirit of the ‘foodie’, and secondly to elevate momentary physical pleasures such as salty and greasy food to a state of great significance.
The ideal of the cultivated man who does not require profanities to make himself understood, who can control his impulses and who concerns himself with overcoming mediocrity for himself and his people is discarded for the gluttonous and slovenly hipster. It is this inversion that we are being conditioned to accept as normal, fun and exciting rather than shameful and pathetic.
What is really taking place in Viceland is combination seedy voyeurism and a patronising cultural sideshow. Where life is cheap, normal day-to-day experiences seem perilous and dangerous – because they are. The subtext here is that the poverty, insecurity, violence and despair that is usually associated with third-world conditions is a preconceived notion and in fact all of this is exciting.
In case you think this is over-the-top, or that this kind of propaganda is harmless, I would direct you to read about some of the horrific cases of young and naïve western women who have met violent deaths as result of their exotic expeditions to Africa and the Middle East. The seed of this idea, that it is white man’s burden to ‘save the Africans’, which I note can be supplanted with Indian, Cambodian, Guatemalan or any other exotic brown person, is planted at an early age from film, television and charity advertising.
A thorough examination of the moral and emotional manipulation of Europeans by the peddlers ‘charity’ and ‘world culture’ such as the well-worn ‘sponsor a distended-bellied, flea-bitten child’ tactic, famously deployed by WorldVision, goes beyond the scope of this article but suffice to say this form of hijacking of White pathological altruism has been weaponised and used against Western populations for decades.
Why does it appear that the more urban a population, the more susceptible they are to moral degradation and ethno-masochism, and the more willing they are to ignore the catastrophic effects of third-world colonisation? It is clear from looking at an electoral map of the United States from the 2016 presidential election that the Trump vote was overwhelmingly a rural and regional victory. The largest population centres overwhelmingly voted for Hillary and thus for amnesty and further White demographic decline.
Clearly the larger number of non-whites in cities will mean that they will be better able to vote in their interests. But controlling for this variable, why are urban Whites more likely to be left-wing? One theory is that they are more likely to be connected to the establishment in one way or another. The education system, public service, professions and large corporates have all pledged fealty to the political and economic status quo, which is underpinned by the agenda of mass immigration and globalisation.
This trickles down, so to speak, into a kind of caste-membership, whereby the convenient convergence of self-interest and moral self-righteousness creates a consensus that it is the primary responsibility of white people to atone for sins of the past by allowing and assisting competing racial groups to establish themselves and flourish in our nations.
There are likely many other factors at play. The urban landscape itself is largely divorced from the cultural inheritance of its past. The largely administrative work performed in a city does not allow for custom or opportunities for cultural expression. In addition, the lifestyle of a city-dweller necessitates the outsourcing of most of the tasks that define and distinguish different cultures.
Language is standardized, food is bought pre-made and our relationship to time is determined by HR departments. This post-war culture has coincided with the emergence of the ‘subculture’, where young people, bereft of a sense of identity, will purchase a kit of various consumer tastes in a perverted corporate simulacrum of tribal membership.
Climate control and a life spent indoors between schools, workplaces, malls, gyms, restaurants and public transportation diminish the sense of place and the connection to locality that people would normally feel. The ubiquitous use of smartphones further amplifies this process. The thronging mass of bodies that one must pass through each day in a city, each day a new horde of strangers, further creates the sense of atomisation that likely lays the groundwork for siren calls for ‘oneness’, ‘global citizenship’ and other such disingenuous notions designed to destroy one’s sense of ethnic belonging and deny one’s own historical birthright.
The existence of diversity itself is likely to further speed up this process. As children of different backgrounds live in similar circumstances, and employees of different backgrounds are forced to work together, the real and authentic diversity of their parents and grandparents will inevitable begin to erase from both cultural practice and consciousness. Thanks to the prevailing social mores, a pastiche of coloured friends is a mark of social prowess. It is increasingly becoming an important preventative measure to accusations of racism for Whites.
Taking back the appropriation of ‘country’ by Aboriginal activists has never been more important. The polite fiction that Aborigines have a cosmic connection to the earth that is beyond the comprehension of Australians is at best quaint and patronising. Anyone who has spent any time outside of major population centres would know that a love of nature and an active commitment to its preservation is near-exclusively the domain of the White man.
The relative lack of destruction of the land by Aborigines is mostly due to their lack of technology, and historical sources point to widespread use of devastating bushfires (misleadingly termed ‘controlled burning’) to harvest game, often resulting in the mass slaughter of animals and enormous environmental damage.
History aside, a cursory glance of who actually gets close to nature and spends time in it, shows that it is White people who do so. Aborigines don’t care enough about nature to raise money to protect it, and the squalor of trash and derelict shacks that define Aboriginal settlement don’t point to any kind of harmonious relationship to ‘Mother Earth’. In fact, recent reports point to Aboriginal use of modern technology, exploiting their exclusive hunting rights to kill endangered species such as Sea Turtles and Dugongs. ‘Connection to the land’ has become a cheap stand-in to mask the absence of any meaningful continuation of Aboriginal culture.
The conquering of distance by pioneers and overcoming of the harsh climate by farmers and settlers informs the Australian sense of ‘country’, and is paralleled by other frontier nations such as The United States. Being hardy, handy and practical (‘down-to-earth’) is an essential component of Australian maleness, and outdoor activities such as fishing, surfing, hunting, bushwalking or four-wheel driving is the easiest way to cultivate this sensibility. There are many such opportunities in or near major cities for urbanites to temporarily free themselves from city life and develop an attachment to the land.
The fallout of increasing urbanisation is that the unique factors that forged a distinctive Australian culture, and indeed American, French or other European cultures, are being eroded. The adoption of the trappings of Western Civilisation by virtually all peoples, most pronounced in big cities, along with the aggressive promotion of global culture by the establishment threatens the distinctiveness of our identity and the conditions required for it to be able to flourish.
The challenge of our present predicament, short of Pol Pot’s unpopular reforms, is to find a way to give to the urbanite what it is they desperately seek. A history that is glorious and not to be apologised for. A club that can’t be joined. A patrimony unbroken for centuries and a cultural past that is unrivalled. The dream of a better future, of job security, home ownership, community, family formation and collective triumph. A life beyond middle-management and consumerism, and the opportunity to be truly subversive, bold and heroic.
Unlike the United States, Australians will not be able to call on a substantial regional demographic to vote with their instincts. Culturally and politically, the big battles will take place in our major cities. It is up to us to take them back.