Men Only Want One Thing - Short

 

"Never Shall An Enemy' - Extract of a Speech to the Australian Parliament by John Curtin

16th December 1941, Australia's Prime Minister gave this speech to the Australian Parliament, of which this is a short extract. Japan had attacked us on the 8th December 1941. Japan attacked the British Empire hours before it attacked the United States but because of the International Date Line it wasn't the same date.

The third thing is that more than 150 years this country has stood. Never shall an enemy set food upon the soil of this country without having at once arrayed against it the whole of the manhood of this nation with such strength and quality that this nation will remain for ever the home of sons of Britishers who came here in peace in order to establish in the South Seas an outpost of the British race. Our laws have proclaimed the standard of a White Australia. We did not intend that to be and it never was an affront to other races. It was devised for economic and sound humane reasons. It was not challenged for 40 years. We intend to keep it, because we know it to be desirable. If we were to depart from it we should do so only as the result of free consent, not because it was sought to be taken from us by armed aggression..

When people wrote, spoke and thought of a White Australia, they meant a British Australia. 

To Help Support My Work

https://www.subscribestar.com/upon-hope

Upon Hope - A Traditionalist Future

Another Article You Might Like

2022 Some Thoughts On The Australian Election

My Response To Replies to 'Arthur Calwell and his Memoirs'

My last article, Arthur Calwell and his Memoirs 'be just and fear not' received two replies. 

The first from Mark Richardson of Oz Conservative fame who basically gave some more information on Calwell's views before WWII.

Calwell's deep concern for social justice was invariably linked with the creation in Australia of an ethnically mixed society through large-scale immigration.

The second comment was from the world's most prolific author 'Anonymous', who gave a very reasonable and intelligent response. However I think that it is wrong and I will outline why after his comment.

I will attempt to reconcile the two seemingly contradictory positions of Calwell supporting both mass immigration and White Australia.

Calwell (along with many other Australian leaders during World War 2) felt that Australia was precariously vulnerable to being overwhelmed by Imperial Japan due to Australia's small population relative to Australia's land size.
Calwell (along with other Australian leaders at the time) concluded that Australia (for national defence reasons) needed a quick and massive population boost above and beyond what increased birth rates or importing Anglo-Celts from the British Isles was likely to achieve.
So Calwell (and other Australian leaders) expanded the White Australia Policy from English-speaking Anglo-Celts to include the near similar Europeans in general.
Which means that the Calwell era immigration following World War II until the mid-1970s was not in fact the first stage of multiculturalism, but more accurately a continuation of the White Australia Policy with a pan-European population base rather than being limited to mostly Anglo-Celts.

I was surprised when reading Calwell's book, which I have since found out was ghost written by Graham Freudenberg, that not once was the phrase 'populate or perish' used. In the post-war period this was a well worn phrase that was trotted out. It meant that Australia's population was too small to defend it and that we needed more people if we were to do so. 

But that phrase and the mass immigration policy that it supported don't really make sense. By the end of WWII Australia's population was about 8 million, Japans was about 80 million. Exactly how many people we needed to 'populate' wasn't talked about and I have never heard a number. What number would allow us to survive?

 It was all very abstract, what was never discussed was when would enough be enough?

If our enemy has a population of 80 million, how big does our population need to be to successfully defend it?

140 million, 80 million, 40 million, 20 million?

Our most likely enemy today has a population of over 1,000 million, how many people do we need to defend ourselves against that?

Defending Australia was never the reason mass immigration was started because there was never a population target to reach and it was never designed to be turned off, only started.

The second point that I would like to make is that the term 'White Australia' was always a misnomer. The truth is that the word white did not mean to most people in the English speaking world, European. It meant a particular type of European, someone from Northern Europe. In other words White people were WASP's, White Anglo Saxon Protestants. While this term wasn't used in Australia, it's an American term, it comes closest to what the word White meant when people spoke about the 'White Australia' policy.

Even countries with similar backgrounds and histories are not exactly the same. Unlike America, Australia has always had a high proportion of Catholics. So Catholics from the British Isles were included as White. In the United States people still ask are Italians White?

Similar concepts but not quite the same.

When the 'White Australia' policy was put forward it wasn't just to stop a million Chinese from arriving in Australia. It existed just as much to stop a million French people from turning up. Under the policy non-Whites did immigrate to Australia, but numbers were in the thousands over decades. The purpose was to keep Australia a bastion for the British peoples with other people in smaller numbers also being allowed in. Numbers matter.

Mass immigration after WWII was a half way house between the 'White Australia' policy and multiculturalism. It most certainly wasn't a continuation of that policy, it was it's replacement.  

To Help Support My Work

https://www.subscribestar.com/upon-hope

Upon Hope - A Traditionalist Future

Another Article You Might Like

Unions and Traditional Conservatism

    

Arthur Calwell and his Memoirs - 'be just and fear not'

Sunday night 27 October 2024 just before midnight I'm reading an article in Quadrant when a writer casually mentions Arthur Calwells memoirs. I thought " Arthur Calwell wrote a memoir!". So I get out of bed and get on the computer and it took me about half an hour to find an actual copy of the book. There are a lot of pages that talk about the book but I only found one copy for sale. So I bought it, over $60 for a nearly 50 year old paperback. 

By the end of the week I had it in my hands.

Why read a nearly 50 year old book? 

Published in 1978 about a man who has been dead for over 50 years, he died in 1973.

Because Arthur Calwell was a quite peculiar man, the man who campaigned for mass immigration into Australia and the last main stream politician to openly support a White Australia. 

How do you reconcile those two things?

I hoped that the book might give some insight, while it does give some insight into other areas, it sadly does not explain at all why he supported mass immigration even though there is an entire chapter on immigration. 

Chapter 12. The immigration saga

It starts with Prime Minister Curtin stating that Australia needs a Ministry of Immigration and Calwell being appointed by Curtins replacement, Chifley as the first Minister for Immigration on July 13 1945, before the war was even over. But it does not say anything at all of the policies prehistory, it just starts fully formed, with no discussion, no debate, nothing. In that sense nothing has changed.

Sir Robert Menzies in his book 'Afternoon Delight' writes on page 59 "It was in the face of these difficulties that Arthur Calwell convinced not only his colleagues but also the Trade Unions that a large immigration programme should be taken in hand. This was a bold and courageous action. It could have been taken successfully only by a Minister who was known as a life-time Labour man of the strictest orthodoxy, and was both well-known and extremely popular at the centres of unionism, the Trades Hall."

Thats more information then Calwell gives, but he does write on what happened once he was Minister. On August 2, 1945 he gave his first Ministerial statement to Parliament of which I have selected the most relevant parts, page 97-98

"If Australians have learned one lesson from the Pacific war....it is surely that we cannot continue to hold our island continent for ourselves and our descents unless we greatly increase our numbers.

...Immigration is, atbest, only the counterpart of the most important phase of population building, natural increase. Any immigration policy, therefore, must be intimately related to those phases of government policy that are directed towards stimulating the birth rate, and lowering the infant mortality rate in Australia itself. It must, further, be related to the whole social service program of creating greater economic economic security and a higher standard of living, as an inducement to young Australian couples to have larger families."

....In view of the alarming fall in the birth rate, and the decline of the average Australian family from six children in 1875 to three children in 1925, and then to slightly over two children at present, our immediate problem will be to hold our population figures without some migration."

Calwell writes about the wish for British migrants, but then he moves seamlessly onto Europe, page 100.

"In forming our immigration policy, we were lucky to obtain the services of an outstanding six-man fact-finding committee which toured Europe on our behalf in November and December 1945. In fact. the mission consisted of representatives of the Commonwealth Parliament and of employers and employees organisations, who went to Paris for an International Labour Office conference."   

So right from the start, the political parties the unions and the employers groups were in. The Australian people were never asked and have never been asked. 

Chapter 14. Black Power and a multi-racial society

Page 117

"Anybody who is not proud of his race is not a man at all. And any man who tries to stigmatize the Australian community as racist because they want to preserve this country for the white race is doing our nation great harm. Those who talk about a multi-racial society are really talking about a polygot nation. Some people talk about a multi-racial society without knowing what the term really means, while others talk about it because they are anxious to change our society. No matter where the pressures come from, Australian people will continue to resist all attempts to destroy our white society."

Chapter 27 Permissiveness destroys society

Page 244

"But the hedonistic doctrine now being popularised is that a women has the sole right over her own body and can alone decide on an abortion for some reason, or no reason. Even's her husbands consent, and he is the father of the child, will not be required, and neither will the opinions of qualified specialists. All this adds up to infanticide, and every nation in history that has practised infanticide, whether with or without the connivance of the authorities, has been destroyed and deserved to be destroyed. God is not mocked. Race suicide does not pay. Those who advocate abortions on demand should not be tolerated in any civilized community."

Obviously in a book by a politician who served for over 30 years in the Australian Parliament there is a lot on politics, events and personalities. Was it worth reading?

Yes but I found it quite frustrating, the central reason I bought the book wasn't addressed. However I did realise that like Menzies who I've also criticised for his failure to see the consequences of his actions, Calwell is guilty of exactly the same thing. He could not see that a policy of mass immigration could neither be turned off or kept small. That instead it forms it's own economy that must be fed. Government and business are now dependent upon immigration. 

      

  

50 More Movies For Traditionalists To Watch 51-100

I had about half of this written and thought I might finish it and put it up, enjoy.

1. Northwest Passage (1940) War

Based on a real event in the Seven Years War in North America. American soldiers raid an Indian village that has been raiding them. Really shows the hardship and brutality that happened. Even though this movie was made in 1940, it always make me think of the Chindits in Burma in 1943-44. 

2. In Which We Serve (1942) War

This was made as a propaganda movie and should not be as good as it is. The acting, writing, direction and plot are all first rate. A war movie that can be watched by anyone who can sit still.

3. The Cruel Sea (1953) War

While this is based upon a novel, the author served and did this type of war service. This might possibly be the best movie about war at sea ever. I really think it's that good. 

4. Khartoum (1966) Drama TS

General Gordan is sent to the Sudan to end a revolt and is killed. A good historical story, a little slow and stilted by todays standards but still solid. 

5. Monty Pythons The Life of Brian (1979) Comedy

It is really is as good as it's reputation, full of classic lines and very funny. What many people miss is how this is much more about politics then religion, religion is simply the vehicle.

6. Blackadder (1982)

There are four seasons, each set in a different period, the one linked above is set in Medieval times, the second in the 1500;s, the third around 1800 and the fourth in the trenches of the First World War. This series is some of the best British comedy that there is. If you haven't seen this check it out.

7. This Is Spinal Tap (1984) Comedy

The first Mockumentary, whereby a movie tries to look like a documentary but is instead a satire. This movie is famous for a reason, very understated but hilarious. 

8. Glory (1989) War

Excellent movie about the first black regiment raised in the North during the American Civil War. My only criticism is that it tries to include the story of other black troops and it clouds the story. For example every black soldier in the regiment could read and were freemen, but the movie shows them differently.

9. Black Robe (1991) Historical

A French priest goes to the wilds of Canada in the 1600's to convert the Indians. While this is based upon a novel it is very accurate with a sympathetic but unromantic view of traditional Indian life.

10. Assault at West Point (1994) Crime Drama

A black cadet at West Point is found tied up and is court martialed . The movie follows the trial and has an interesting view of race relations. It is very liberal in it's viewpoint but I would look at what is shown and it shows some things that you might not expect. 

11. Operation Dumbo Drop (1995) Comedy

A silly movie about elephants, aeroplanes and the Vietnam War. Based on a true story but 95% Hollywood. A good dumb movie. 

12. Star Trek: Fist Contact (1996) Sci Fi

The best Star Trek movie with the best villains The Borg. 

13. The Ghost and the Darkness (1996) Adventure

This is a very underrated movie, a railway is being built in Africa and two maneating lions attack and this is about the efforts to hunt them down. Loosely based on a true story. The lines in the movie really stand out. 

14. L.A. Confidential (1997) Crime Drama

Corruption isn't just about money, while violent this is also a philosophical movie with quite a few twists and turns.

15. Mrs Brown (1997) Historical

Queen Victoria has a new man servant by the name of Mr. Brown, this is about their relationship. 

16. The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999) Drama 

What starts out as a story about a social climber becomes so much more.

17. Uprising (2001)  War

A made for TV movie that is better than you might expect. It tells the story of uprising of the Jewish ghetto in Warsaw in 1943. 

18. War Photographer (2001) Documentary

This documents the work of James Nachtwey as he photographs war. Can be quite graphic.

19. Spiderman (2002) Superhero

This is in my opinion the best of the Spiderman movies and I think it works because it stays true to his origin story while also adding just enough to keep it fresh.

20. Hellboy (2004) Superhero

There are things that go bump in the night and these guys are the ones who bump back. I like the first half better than the second but the first half I really like. 

21. The Incredibles (2004) Animation

Superheroes exist but are illegal. 

22. Team America: World Police (2004) Comedy

If you don't like sex, swearing or violence then this movie is not for you. While it is gross and over the top it has a great message and is hilarious. 

23. Batman Begins (2005) Superhero

The first of the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy, a movie that has no right to be this good. Highly recommended.

24. Miss Potter (2006) Biographical TS

A good movie to watch with the wife or girlfriend. A look at the author of the Peter Rabbit books with some fantastical flourishes. 

25. United 93 (2006) Drama TS

A very underrated movie on how the passengers and crew fought back against the hijackers on their flight on 9/11. A slow burn that reaches a crescendo.  

26. 30Rock (2006) Comedy Series

I must confess that I have not seen every episode but the ones that I have seen I liked. It is both inmature and has mature themes so if that's not your thing beware.

27. Into The Wild (2007) Drama TS

Young man goes into the wild to test himself and things don't go well. A contemplative movie.

28. Burn After Reading (2008) Comedy

A Coen Brothers movie in which everyone is unlikeable but what happens to them is entertaining. Swearing, implied sex with some graphic violence.

29. Starship Troopers 3: Marauder (2008) Sci-Fi War

A trashy movie that is good fun and has some surprising takes.

30. Passchendaele (2008) War Drama

Set in both Canada and the Western Front during WWI, while this not a bad movie, at some points it is really good at bringing out the feeling of the period. I really wish it was better as it had the potential to be really good.

31. The Dark Knight (2008)

Batman, what can I say, it's good.

32. Julie & Julia (2009)

One to watch with the wife or girlfriend. A women decides to cook all the recipes in Julia Childs cookbook. This is also a look at Julia Childs life. 

33. Hugo (2011) Drama/Children

A movie that I find hard to pigeonhole, it is about a young boy and an old man and the early history of filmmaking, but it nearly all takes place in a train station. Most suitable for older children.  

34. Too Big To Fail (2011)

A movies that tries to explain the 2007 Global Financial Crisis and doesn't do that bad of a job. Unfortunately they made the US Treasury out to be the good guys when they were as guilty as anyone. 

35. The Dark Knight Rises (2012) Superhero

Batman has been my favourite superhero since I was 4 and I was very happy with the Dark Knight series.

36. Game Change (2012) Political Drama TS

A look at John McCain's Presidential campaign in 2008 and his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate. It must be kept in mind that this is based off of a book and that it's take might be more impressionistic than correct. Having said that I thought it gave an interesting insight. 

37. Gravity (2013) Sci Fi

The space shuttle has an accident and a women  must find a way to get back to Earth. It looks fantasical and I liked the story.

38. American Sniper (2014) War

A character study of a SEAL sniper in the Iraq War. Violent, confronting but never patronising.  

39. Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) Sci-Fi

This one was very surprising, funny with great special effects.

40. Wolf Hall (2015) Historical Drama

Based on the award winning novels this series in slow and brilliant. The acting, the writing, in fact I cannot think of a single thing that I do not like about this nearly 6 hour long series.  

41. Silence (2016) Historical Drama

Made from a novel which is based upon real historical events. Long, at times hard to watch, but I found it quite moving. Two Priests go to Japan where Christianity is outlawed and their faith in God, man and themselves are tested.

42. Zoolander 2 (2016) Comedy

This movie is stupid, but in a good way. If you liked the original Zoolander then you might like this, it's not as good but it's fun.

43. The Vietnam War (2017) Documentary 

A Ken Burns documentary series that is 16 1/2 hours long in 10 episodes. While I have some issues with the series, most minor, however the detail and coverage is very impressive. Very focused on America even though it does try to do justice to both North and South Vietnam. 

44. I, Tonya (2017) Drama TS

A story about violence and figure skaters, not a subject that you would think go today, because they aren't supposed to. A good portrayal of the incident and the events surrounding it.

45. Incredibles 2 (2018) Animation

Superheroes and their troubles.

46. Kursk: The Last Mission (2018) Drama TS

A Russian submarine sinks and the efforts to find out if anyone has survived. A sad story. 

47. 7 Days in Entebbe (2018) Drama

Terrorists highjack a plane and take it to Entebbe airport in Uganda and Israel sents troops to get them out. 

48. Country Music (2019) Documentary

Another Ken Burns documentary series, 16 hours long in 8 episodes. I thought this was excellent, if your interested in American country music this is as good as it gets. 

49. Glass (2019) Superheroes

M. Night Shyamalan has a mixed record, but his superhero series is a look at how they would exist without us noticing them. This is better if you have seen the other movies in the series. 

50. The Spy (2019) Drama TS

A women spies for Sweden during WWII, a little slow but still interesting. 

Keeping Traditions Alive

How often do we hear that the old traditions are dying out?

How often do we say much the same thing?

But what are we doing personally to keep these traditions alive?

Recently I was talking with one of my brothers and I mentioned that I only received one Christmas card this year. He replied he hadn't sent any out and that it seemed that it was a tradition that was dying out. Which made me realise that I was part of the problem as I never send out Christmas cards. If I want this tradition to survive then maybe I should do something to keep it alive. Like telling people that I want Christmas cards sent to me, maybe even going the radical route and sending some out myself.

This week I have been out and about doing Christmas shopping and everywhere I have been I have been wishing people Merry Christmas and people like it. People want to be a part of the festive season and they like it when other people are nice and pleasant to them. I have seen people smile, I have had people then wish me a merry Christmas. What I have not encountered is any pushback. If we want to keep our traditions alive then we need to keep them alive.

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To Help Support My Work

https://www.subscribestar.com/upon-hope  

Upon Hope - A Traditionalist Future

Another Article You Might Like?

The Death Of Classical Liberalism

Why Aren't We Having More Children?

In the 1990's the Left shared an African proverb, 'it takes a village to raise a child'. They loved that this traditional phrase called upon a collective for child raising. What they failed to notice was that in an African village nearly everyone is likely to be a relative of that child. It is not about a collection of random people or of professionals raising a child, but the importance of the extended family in looking after itself.

From Italy to South Korea there is hardly a country in the developed world that doesn't have a baby shortage. This is even spreading to the third world. Here we are witnesses to a civilizational issue, not simply one restricted to one country or society. Which means that to understand the issue we must look more broadly. 

Men and women want children, but we are not simply creatures of instinct. We think, which means that what we think can be influenced by things other than our instincts. The environment in which we live and the ideas that exist around us also influence us. As does the reality of raising children. They take up time, money and resources. Even though people want children, children come at a cost.

However in the past people seemed to be willing to pay that price and today more and more people seem to be unwilling or unable to. The standard answers as to why are always economic. People moved from the farm to the city and children went from being an asset that could provide labour to a burden that instead cost money. That as women become more educated they wanted less children. Each idea suggests that these things are rational and logical. Even that having a large family is indulgent and selfish.

In 1700 no matter where someone lived they were nearly always surrounded by family. Everyone in the town, village or district is related in some way to the other people who also live in that place. Which means that there was a vast network of people who could help in the day to day raising of children. But when a family moved to the town or city they left behind that support and they disrupted two communities. We are familiar with the idea that the village is disrupted, but so too is the community that someone moves too. A stranger arrives and is now competing against the locals. Ties are broken and that includes those of the extended community. If no one can look after the children then it makes less sense to have more. It is not economics or logic that encourages less children. But instead the reality that it is much harder to look after them. 

There is an old saying, 'many hands make light work', meaning that if a job is done by many people each persons share of the work is reduced. In the past motherhood used this principle, many people other than the mother took some of the burden. Mother, grandmother, aunt, sister, cousin, niece, daughter, all pitched in. When a women is in a new place amongst new people then all of that changes. Motherhood becomes a much bigger and harder part of her live. 

We see this in modern times, a couple have a child together and it is a very trying time for them. The husband feels as if he is doing everything that he can to support his brand new family, working, helping out, providing emotional support for her and often she is frustrated beyond belief, why is he doing so little to help she wonders? 

Which has a big impact on how many children this couple will have. It is an enormous test for their relationship. The answer is other women, specifically her mother, then her aunt, sister and any other women who are related or experienced with children. It is an unfortunate modern trend for the father to take the place of all the women in the village, it's too much.

Then in the middle of the 20th century we had a massive population boom, the rapid growth of population in the third world as it received the benefits of transport, new rapid growth crops and pharmaceuticals. In 1927 the worlds population was around 2 billion, in 2023 it has gone over 8 billion, but nearly everywhere the fertility rate has declined.

In the West we had the babyboom between 1944-1964, but that created it's own problems as new families left older communities and started new lives amongst new people. Those older family ties and formations broke down and today we are seeing that continue although with new challenges. One of those new challenges is how hard it is to get into an economically stable position and then to remain there. In the past a great deal of effort was made to get families to form and to make sure that jobs were available and that prices were kept under control. Today none of that is true.

It is still required for a man to have a stable job and to pay, but permanent employment is harder to obtain. Competition from women, mass immigration all make family formation harder. Marriage has  been made unstable. 

I have mixed feelings about the fertility decline, in 1086 when Willian the Conqueror had the Domesday book compiled there were around 1,700,000 people in England, today there are more than 56,000,000. I can't help feeling that that is insane. Sure about 20% of that is from immigration, but even 45,000,000 is a lot of people. That problem is now all over the Earth. Capitalism, the handmaiden of Liberalism says that a bigger population leads to a bigger economy and thats what really matters. I'm a bit more agnostic on population, I'm not convinced that a smaller population is a bad thing. 

Having said that, if we want people to have more children then we need to make family formation easier. family stability a priority and to make women more important to society than to the economy. Today we are burning the candle at both ends because in theory it increases the economy. But if increasing the economy leads to our extinction then that isn't a good deal at all. 

To Help Support My Work

https://www.subscribestar.com/upon-hope

Upon Hope - A Traditionalist Future

Another Article You Might Like

Debt Is King I