The crucifixion of Blair Cottrell

For anyone who isn’t paying attention, nowdays our cultural zeitgeist say that simply being of European heritage makes you a racist. The NWO propaganda machine doesn’t tolerate opposing views.

By Richard B Riddick

Blair Cottrell is a carpenter from Melbourne and the leader of the United Patriot Front. UPF’s policies include a blanket ban on all Muslims immigrating to Australia and a ban on any new mosques. UPF’s rationale I’d imagine is that Islam is incompatible with the values of the historic Australian nation and that therefore, it should be the policy of the government to prevent the accumulation of an Islamic population via immigration. Holding and advocating for this view is an unlegislated “crime” in our society and for this crime Blair Cottrell has been sentenced to be “un-personed”.

I don’t just mean unsubtle wowser articles about how Blair is literally Adolf Hitler, and that anyone right of the ALP is fascist. I mean literally that the 4th estate in our nation is doing their best to prevent Blair from holding and advocating for his views. So much so that the media is now engaging in hit pieces on each other, after Seven news aired an interview with Blair.

To be honest, this level of uproar over Blair is not even the most clown world-esque thing to have occurred recently. Stan’s recent Romper Stomper series is an unsubtle hit piece on Blair, portraying a caricature of him called Blake Farron. In the series Blake is the stereotypical fat loser who gets cucked by the lead character.

Does that guy look like this guy?

So why all this effort for one “thought criminal”?

It’s simple. People like Blair are an anathema to the media/academic/government alliance.

Blair holds views that are not presently allowed and importantly are dangerous to the status quo, because he is able to remind the wider population that we didn’t always have to step between “diversity bollards” whilst shopping, and we as a people didn’t always have to advocate for non-citizens at the expense of ourselves. Therefore the media/academic/government alliance must make him comply.

In other news:

HOW MANY MENTALLY ILL JAPANESE RUN DOWN PEDESTRIANS?

Police won’t call the Muslim Afghan who ran down people in Melbourne a terrorist:  “He is a person who is known to have a mental illness. In fact, he was on a mental health treatment plan and missed an appointment yesterday.” A question: Japan has very few Muslims;  how many mentally ill people there run down pedestrians?

Normally a few hit pieces and the fear of loss of employment is enough to shut people up. But Blair is a carpenter, he doesn’t rely on corporate types stamping approval on his views. The blue collar trades environment is still a place where the Aussie Anglo-celtic culture and socially conservative worker (average punter) centered political attitudes live on, and there Blair’s political views are unremarkable and common. These people know that mass immigration to Australia has only occurred due to an alliance between cultural Marxists and crony capitalist Big Australia advocates, they know it doesn’t benefit their families, or the society they once had.

So not only is Blair immune from these economic sanctions, but he is also dangerous because he isn’t an incompetent loser. The system doesn’t mind when its rebels are unkempt and dull freaks – it gets nervous when its enemies are articulate and charismatic. I’ve never met Blair, but I have seen his videos and his media appearances. Blair is a measured speaker and rarely falls into the traps. Go to youtube and witness him in his early 20’s talk rings around paid propagandists.

Finally, and perhaps most worryingly of all for the system, Blair is an Australian Chad.

On some level it is hilarious to me to use such a term in serious analysis, but a Chad is a Chad and Blair is a tall, strong, well-spoken, confident larrikin/rebel. That is to say, Blair is dangerous to the system, because he and his movement could make it cool to be a thought rebel.

This is why any coverage of him is literally unacceptable. If given a platform, Blair’s views could spread like wildfire through the currently apathetic disengaged Australian millennials, and the system can’t risk that.

I urge you to analyse their coverage of him, see how they lie. The following article has a particularly interesting example:

Far right leader Blair Cottrell clashes with Muslim and indigenous community members on fiery ABC debate

“In a taped piece before the debate Mr Cottrell admitted he was a racist.

“I don’t view myself as far right or neo Nazi but by standard of the current political system, yes I am a racist.”

Blair didn’t say he was a racist, he said that in the current political system he is a racist. For anyone who isn’t paying attention, nowdays our cultural zeitgeist say that simply being of European heritage makes you a racist. This is why they go on and on about institutional and unconscious racism.

I honestly implore you to go and watch the videos of him speak and contrast them with the coverage. Take the “Australian media is even worse than you thought” red pill.

The media/academic/government alliance will do anything to prevent the return of the real Right wing. Since the 50’s they have been able to achieve victory after victory by gaslighting Right movements into corporatist controlled reactions.

Now things are changing, we are reaching peak ponzi in terms of economics, social dysfunction and demographics, and the liars can’t paper over the cracks anymore. The real Right is returning, they have their own diagnosis for the civilisational sickness and their own remedy. The media/academic/government alliance knows that remedy will be the end of their stranglehold and as such are treating them as an existential threat.

The crucification of Blair is but an opening salvo in the Culture War to come that will literally decide the fate of our nation.

 

7 thoughts on “The crucifixion of Blair Cottrell”

  1. Forgive my ignorance, Sheik, but what is an ‘Australian Chad’? Is it an Australian citizen who was born in Chad, or did the writer mean to say ‘Chav’?

  2. Urban Dictionary: Chad

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Chad
    The meaning of the name Chad is: Defense warrior

    The origin of the name Chad is believed to be Celtic C: The positive personality traits: Highly Sociable, Inspiring, Excellent Vocal communication skills, Motivational, Fun loving, Creative and Imaginative ,Versatile. The more negative personality traits apt in some …

    What does it mean to be a chad?
    Chad is a generally derogatory slang term referring to a young urban white man, typically single and in his 20s or early 30s. … The female counterpart to the Chad, in slang, is the “Trixie”.

  3. A voice of reason in the PC wilderness. I’ve tried writing to our elected representatives. All I get back are meaningless platitudes about how we live under one law and how great Islam’s contribution to the nation is. There is of course no mention of the blight of creeping Sharia, the threat of terrorism, organised Muslim crime gangs, and not so organised African gangs. The only greater threat to our hard won freedoms is the PC brigade that suppresses any voice raised in opposition. 250,000 immigrants a year. What could possibly go wrong?

    1. The Standard Form Letter -(EXTREMELY similar for ALL Australian Political Parties)- Sent to written complaints regarding the Australian Government’s policy on the immigration and retention of islams into and in Australia.

      Dear {████████}
      Thank you for your letter of {████████} on behalf of {████████}, regarding the Australian Government’s policy on the immigration of Muslim people to Australia.

      Australia has long placed a premium on ensuring its immigrant population settles effectively and contributes to our nation. We have active policies and programs which support settlement and social cohesion.

      While I note the concerns raised by {████████}, the vast majority of Muslim people who have settled here have done so successfully. They live peacefully with their fellow Australians. respect the law, work, pay their taxes and strive to achieve the same goals as other Australians. As you are aware the Australian Government is not considering the introduction of any part of Sharia law into the Australian legal system.

      Australians of all cultures and religions are able to express their beliefs and to practise their religion without intimidation and without interference, as long as this complies with Australian law.
      (Everything about islam contravenes Australian Law)

      All applicants aged 18 years and over are required to sign a values statement when applying for selected visas. The statement requires applicants to confirm that they will respect the Australian way of life and obey the laws of Australia before being granted a visa.
      (
      This explains ALL the young jihadis now surfacing – they didn’t sign a values statement – but islams are born deceivers in the name of islam anyway.)

      One of our great achievements as a nation is that we have been able to successfully settle people from diverse backgrounds into one Australian family under a properly managed immigration Program.
      (
      But islams are reknown for non-intergrating in host countries.)

      Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. I hope the information provided is helpful in responding to the concerns of {████████}.
      (Then the dismissive “Courtesy” Remark)

      Yours sincerely

      Signature of “The Current Dhimmi Politician” for lmmigration and Citizenship

      All courtesy of our islamophile seditious subversive cultural marxist infiltrating “authorities” who are labeled under one banner TRAITORS !!!
      (who will be forcibly converted or forcibly subjugated or aggressively murdered when the islams have no more use for them)

  4. Now – lets call our “authorities what they are …

    islamophiles
    … One (especially one who is not an adherent of Islam) who loves Islam, Muslims or Islamic culture.
    (Wikionary)
    traitors
    … Someone who violates his allegiance and betrays his/her country; someone guilty of treason; one who, in breach of trust, delivers his country to an enemy, or yields up any fort or place entrusted to his defense, or surrenders an army or body of troops to the enemy, unless when vanquished
    … Someone who takes arms and levies war against his country; or one who aids an enemy in conquering his country.
    … Hence, one who betrays any confidence or trust.
    (Wikionary)
    seditioners
    … Organized incitement of rebellion or civil disorder against authority or the state, usually by speech or writing.
    … Insurrection or rebellion.
    (Wikionary)
    subverters
    … (transitive) To overturn from the foundation; to overthrow; to ruin utterly.
    … (transitive) To pervert, as the mind, and turn it from the truth; to corrupt; to confound.
    … A dictator stays in power only as long as he manages to subvert the will of his people.
    … (transitive) To upturn convention from the foundation by undermining it (literally, to turn from beneath).
    (Wikionary)

    cultural Marxist/multiculturalist
    … The current cultural Marxist/multiculturalist elites, the New Totalitarians, are the most dangerous generation in Western history.
    … Not only have they managed to destroy fundamental structures of European society.
    … They are allowing millions of Muslims to colonise Europe.
    … In just five decades Muslim populations have increased from a few thousand to more than 25 million.
    ((free) Anders Behring Breivik – Manifesto)

  5. https://publicintelligence.net/anders-behring-breiviks-complete-manifesto-2083-a-european-declaration-of-independence/ … Section 2.16 Page 380

    2.16 Why the discipline of Sociology must be completely removed from Academia
    Marx is considered to be the greatest contributor to the science of sociology primarily due to his analysis of capitalist societies and the various alleged injustices and economic failures that they produce, and suggested socialist remedies. The discipline of sociology appeals to Marxists and bleeding heart liberals who would rather blame others for their problems than take personal ownership of these problems.

    The sociology discipline is described as the revolutionary “tools for change” by Marxist intellectuals as it contributes to institutionalise cultural Marxism/multiculturalism. Modern sociology provides an examination of the pivotal theories of Marx, Durkheim, Weber and Comte, the authors that have decisively shaped the discipline.

    Students of sociology are taught how the public apparatus may be used (by deliberately manipulating statistics, and rejecting all aspects of biology) to portray and propagate a Marxist world view. Any and all faculties of sociology in the European world (US/Europe)
    are therefore in many ways Marxist indoctrination camps where the students learn how to infiltrate public institutions and covertly contribute to change the character of society by presenting falsified reports and statistics.

    Sociology is fundamentally anti capitalist and anti traditionalist (anti-nationalist, -patriarchal, – Christendom) and as such; anti-European by design. Furthermore, a large percentage (90%+) of sociologists refuse to acknowledge biology as relevant and instead proclaim that environment is the cause of all human behaviour.

    In order to defeat one of the most devastating academic weapons of the cultural Marxists/multiculturalists, we must destroy/ban the discipline of sociology completely.

    Sociology students are indoctrinated by learning (from a Marxist point of view) what is wrong in the world. As such, they are transformed into academic Marxist revolutionaries.

    So why did the conservative post-WW2 European elites allow the discipline of sociology to exist and its propagators to operate freely at our universities?

    The European elites at the time, underestimated the discipline as it could not directly affect the “important aspects/sectors” of society (according to their definition); defence (police/military), law and finance. Needless to say, this was a critical mistake because the discipline of Marxist sociology would later prove to significantly contribute to shape the cultural/social structures of our societies which lead to the 68 cultural Marxist revolts in the European world.

    Apologists of sociology have successfully prevented the removal of the discipline using the following arguments:

    Sociology aims to explain what is, not what could be. The students learn about everything that is wrong in the world (from a Marxist narrative) but NOT “specifically” how to change it. However, as we all know the students indirectly learn how to change our societies as they study other aspects of Marxism.

    Imagine the following; the sociology students learned about what is wrong in the world from a Nazi narrative, that the Jew is the root of all evil. Wouldn’t that have lead them to draw their own conclusions based on the self study of Nazi intellectual works (that the Jew had to be killed)? Of course it would. Regardless of which ideological narrative is chosen, the student will be brainwashed in that particular ideological direction.

    The Marxist (cultural Marxist) revolutionary disciplines (disciplines of the Frankfurt school) are not limited to sociology, however; philosophy and journalism are highly affected by the same level of Marxist indoctrination. Their academic weapons are to deliberate spread their falsified and corrupted Marxist world view through statistics, reports and articles with the aim to glorify the Marxist/multiculturalist world view and to effectively undermine nationalistic/conservative/capitalist thought. These individuals must not be underestimated as they are usually very influential in society (which is the reason why 95% of them are categorised as category B traitors).

    (Related professions: psychologists and social workers)

    Political sociologists
    Offices infiltrated by sociologists (or individuals who has a sociology major):
    Public administrative positions (usually government and public agencies that administer human services).

    Sectors heavily infiltrated with individuals who have taken a sociology degree/courses in sociology:
    Census analyst
    Community organizer
    Consultant
    Criminal justice planner
    Demographer
    Diversity related professions
    Health and Family Planning
    Interviewer
    Jury Consultant
    Labour relations
    Law enforcement officer
    Market researcher Mediator
    Military
    Ministry
    Non-profit Organizations (leaders)
    NGOs (leaders)
    Personnel Management
    Planning Departments in various agencies
    Politics
    Population analyst
    Public opinion pollster
    Publishing – editing, research and sales
    Prisons
    Psychiatric social worker
    Recreation worker
    Researcher
    Rural sociologist
    School social worker
    Social services volunteer coordinator
    Social worker
    Sociology professor
    State and Local Agencies
    Substance abuse counsellor
    Teaching and counselling – high school, college, university
    Training and development

    Sociology bachelor’s degree as background for graduate school in:
    Journalism
    Law
    Medicine
    Divinity School
    Education
    Political Science
    Economics
    Business Administration

    Apolitical sociologists
    A small minority of sociologists are not considered traitors as they are apolitical.

    An alternative instead of a complete removal of the discipline of sociology from academia
    Instead of destroying the discipline of sociology by removing it, an alternative approach is to completely reform it; replacing the Marxist ideological view with a conservative/anti-Marxist by instead using ideological fundaments from the following works/authors;
    The Bible
    Machiavelli George Orwell
    Thomas Hobbes
    John Stuart Mill
    John Locke
    Adam Smith
    Edmund Burke
    Ayn Rand
    William James

Comments are closed.