By TONY MOBILIFONITIS

An extract from a Communist Party of Australia document obtained by Geoff McDonald, showing the plan to create a separate Aboriginal state. This could conceivably involve the entire country.

“FIRSTLY, this is not about race,” declared Rachel Perkins, in a debate on the Voice on ABC TV’s Q&A program hosted by Patricia Karvelas. “Although our Constitution has many elements in it, 51:26, Section 25, it was created by people who deliberately brought race into the Constitution, so it’s always been there, right?” she added.

Perkins, a film maker and part German and Irish daughter of noted Aboriginal activist Charlie Perkins, then hastens to suggest that the Voice is not about discrimination. “But this is not about giving, you know, Patricia Karvelas is Greek Australian I’m Aboriginal Australian, you know, this is about recognising the deep connection to country of 65,000 years and that matters for something and that should be in our highest legal document in the land.”

Not about giving what, Ms Perkins? Separate racial status to yourself and Karvelas? Oh yes it it is and you know it, which is why you never finished that line of thought then tried to deflect by claiming your alleged “deep connection to country”. The fact of the matter is you, in your artistic and academic world of film-making, probably have less connection to the country than the white skinned farmers working the soil anywhere west of the Great Dividing Range.

Not long ago it was claimed Aborigines were in Australia 40,000 years – longer than all recorded history. Then recently it became 60,000 years, and now 65,000. Do we have a 70 anyone? It’s pure speculation, but is supposed to make them out to be some sort of super race with “deep connection to the land” like none other.

The reality is that Aborigines were like any other nomadic people migrating across landscapes, and surprise, surprise, genetic studies show them sharing ancestral traits common in all of humanity. However even simple observation reveals strong similarities with the Sri Lankan, southern Indian and Papuan people. Estimates of their time in Australia vary widely, based on speculative interpretation of DNA sequences. People intrigued by human origins might consider creationist research which also employs gene sequencing and apparently shows Noah and his three sons at the base of the DNA-based tree.

Perkins’ comments are laced with deception and duplicity. She clearly suggests The Voice is not about discrimination when non-Aboriginals, or at least those who do not identify as such, do not get a seat on “The Voice”, whose structure we still know little to nothing about anyway.

She is also having a two-way bet, because she also hints very strongly that putting another “race-based” provision in the Constitution is not an issue because two “race-based” sections are already in there. It has been shown that Section 25 is actually an anti-racist provision. It only accepts that, at the time of Federation, the states had the right to deny Aborigines the vote for their own Parliaments. But the Commonwealth never had or intended to have this power.

Section 51:26 allows the Commonwealth to legislate in respect of any racial group, which allowed the formation of the federal Department of Aboriginal Affairs, to be headed initially by Charlie Perkins. Ms Perkins might well ask why her father is now condemned as incompetent, given that one of the major reasons given for The Voice is the alleged failure of Aboriginal organisations to either represent them or deliver results.

Perkins was also less than honest on Q&A about the racial division issue because she is a maker of films that distort the history of the Aboriginal-European interactions and foment hatred of the “colonialists”. The UN and its hordes of activists headed by the Portuguese Marxist Antonio Guterres, are desperately pushing the indigenist, anti-colonialist movement worldwide – but primarily in the Anglo-American nations. This movement had its origins in the National and Colonial Question paper written by Stalin at the behest of Lenin before his death in 1924.

Former Communist Party of Australia member Geoff McDonald, who was expelled from the party in 1960, recalled he was shocked to see some years later the emergence of the Aboriginal land rights movement, the theory of which he had learned about while a party member. He was also shocked to recognise former party members on TV an in newspapers claiming to speak on behalf of Aborigines.

McDonald, after he became industrial relations officer for the Royal Australian Nurses Federation in 1970, visited Northern Territory settlements where nurses worked. He noticed communist literature had been distributed there and in 1972 when the Fabian Socialist Whitlam came to power, the policy of “self-determination” was introduced, under the auspices of giving Aborigines more dignity, autonomy and control over their own affairs. McDonald noted that in international law self-determination means the right to secede.

Then Whitlam, instigated by Charlies Perkins and others, threw the police off the settlements, regardless of the fact that they were able to keep alcohol abuse and violence at bay. This set in train a disastrous chain of worsening violence and killings. McDonald says the situation deeply disturbed both the settlement nurses and Aboriginal leaders who tried to get the police back. Happening concurrently were attacks on Aboriginals attending Christian churches. Marxist anti-religion hate messaging was already at work.

As we know, propaganda is a major part of revolutionary strategy, and Ms Perkins is up to her eyeballs in it, regardless of whether her father was supposedly anti-communist, although how much of that was expedient in order to win acceptance of the establishment we can only speculate. In her film making Ms Perkins is doing what communists and leftists always do – rewrite history to their own political advantage. Her latest movie invents something most Australians have never heard of – “The Australian Wars”. This is what the indigenous activists call “truth-telling”.

There is no doubt that there were skirmishes and running battles between settlers and the Aborigines, for various reasons from theft of livestock to murders. But in the simplistic thinking of today’s neo-Marxists it was a “war of resistance by first nations against racist, colonialist oppressors”.

The indigenous channel NITV reports: “It’s time for a reckoning. Are we ready to face the past that made our country what it is today? A new ground-breaking documentary series gives voice to the story of The Australian Wars — the battles fought on home soil, as the colonial frontier pushed forward, and First Nations peoples resisted. The British claim to the Australian continent, that disregarded First Nations peoples’ sovereignty and their custodianship of Country for thousands of years, set in train brutal conflicts that unfolded for more than 100 years.”

How about a more realistic appraisal of the past? The British colonists, following the surveys by James Cook, claimed the lands of New Zealand and Australia as territories under the jurisdiction of the English Crown. The Spaniards, Dutch or French who all navigated the high seas in their mighty sailing ships, might well have done the same, but the Englilsh got in first. They also needed somewhere to send the inmates of their overcrowded prisons.

The response of the Aborigines and Maoris was mixed, with both violent and non-violent encounters. One thing was for certain and that was the advanced technology, economic and societal organisation of the Europeans that would eventually win over the fragmented, tribal nomads. The more devastating and lasting negative impacts from colonisation were from alcohol, poor diet, disease and isolation.

But that was not the entire picture. Many Aborigines adapted and like Ms Perkins and her father, became notable achievers in national life. They, like the Perkins ancestors, intermarried with English, Irish, Europeans and others. Rural Aborigines became noted stockmen on the big cattle stations. These days they also work in the mines or in regular jobs in cities. Then there are the elite athletes and AFL and NRL sportsmen.

Rachel Perkins calls herself an Arrernte and Kalkadoon woman. What does that mean except that she claims some ancestry to those tribal groups. So what? We all have ancestry to some tribal group or region. Do European Australians go around calling themselves Picts, Celts and Saxons from East Anglia or wherever? Yes, there are Scottish societies who play bagpipes and eat haggis. There are French, German, Italian, Middle Eastern and African societies in Australia who all do their traditional ethnic things. But do they demand reverence and special attention above others like Perkins and the indigenous elite? No. They all have a baseline loyalty and national identity with Australia, their nation of adoption. And so do many, if not most Aboriginal Australians.

“Indigenism”, as we might call it, is clearly a top-down neo-Marxist UN-facilitated campaign seeking total political power, which is always the objective of Marxist and socialist movements that are now encompassed by the WEF globalists and their ruthless drive for total, global control.

“Ethno-states” consisting of multiple regional, tribal coalitions exercising effective control over all private land as we see developing in south-west WA, would be mere tools in the hands of Schwab and the scheming globalists who promise to “make us happy but owning nothing”.