You are here

Party for Freedom auction protests against foreign ownership at Sydney house sales

(Video inside.) Once again Nick Folkes and his Party for Freedom have come up with a very effective way to protest against foreign ownership and overpopulation through invited economic immigration and its impacts.[1] Other groups would do well to imitate these democratic initiatives especially if they differ with Party for Freedom on issues of multiculturalism but care about housing affordability and democracy, rather than simply trying to shut Party for Freedom up and, in the process, allow the growth lobby to destroy Australia. In this video Folkes and his Party continue their campaign to make real estate agents and property developers think twice about selling built property to foreign nationals. They focus on the preponderance of Chinese foreign nationals purchasing Australian property. This cannot help but get attention since the Australian mainstream media constantly popularises this issue, although it does not promote any effective way of countering it. (Note that Fairfax and Murdoch press are heavily invested in property dot coms that market Australian real estate to the world: and In the video inside this article Mr Folkes engages effectively with people who show both positive and negative interest in the protest for which he is a spokesperson. What next, Mr Folkes, a protest at an Australian international airport, or on the road towards it?

Party for Freedom's press release with this video

"On Saturday, 29th August 2015, Party for Freedom members and supporters will be carrying out protests at auction sites objecting to foreign nationals purchasing Australian residential property.

Last Saturday, 15th August we held protests or flash mobs at three auction sites. The response was amazing with real estate agents and onlookers totally shocked seeing patriotic Australian arrive with placards and Australian flags reminding both real estate agents and foreign buyers that it is illegal under Australian law to sell existing property to foreign nationals.

Thousands of properties have been illegally sold to foreign nationals yet our government does nothing to stop the buy out. It is economic genocide to transfer assets and wealth to foreign nationals. Also, the impact on housing prices and rentals is huge with Australian property prices being some of the most expensive real estate in the world due to foreign ownership coupled with mass immigration.

Both NSW and Victorian state governments are addicted to stamp duty and will continue to encourage foreign ownership. Last year alone, the slippery NSW Treasury raked in over $7.4 billion in stamp duty. No doubt much of this stamp duty money is ‘dirty money’ from China. The CCP Politburo is on an anti-corruption drive in China so many Chinese nationals with connections to the ‘Chinese Communist Party’ are keen to get their money out of China. China has rules in place restricting the export of undeclared money yet does very little to stop the outflows to Australia and other Western and Asian nations."

The press release also claims, without supplying documentation for the statement, that,

"The Chinese government wants to establish ‘Chinese satellites’ throughout the world giving it control and prestige in many nations. The Chinese government has secret plans to move millions of Chinese nationals out of China to help establish these new colonies.

The press release continues:

The people of Hong Kong have seen their small city-state overrun with mainlanders, this has pushed up property prices and demolished wages and job opportunities. Australia should take notice what is happening around the world and take action but we know that our government is too busy getting intoxicated on lure of easy money."

"It is now up to the people of our nation to take action, and this is exactly what we did last Saturday when we arrived unannounced at three auction sites. The first auction site we arrived at was Chatswood. The real estate agent and prospective buyers weren’t happy seeing us arrive when we reminding them that we do not want to see our nation sold out. Our action caused the auction to be cancelled. Our intention is not to stop or interrupt auctions but to exercise our democratic right of protest and remind all present that it is illegal to sell existing property to foreign nationals. We have a right to be angry and annoyed at seeing foreign nationals steal our economic sovereignty.

The second auction site was Turramurra. Again, the real estate agent and onlookers were totally shocked with some rowdy neighbours calling us “racists’ and “bogans”. There were even more neighbours who quietly gave us support and openly spoke about their own opposition to Labor and Liberal’s foreign sell out. These good people hold the same reservations as we do when it comes to our pimpish real estate industry and government who are more than eager in flogging off our nation to foreign entities."


[1] Despite my admiration for the effective democratic protest these Australians are making in defense of housing affordability and Australian sovereignty, Party for Freedom's previous website featured some articles and comments about aboriginals and muslims with which does not agree and with which I cannot agree on anthropological grounds personally, speaking as a sociologist specialising in population, inheritance laws and land-use planning. Furthermore, I think that these comments are antithetical to the Party for Freedom's arguments for sovereignty - which is actually best achieved with a fair dose of endogamy. Here is my reasoning:

These comments and articles use 'scientific' theory against specific groups of peoples. For instance, one article discusses a high rate of cousin marriage in a particular people as if it were unusual or hazardous incest. That is a popular view that does not take into account the widespread role of endogamy in preserving land within a people, and other factors that need to be taken into account when assessing cousin marriage. In fact, a high rate of endogamy need not be genetically damaging; it can be beneficial, both in terms of preserving control over territory and in strengthening positive traits. Depending on the public relations, where one highly endogamous group can be stigmatised for 'inbreeding stupidity' another may be famous for 'inbreeding genius'. When assessing the impact of marriage and land-tenure traditions on genetic inheritance, environment and changes to economy, diet, and social organisation also need to be taken into account. See about the importance of dynasties in modern power. There is also a comment on the Party for Freedom site suggesting that a particular group of people have lower average I.Q.s that other people. IQ tests are not reliable when dealing with culture and language differences and this theory also does not take into account mass dispossession and changes to economy, diet and social organisation - and the impact of drugs and alcohol. It's a pity that the Party for Freedom does not seem to be able to see how fighting between groups weakens the ability of Australians to stand up to the powers that have overtaken national control of land, housing and economic benefits.

Despite these reservations, I do not want to fall into the trap of enabling wedge politics, which makes people afraid to learn from positive efforts by other groups on the grounds that those groups also hold opinions of which they disapprove. If I were to engage in wedge politics, I would not publish the Party for Freedom's video, on grounds of my differences with their opinions about issues from endogamous marriages - which are, ironically, also widely held by the general political, scientific and citizen community.


"In fact, a high rate of endogamy need not be genetically damaging; it can be beneficial, both in terms of preserving control over territory and in strengthening positive traits. " Maybe there should be a clear distinction between marrying withing one's close family, such as with cousins, and marrying within the community, or tribe?

I know of a carer for people with disabilities, who said that there are many Italian and Greeks who traditionally intermarried, and now have grown up offspring in care.

“It is once said that marriage your cousin & increase your empire” but that was the tribal era which promoted the system but close family marriages are also practiced & preferred in Royal families.

Inbreeding is considered a problem in humans because inbreeding increases the chances of receiving a deleterious recessive allele inherited from a common ancestor. Statutes passed in the 19th and early 20th centuries made inbreeding and marriages to the first cousin level illegal in the majority of the United States.

It is estimated that at least 55% of British Pakistanis are married to first cousins and the tradition is also common among other British South Asian communities and in Middle Eastern countries. Muslim culture still practices inbreeding and has been doing so for the better part of 1400 years.

Nikolai Sennels is a Danish psychologist who has done extensive research into a little-known problem in the Muslim world: the disastrous results of Muslim inbreeding brought about by the marriage of first-cousins. According to Sennels, research shows that children of consanguineous marriages lose 10-16 points off their IQ and that social abilities develop much slower in inbred babies.

While it might sound "racist", the damages from inbreeding, for many centuries, could be devastating and should be avoided.

Engogamy doesn't necessarily imply close breeding (ie, cousin marriage).

Inbreeding can have positive results, in that deleterious genes are brought to the forefront and can be eliminated, and desirable traits can be propagated, as potentially beneficial recessive genes are more likely to be expressed.

BUT, in human society the role of natural selection is subdued, and intermarriage becomes a political matter. While it may serve a purpose politically or socially it is the result of the social systems that people have created. Also, the likelihood of inbreeding becoming a problem is dependant on the number of deleterious genes in the family in the first place. A family with good genes can engage in interbreeding with little ill effect. One with bad genes will display issues within a few generations.

As for the benefit of endogamy, I struggle to see how a working, sustainable endogamous system can be created without "racist" implications. The argument against racism necessitates the removal of this type of thinking and essentially outlaws any advocation of endogamy, which in practice would continue what the argument against racism states should cease...

Also, I do believe that IQ as measured does measure some aspects of intelligence reliably, and does correlate with a nations development. The role that diet, education and genes play in IQ is yet to be reliably quantified, but it seems that health/diet and genes are quite significant (refer to the Flynn Effect).

I am glad people are discussing the "Note" in the above article and attempting to relate it to politics. I would like to refer readers to the article below, quoted in part. It discusses how power and territory can be and is accumulated through endogamy and how forced exogamy has the opposite effect of disorganising power and possession of territory. Australians might like to think about the use of 'diversity' as a policy in this context. Without endogamy we would not only have no Zulus, Maoris, different Australian aboriginal peoples, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, different tribes and languages in New Guinea, exotic peoples like the Karen in Thailand, French regional differences, Jewish communities or royal families. It is indeed ironic that Australian policy encourages tolerance towards Muslims and other ethnicities coming to Australia from the Middle East whilst supporting devastating military interventions in their countries of origin: Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and every effort to destroy local organisation (based on endogamy) in those countries.

Without endogamy we would also not have separate populations and sub-populations of other animals and plants, for every sexually reproducing species seems to be organised according to rules about incest varying according to local environmental capacity. See Demography, Territory, Law: Rules of Animal and Human Populations

In the article I explain that, depending on the kinship rules in your clan or tribe, you will have more or less fertility opportunities, limited to your own people (i.e. your tribe or clan). When animals (including humans) could only travel on foot, immigration existed but could rarely make a lot of difference to fertility opportunities unless there was wholesale invasion. Boats, horses, elephants etc made distant travel more accessible for humans and some peoples, like the Vikings and the Romans, took early advantage of such opportunities. Mass migration and rapid distance travel have exploded clans and tribes since rail, then automobile and plane. Small states coalesced into nations, which are really big natural intermarrying tribes. All have their rules about exogamy. Almost no peoples totally outlaw out-marriage or adoption into the clan or tribe, but all have their rules, which usually preserve their 'autopoesis' or self-recognition. What has happened in the 'settler states' is that the tribe has become an administrative notion overseen by a privileged caste which does not intermarry with ordinary people but with money and power, whilst administering a disorganised population with few connections to land or power.

So I would say that our problem is not poor, malnourished people who sometimes intermarry despite heavy genetic disease loads, but powerful people who intermarry and accumulate territory whilst making sure that the rest of us are dispersed and landless and our bargaining powers are diluted by high immigration.

With regard to IQ, healthy genes are obviously a bonus; environmental stimulation plays a huge part; diet is super important and lack of sufficient animal protein and fat in early life dooms whole populations to less than their potential intelligence, especially when the problem continues over generations. I guess that the popular identification of inbreeding as a feature of oddball peoples came from observation by occupying castes of the people they displaced and forced into suboptimal conditions, rather than similar practices among the occupying castes who intermarried to preserve their territory. Whilst modern genetic counselling may reduce the incidence of inherited diseases (but not all are known or tested for) modern fertility enhancement increases fertility in women and men who might otherwise not have reproduced and who have genetic problems, such as polycystic ovarian syndrome, which is on the rise. Environment and diet may also play a part in this syndrome.
Overpopulation: Endogamy,Exogamy and fertility opportunity theory
Outside the property development and population growth lobby, very few people who are worried about population growth and high immigration appreciate the effect of endogamy (marrying within your people) and exogamy (marrying outside your people) on population size and fertility. They also don’t recognize its effect on the private amassing of wealthy estates and political power. Anyone who wants to understand modern day problems with overpopulation, poverty, and loss of democracy would do well to study this article. This article is intended to stimulate debate about democracy, wealth distribution, and overpopulation. The author invites critical comments and argument.
Article based on S.M. Newman Demography, Territory and Law: Land-tenure and the origins of capitalism in Britain, Countershock Press, 2014. and S.M. Newman Demography, Territory and Law: The Rules of Animal and Human Populations, Countershock Press, 2013.

How to read the diagrams: White squares in the diagrams below indicate permitted marriages and black squares indicate forbidden marriages. White squares become black squares when someone is already married, although polygamy varies this factor. The symetrical rules for marriage to "in-laws" are indicated by mirror images, creating an overall pyramid form in the diagram of an extended family or clan.
"Endogamy" refers to marrying within one’s clan, tribe or similar social unit. "Exogamy" refers to marrying outside those units. The most extreme kinds of endogamy tend to be practiced by ancient royal clans, such as the Egyptians and the Incas, where there were sibling, father-daughter and grandfather-granddaughter marriages. Less extreme, but more common, are first and other cousin marriages, frequently practiced by nobility and other established clans and tribes. The wealthy, whether they are noble or not, tend to marry other wealthy people for similar reasons.

Diagrams and rest of article here:

Australia Day should be a day that unites the nation but instead there are many evils forces at work seeking to ridicule Australia Day with divisive and unnecessary campaigns of hate and bigotry. The evil agitators have done a great job at labelling Australia Day celebrations as a manifestation of “racism”. These troublemakers recently applied pressure to a fun loving group of Australians who proposed holding an event called ‘Floatopia’ at Gordon’s Bay, Coogee.

The event was cancelled in December due to an online smear campaign. One of the former event organiser blamed “mean spirited behaviour” including racism. Apparently the ‘Floatopia’ Facebook event page, which had been liked by over 4,200 people quickly descended into a thread of insults and derogatory comments with venomous haters calling for the event to be cancelled. Regrettably, the event was cancelled due to pressure from left wing activists.

In the spirit of reconciliation and harmony, we believe the event should proceed. Australia Day should be celebrated by all Australians especially by the descendants of the British settlers and aboriginal people who have created a great nation despite the odds. No doubt the establishment of the British Crown Colony of New South Wales on the 26th January 1788 caused the local Aborigines displacement and anxiety but we cannot change the past. Most Australians are mature enough to acknowledge the past sins and troubles that affected the first Australians however it is unfair and unnecessary to blame current generations for this. It is time for the divisive and mean spirited leftists to grow up and celebrate the tremendous gains aboriginal people have made over the past 228 years since European colonial settlement.

One of the fiercest critics of the Floatopia event, Tatiana Sugarplum Sparkle Crauford-Gormly said she was pleased the event was axed. “It’s a small step towards breaking away from the stigma that this is a day of celebration rather than mourning”. Tatiana’s mean spirited comments should be ignored and ridiculed. Her feeble attempt in trying to bring shame on Australia Day typifies how low some people will go in making everybody’s Australia Day miserable. Tatiana also said, those who celebrated Floatopia anyway were, “ignorant, obstinate and disrespectful”. I believe many people and their families attending the upcoming ‘Straya Day Bogan Floatilla’ would probably think the same of her. It is difficult to fathom how families having fun could be considered ‘ignorant or disrespectful’.

It is not only left wing activists but also some privileged migrant groups and their highly paid commissars who like to ridicule Australians on Australia Day. This is the highest form of disrespect and racism but usually goes unchallenged by the broader public due to fears of being labelled ‘racist’. It seems quite odd that many migrant groups seem quite content in spewing abuse forgetting the generosity and kindness the Australian people have shown them.

Racism affects all societies and nations – this is an obvious fact. Most Australians are mature and honest enough to acknowledge that racism exists in Australia and yes, of course we have people who hold bigoted attitudes towards others but it is insignificant and pales in comparison to celebrated ingrained racism that prevails in Asian, Muslim and African countries. In Australia, Australians are the victims of racist and bigoted antics, intimidation and discrimination perpetrated by left-wing politicians, including the political elite, the media and many third world migrants.

We should ignore the hateful Australia Day bigots who use their shallow minded rhetoric. It seems almost every party has its whingers. It just happens that the left and its spineless minions occupying politics, media and the institutions are the party pooper types who sit on the outskirts of a broken iceless esky and point their fingers at the real people, while munching on halal kebabs rolled in sand, swill on discounted third world low carbonated beer and entertain themselves by dwelling on their small and unimportant lives, while the real people party on in a civilised celebratory manner.

The Australian people are a great people who settled a great land and made a great nation possible. Despite this, the haters will always hate due to their cold and jealous hearts. The haters of Australia Day need to seek repentance and emancipation from their wicked thoughts and jealous rage.

On Australia Day, raise a glass to our great nation that is the envy of the world, a nation that has achieved more socially, economically and culturally than much older empires or nations in the pacific region and beyond. The elitist politicians, intellectually handicapped academics and socialist minded useful idiots would always justify their nasty attacks on Australia Day.

As a people, we should be proud to be Australian and proud of our unique culture past and present so come down to Gordon’s Bay on Australia Day and celebrate the great nation that our ancestors have built. Don’t forget to bring your inflatables, zinc cream and refreshments to enjoy a fun filled day at the beach. Also, please respect the local eco-system and take your rubbish with you. And please remember Gordon’s Bay is an alcohol and lefty free zone.

Time: 11am onwards
Date: 26th January 2016
Place: Gordon’s Bay, Major Street, Coogee 2031

Facebook discussion page:


Floatopia event cancelled following outburst and insults online

Multiculturalism was a policy brought in to Australia under the Whitlam government, as a response to the end of the "White Australia" policy. From the mid-1960s until 1973, when the final vestiges of the 'White Australia' policy were removed, policies started to examine assumptions about assimilation. They recognised that large numbers of migrants, especially those whose first language was not English, experienced hardships as they settled in Australia, and required more direct assistance. It was to limit racism, and break up the majority hold of Anglo settlers that were in Australia. It was meant to help integration, of European migrants, not make other cultures separate.

Multiculturalism has positively contributed to Australian culture and to its values. Its overriding ethos of tolerance and harmony has reinforced the character of our democracy. However, it's also an effective tool used to manipulate and facilitate endless population growth, and high immigration. Now, we have some extreme cultures coming into Australia.

It's time our Government threw away the manifestly failed experiment of 'multiculturalism' and instead brought in a requirement for all migrants from whatever ethnic origin they might spring, to sign a contract with the Australian people to adopt, embrace and integrate into our society.

Dutch politician Geert Wilders launched the Australian Liberty Alliance, promising to stop the Islamisation of Australia, as extremist groups like Islamic State stoke fears of terrorism and distrust within the community. Despite the apparent growing public backlash, experts believe organisations like ALA will continue to appeal to just a small number of people! The next elections, we'll see much more influence of the "minor" parties.

Australia Day should be a celebration of the Traditional owners of our land, our history, heritage, food, and customs. Demonstrating patriotism is not "racism", but a threat to the growthists, the "big Australia" advocates, who see it as a barrier to ongoing high rates of immigration - and "diversity".

It's time our Government threw away the manifestly failed experiment of 'multiculturalism' and instead brought in a requirement for all migrants from whatever ethnic origin they might spring, to sign a contract with the Australian people to adopt, embrace and integrate into our society.

Which "Australian people"? What "Society"? Contract with who? Who gets to decide what the contract is?

The obsession with trying to absorb and assimilate the other, our us into the other, leads inevitably to manifestly silly ideas, and society doesn't function if it bases its moral on silly ideas.

Mutilculturalisms flaw stems from the idea that somehow society MUST change. It assumes that society has some demographic "flaw" that has to be "remedied" through genetic manipulation. Let's be honest here. Multiculturalism is purely about genetic change, not "culture".

So now we are asking migrants to make a contract with, themselves, "Australians"? As migrants become Australian, we are asking arrivals to contract with other arrivals. Or whatever arbitrary concoction of people have citizenship at that point in time, which will change anyway.

All this comes from the Western disease whereby we somehow think we need to engage in demographic engineering, and our only options is how to make it occur with the least trouble. No one really questions whether the basis for considering the original society flawed had any merit to it.

Most cultures grow and evolve organically, over centuries of unified ideals and common history, language and experiences. Australia is unique in that our population growth is manipulated politically, and by social engineering. It's artificial, contrived, and "managed" for economic benefits. Just what is "Australian" culture? Except for Aborigines, there is no one sense of culture. Even they are divided and diverse. The multicultural experiment is one way of addressing the problem of nationhood, of unity, and living peacefully together. It's an experiment, not totally successful, but nevertheless one way of doing the impossible - of unifying people of different backgrounds from different countries. In a country in which nearly 30% of the population is born overseas, there's an inherent challenge. We are encouraged to embrace "diversity", and at the same time somehow abide by our laws, and common values. It's arbitrary, and subtle.

It's convenient for the promoters of "big Australia" to avoid strong patriot fervor. It means the symbols of being Australian must focus on how varied we are, of differences, not on sameness. Our multicultural policy is a paradox, devised by academics, in isolation from the real world. It's lofty, abstract and fuzzy.

I disagree with the statement that Australia is unique in the sense that we have our population demographically manipulated. This is occurring in many Western countries, and openly and plainly so.

What makes Australia a little different is the rate at which it is occurring. We have (compared to others) a smaller population and very few big cities, so the effect is more pronounce, as the people are moving into only a few urban centres, and proportionately speaking, the migrants consist of a larger slice of the population.

I have a strong dislike for the idea that people should be free to socially experiment on existing nations, existing populations and existing peoples. It is not excusable to experiment on people and then shrug off the failure, and simply saying it failed, or didn't work doesn't excuse one for being responsible for the damage. No one has a right to experiment on others. No one should be permitted to act in a manner which is hostile, treasonous or otherwise contrary to the benefits of ones own people and nation.

You can embrace diversity. You can decide to create an experimental society on your own own private land. Maybe found a new nation. But you can't do it in an existing one. You don't have the right, and those who suggest it is necessary are bordering on treason to their own nation.

How else do you describe someone who considers their own population, their own nation as a "problem" which has to be fixed through demographic engineering?

I don't care about "embracing diversity" because it's just some rubbish that a few intellectuals created, and there is no successful precedent or good reason. It's basically just bullying people into accepting change, and accepting challenges which shouldn't have existed in the first place.

I hate to think that my Grandparents came to Europe in the 50's just to be a challenge to Australians to overcome. I am physically revolted by those who use the post WWII European migration to make Australians buy population policy propaganda, as if I'm just an excuse to enact a hostile agenda.

There is no point in unifying peoples, because its a pipe dream. It's a dream of an arrogant Western Society which thinks its God, which thinks it can change the fundamental nature of human beings. It's a sign of arrogance, hubris and decadence. A pompous civilisation which is so up itself, that it thinks its crappy decadence can overcome thousands of years of culture and millions of years of natural selection.

It's one think to respect others, to live and let live, and not subjugate others because they are different. That's fine. Mutual respect and trade and good relations is all good. But modern multiculturalism is just imperialism and colonialism by another means.